Cookies Policy

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here


Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this chapter

+ Tax (if applicable)

Chapter Summary

This chapter explores whether, and if yes, to what extent, the defence of duress (i.e., the claim of absence of a reasonable choice) may be available to a transnational corporations (TNC) in an Alien Tort Statute (ATS) case. In ATS litigation, duress was raised for the first time in the Unocal case. To understand the circumstances of the defense raised by Unocal, one needs to look at the general political situation in Myanmar. The second ATS case in which the defense of duress was addressed is the Agent Orange case. In In re "Agent Orange" Product Liability Litigation, Vietnamese nationals and a Vietnamese organization sued corporations in the United States for committing violations of the laws of war by manufacturing and supplying herbicides to the governments of the United States and South Vietnam which were sprayed, stored, and spilled in Vietnam from 1961 to 1975.

Keywords: Agent Orange case; Alien Tort Statute (ATS) litigation; Duress; Unocal case



Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
    Corporate Responsibility under the Alien Tort Statute — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation