Recently, Global Law Office (“GLO”) helped a world-renowned automotive industry supplier (“the Client”) win in the second instance of an environmental damage compensation case. The judgment of second instance revoked the original judgment that held GLO’s Client, along with several other companies and individuals, liable for ecological environmental infringement and joint liability of compensation.
This case originated from a criminal case on environmental pollution, where the relevant companies and individuals were found guilty of illegally acquiring and processing solid hazardous waste, resulting in ecological environmental pollution which constitutes the crime of Environmental Pollution. The local government filed a lawsuit supported by the procuratorate, seeking compensation for the environmental damage from the entities involved in the criminal offenses and other entities selling solid hazardous waste to the offenders which was established in the criminal judgment. Despite the Client's defense during the first instance that there was insufficient evidence to prove their involvement in selling solid hazardous waste to the criminal entities, the judgment of first instance still held the Client and other related entities jointly liable for the environmental pollution based on the impact of the criminal judgment.
In the second instance, Global, representing the Client along with other defendants, primarily focused on two aspects. Firstly, we presented a large number of technical research and bolstered evidence to demonstrate that the solid waste acquired by the criminal offenders did not directly constitute hazardous waste in law. Secondly, we argued that the evidence presented in the original judgment was insufficient to establish that the Client had sold solid hazardous waste to the criminal offenders, as the criminal judgment primarily focused on establishing the criminal facts of the offenders and did not provide substantial evidence of the Client’s selling solid waste to them. Ultimately, the court of second instance fully accepted Global's arguments, and revoked the original judgment's verdict that the Client sold hazardous waste. The court ruled that there was no evidence of any infringement by the Client, and thus, they do not need to take any liability for infringement.
The successful judgement in the second instance helped the Client restore the reputation as a green and environmental friendly enterprise, while also removing obstacles for their regular business operations and obtaining financing. The case was led by Lei Niu, with team members including Kai Xiao and Yifeng Li.
