Global value chain litigationobstacles and emerging pathways to corporate liability for human rights abuses

Resumo

Scholars and policymakers have shown growing interest in corporate liability for human rights abuses in global value chains (GVCs). However, no study has conducted a systematic, empirical, and comparative analysis of how national courts across different jurisdictions approach corporate liability for GVC-related human rights abuses. This study addresses this gap by examining how national courts across eight jurisdictions have ruled in 32 lawsuits, including underexplored cases from the Global South. The study pursues three objectives: (a) it maps the structural elements of this type of litigation, such as the parties involved and the legal claims raised; (b) it identifies the courts’ criteria associated with liability and non-liability outcomes; and (c) it explores, through the analysis of cross-jurisdictional patters, potential factors that may explain variations in judicial outcomes. The study relies on document analysis, thematic coding, and Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA). The findings show that procedural barriers dominate GVC litigation. Courts dismissed claims on procedural grounds in 21 of 32 cases, citing insufficient factual allegations, the absence of a recognized legal basis, statutes of limitations, and lack of standing. Only eleven cases advanced beyond these initial procedural barriers, whether through jurisdictional determinations, preliminary merits assessments, or substantive merits analysis. Together, these cases reveal emerging judicial pathways through which courts adapt traditional legal concepts to the challenges that fragmented value chains pose. For instance, some courts consider the lead company's economic power, operational influence, economic benefit, and pricing power as relevant considerations when assessing a company’s involvement in abuses within its value chain, while others treat CSR-related commitments as potential sources of liability. A key contribution of the study is identifying a recurring pattern of judicial reasoning: in most cases in which corporate liability claims advanced, judges relied on social justice reasoning grounded in arguments such as equity and access to justice. The study also identifies a distinctive pattern in Global South jurisdictions, where courts often rely on constitutional principles to advance claims, a trend that international literature has largely overlooked. An additional analysis of fifteen Brazilian cases, drawn from the only Global South jurisdiction in the international sample to reach substantive merits analysis, reveals innovative pathways for corporate liability within value chains, including group liability, strict liability, and competition law concepts such as social dumping. Finally, the analysis indicates that strengthening corporate liability regimes within GVCs requires more than regulatory reform alone. Even where corporate responsibilities are formally recognized, procedural barriers and restrictive judicial approaches may continue to limit access to remedies. While recent Business and Human Rights debates have increasingly centered on the adoption of mandatory Human Rights Due Diligence legislation and related regulatory reforms, this study cautions against treating regulatory reform as the primary pathway to advancing corporate liability and highlights the role of courts in shaping corporate liability through existing legal frameworks. In sum, corporate liability within GVC litigation is still a narrow and contested field of law. At the same time, the cases analyzed in this study suggest that courts are gradually expanding the legal tools available to address human rights abuses within value chains. Although these developments remain incremental, they point to important trends in how courts adjudicate corporate liability in value chain contexts and warrant greater scholarly attention amid growing pressure on legal systems to address governance gaps in contemporary GVCs.

Ficha do documento

Tipo

Tese

Ano

2026

Instituição

Fundação Getulio Vargas

Fonte

Repositório da FGV

Idioma

Inglês

Acesso

Acesso aberto

Identificador

oai:repositorio.fgv.br:10438/41370

Temas

TransportesGovernança

Palavras-chave

Supply chainValue chainLiabilityResponsibilityBusiness and human rightsHuman RightsCadeia de fornecimentoCadeia de valorCadeia produtivaResponsabilidadeEmpresas e direitos humanosDireitos humanosDireitoResponsabilidade social da empresaAção judicialLogística empresarial - Aspectos sociaisResponsabilidade (Direito)