header-logo header-logo

07 July 2021
Issue: 7940 / Categories: Legal News , Human rights , Commercial , Profession
printer mail-detail

Business & human rights

A global team of more than 60 Debevoise & Plimpton lawyers has authored a landmark report, the ‘UN guiding principles on business and human rights at 10’ (UNGPs)

The UNGPs consist of 31 principles setting out the duties and responsibilities of governments and business enterprises to prevent and address adverse impacts on people resulting from business activities.

The 264-page report, commissioned by the UN, marks ten years since the adoption of the UNGPs in 2011. It examines how judicial and quasi-judicial bodies in more than 50 jurisdictions have used and referred to the UNGPs in reaching their decisions.

It identifies regional and international trends and predicts how the use of the UNGPs might evolve in future. While there were few direct references to the UNGPs in judicial and quasi-judicial decisions, the researchers thought this was likely to change. Some recent legislation, such as the EU Taxonomy Regulation of March 2021, makes explicit reference to the UNGPs, while other legislation, such as the Modern Slavery Act 2015, refers to them as part of their rationale.

The researchers also report an increasing number of complaints in which the UNGPs have been cited by the parties, including in the English, US and Canadian courts.

Other observations include that the UNGPs are increasingly being incorporated into investment treaties and may come to play a more important role in international arbitration. One noticeable trend is towards dedicated business and human rights arbitration instruments and procedures, for example, the Accord on Fire and Building Safety in Bangladesh, a first of its kind agreement between retailers and trade unions following the 2013 Rana Plaza building collapse. This Accord covers more than 1,600 factories and two million workers in Bangladesh and is, the report notes, ‘the first example of an arbitration procedure being integrated into an international framework to resolve business and human rights disputes’.

Issue: 7940 / Categories: Legal News , Human rights , Commercial , Profession
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll