Environmental Protection, Producer Insolvency and Lender Liability

The present paper deals with some legal issues surrounding environmental protection, namely those issues concerning the liability of the different firms and individuals directly or indirectly involved in the generation of environment damaging accidents. We consider in particular the potential effects of extending a firm's liability in case of an environmental disaster to its lenders and financiers when the cost of this liability is too large in relation to the firm's assets. Such extended liability regimes exist or are considered in many countries. The most important case is the 1980/85 Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) in the USA that led to an extensive jurisprudence over the last fifteen years. Nous traitons ici du cadre légal de la responsabilité directe des entreprises lors de désastres environnementaux et de l'extension de cette responsabilité aux prêteurs en cas de faillite de l'entreprise. De tels régimes existent ou sont à l'étude dans plusieurs pays. Le cas le plus connu est le Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) de 1980/85 aux États-Unis et nous analysons les principaux cas de jurisprudence auxquels cette loi a donné lieu depuis 15 ans.Environment, Extended Lender Liability, CERCLA, Environnement, responsabilité, CERCLA

The Consumer Product Warranty and Liability Act

This article provides a roadmap for the Consumer Product Warranty and Liability Act. The Act reformed and modernized much of the law regarding the sale or supply of consumer products, not only for consumers but also for business buyers. The Act deals with the following matters: express warranties; implied warranties; remedies; the supplier's ability to limit liability; the supplier's rights against his own supplier; rights against the manufacturer or other distributor regardless of privity of contract; and the imposition of strict liability on suppliers for unreasonably dangerous defective products.Cet article illustre un plan de la loi sur la responsabilité et les garanties relatives aux produits de consommation. Cet acte a reformé et modernisé considérablement la loi concernant la vente ou la fourniture de produit de consommation, non seulement au point de vue du consommateur mais aussi au point de vue de l'acheteur en activité commerciale. L'acte traite des sujets suivant: garanties expresses; garanties tacites; recours; abilité du fournisseur de limiter sa responsabilité; recours du fournisseur contre ses propre fournisseurs; recours contre le manufacturier où des autres distributeurs même en l'absence de liens contractuels; la responsabilité des fournisseurs pour un produit de consommation dangereux

Liberal Construction of CERCLA under the Remedial Purpose Canon: Have the Lower Courts Taken a Good Thing Too Far?

This article examines the use of the remedial purpose canon of statutory construction in connection with the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), otherwise known as the Superfund Act. The article also assesses scholarly criticisms of the remedial purpose canon

The Utilization of Caveat Emptor in CERCLA Private Party Cleanups

The applicability of equitable defenses in private party Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) actions is discussed. The caveat emptor defense is available for courts to use at their discretion, and holding a purchaser responsible for the property he or she purchases is economically and equitably beneficial

Ground Water Contamination

This detailed discussion explains that most ground water contamination is the result of human activity, and that several laws have been passed with an aim to minimize effects. The Clean Water Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act are explained along with the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA, or Superfund), the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), and the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Other terms explained include zone of contribution, interaquifer leakage, and plume of contamination. Special tables included at this site are Typical Sources of Potential Ground Water Contamination by Land Use Category and Potential Harmful Components of Common Household Products. There is also a full page diagram showing some potential sources of ground water contamination. Educational levels: High school, Middle school

Superiorfund - An Answer to State Court Holdings That Government-Mandated Cleanup Costs Constitute Damages under Comprehensive General Liability Policies

This comment analyzes the state high court decisions which seem to be reaching a consensus that the term damages in a Comprehensive General Liability policy encompasses the cost of cleaning up a hazardous waste site. In six state high court cases, the courts held in favor of the insureds, holding that cleanup costs constitute damages. In only three state high court cases, decided by two courts, the holdings were in favor of insurers with rulings that cleanup costs do not constitute damages. Two possible solutions to resolve the insurance carriers\u27 dilemma regarding the damages question are proposed in this comment. The preferred alternative is to amend the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act and make cleanup costs an uninsurable interest. With reimbursement of cleanup costs by insurers an impossibility, an alternative to insurance would be necessary. The author proposes a solution to the problem in the creation of a pollution fund to clean up hazardous waste sites. As a less desirable alternative, the author recommends that insurance carriers seek alternatives to litigation such as settling out of court

CERCLA Derivative Suits

Corporations frequently incur liability pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). Pursuant to the statute, however, the officers and directors of such corporations cannot be held directly liable. Despite this statutory protection, when corporations violate CERCLA, shareholders may be able to use a derivative suit to hold officers and directors liable based on the corporate actors\u27 fiduciary duty of care