Name of the Student: Apoorva Kudari

Registration Number: 21DBALB005

Programme: BA, LLB (hons)

Semester: III Sem

Course Name: Law and Economics

Course Code: 5BAL322

Course Component: Case Study

Date of Submission: 06/10/2022

Submitted to: Prof. Aardhra Vasudevan

1
 Union Carbide Corporation Vs Union of India (Bhopal Gas tragedy)
The Unfolding of an Economic and Environmental Disaster

Court of jurisdiction: Supreme court of India

INTRODUCTION
In the infamous Union Carbide Corporation v. UOI case, better known as the Bhopal gas leak case, the Indian
courts reaffirmed the concepts of strict liability and absolute liability. Methyl isocyanate, a highly hazardous
gas, escaped from Union Carbide Limited's (UCIL) property and adversely affected a significant number as
well as the environment's flora and fauna. In response to this tragedy, two laws—the Public Insurance Liability
Act of 1991 and the Environment Protection Act of 1986—were enacted to prevent another catastrophe. Even
the Indian Constitution's Article 21, which ensures that everyone has the right to life and personal liberty, was
expanded in this case. As determined in the case of Subhash Kumar v. State of Bihar, this right comprises the
fundamental Right to Live in a Pollution-Free Environment for their Full Enjoyment of Life (1991)
Environmental protection is a responsibility shared by the state and its residents under the constitutional
provisions specified under Articles 39(b), 47, 48, 48A, 49, and 51A(g).

FACTS IN BRIEF
➢ Bhopal tragedy, a chemical leak in 1984 in the Indian state of Madhya Pradesh's capital city of Bhopal,
referred as the deadliest industrial accident in history at the time.
➢ On December 3, 1984, a plant producing pesticides for Union Carbide Corporation, an American
company, let loose roughly 45 tonnes of the hazardous chemical methyl isocyanate.
➢ As the gas drifted over the crowded neighbourhoods near the factory, it instantly killed hundreds of
people and sparked a panic as tens of thousands more tried to leave Bhopal.
➢ Between 15,000 and 20,000 people were said to have died in total. A few hundred dollars in
compensation were given to many of the about 500,000 survivors who experienced respiratory issues,
eye irritation or blindness, and other illnesses as a result of being exposed to the deadly gas.
➢ Investigations eventually revealed that the accident had been caused by poor operating and safety
practises at the understaffed plant. The location of the former factory was given to the state of Madhya
Pradesh in 1998.

2
ECONOMIC ASPECTS - WAS THE ECONOMY STALLED BY THIS TRAGEDY?
➢ Income, transportation, and other necessities have all suffered significantly as a result of the gas spill.
Seventy-five percent of Bhopali residents can only work a few hours at a time. The populace must
"work" or "earn" a living in order for society to function economically.
➢ But when individuals couldn't go to work because of bad circumstances, the economy suffered. People
who are unable to work do not make enough money to pay for needs, let alone extras.
➢ Lending from banks typically carries high interest rates. Because they have no other choice, citizens
are compelled to accept the terms, which helps to keep poverty's cycle going.
➢ Even though the union carbide plant provided jobs for approximately a thousand families and
supported the livelihoods of others who were its suppliers, the money given as compensation to the
victims eventually found its way back into the economy.
➢ The families of the 5,345 people who passed away and the 5.74 lakh other people who were deemed
harmed received compensation of $470 million (Rs 715 crore) at the time of the settlement in 1989.
➢ The compensation money exceeded many people's annual salary and was used to improve comforts,
fix homes, buy furniture, electronics, mattresses, and other items, among other things. However, it did
not help the local economy in a long run.
➢ After the first round of compensation payments on a pro rata basis were completed, the money was
added in accordance with a Supreme Court order and disbursed over nine years in the first instalment.
The apex court then mandated a second payment of Rs 2 lakhs to about 42,000 victims with serious
injuries.
➢ What would happen if a small economy like Bhopal received a compensation package worth Rs 3,000
crore? "93% of beneficiaries received Rs 50,000 as compensation, while 7% received between Rs 2
and 8 lakhs, meaning the amount of money held individually was not very great.
➢ Ingrid Eckerman quotes a sufferer as saying, "Death would have been a wonderful comfort," in his
book The Bhopal Saga. To be a survivor is worse. There has been no resolution to the lawsuit thirty
years later. Numerous survivors of the Bhopal gas disaster still struggle with a shortage of medical
resources. Whatever was left inside the factory after it was shut down was sealed and stored there.
Welfare organisations representing gas victims have been requesting its removal for years. There are
numerous applications pending before the SC and high court to get the plant's poisonous leftovers
removed.

3
ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS OF THE TRAGEDY – A CONTINUING DISASTER
➢ Even 17 years after the accident, there are still some lingering environmental issues in Bhopal. Future
generations are seriously at risk for health problems due to the ongoing poisoning of the soil,
groundwater, and breast milk.
➢ Experts claim that the research indicates that the harmful substances have not only travelled via
different media but also that they have been transported through the food chain and are now part of the
body load. On the one hand, Greenpeace maintains that Dow Chemicals is falling behind in the clean-
up of the Bhopal area, while on the other side, Dow Chemical’s asserts that it is not responsible.
➢ It is one of the bitter ironies of Bhopal that its major reformist effects were felt in Union Carbide's
home country. The post-Bhopal era also saw global regulation on chemicals and toxicity and a demand
by communities to have the right to information and to participate in the process of industry siting.
The US stepped up its regulatory efforts. The establishment of the Dangerous Emissions Inventory and
other freedom of information laws that significantly increased the public's access to information on
toxic chemical releases was a significant step forward.
➢ However, in India, community campaigns to obtain the "right to know," which would allow residents
to identify any polluted sites in their neighbourhoods, have had limited success. The legislative
framework for informing locals of issues in their community is still in its infancy.
➢ Moreover, because the vast majority of people in the disaster zone are illiterate and underprivileged,
they are unaware of the health risks associated with exposure to toxic waste at the site. The majority
of locals are unaware of the area's contaminated ground water. Because the government has not
supplied any alternate sources of drinkable water, some people still drink it despite being aware of the
contamination.
➢ Union Carbide produced 700 tonnes of poisonous waste in the form of corroded metal and other debris,
which are now dispersed around the industrial grounds and exposed, worsening the suffering of those
who live nearby. The Greenpeace analysis found harmful contaminants, some of which were
carcinogenic, after it also examined groundwater samples from the sources now used by locals around
the facility. These have been connected to the citizens' chronic ailments.
➢ During an inquiry, more than 20 tonnes of hexachlorocyclohexane in sacks were discovered in the
closed-off factory. The environmental toxin and persistent organic pollutant HCH have been related
to immune system and reproductive problems. Some of which were listed at the outset.
➢ The factory area has a high percentage of toxic wastes, according to research done by the National
Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI), Nagpur, suggesting that pollution may exist
at "greater depths." At this moment, groundwater contamination is still being investigated.

4
LEGAL ASPECTS OF THE TRAGEDY
➢ Absolute culpability is one of the major questions that the Bhopal Gas tragedy brings up. The case of
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India involved a detailed discussion of this subject. According to the principle
of absolute liability, if an enterprise engages in a hazardous or inherently dangerous industry and any
harm results as a result of such activity, the enterprise is absolutely liable to compensate for such harm;
it should not be an acceptable defence for the enterprise to claim that it took all reasonable precautions
and that the harm occurred without any negligence on its part.
➢ The idea behind safe design in these sectors is to not limit protection to the most common, routine
types of incidents. Instead, one should try to foresee the worst that could occur, even if it is extremely
rare, and take precautions to prevent it as well as to confine it and ensure that there is no way for that
to ever be possible.
➢ This is the idea of absolute culpability, and it is possible to establish liability even in the absence of
any fault on the side of the accused. Even the defences available under strict responsibility would not
apply in the situation of absolute liability.
➢ As a result, even if the accident was an unusual occurrence, culpability would still be determined.
Arguments that the carrying out of such hazardous behaviour was not the accident's direct or indirect
cause or its causa causa—that it was instead caused by an act of God or some other outside influence—
would not be persuasive in such a situation.
➢ The Company would still be held accountable even if they had taken extraordinary measures to prevent
such occurrences from happening. The Bhopal Gas Disaster and the Oleum Gas Leak case served as a
catalyst for the development of India's absolute liability theory.
➢ The Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991, which mandates mandatory insurance of every unit or
factory engaging in hazardous activity, was passed in part as a result of the Bhopal Gas Tragedy.
➢ In addition to all of this, the tragedy has received a lot of attention recently in light of the Nuclear
Liability Bill. Many contentious clauses in this measure are intended to cap the total liability in the
event of a nuclear accident. The bill also limits the victims' ability to seek compensation from suppliers
directly and limits it to operators. The bill also places a limit on how much money an operator may get
back from suppliers.
➢ In the light of the events that followed Bhopal, it is clear that there is a need for a proper mechanism
of compensation and it is important that any kind of cap on liability should be removed as it would be
unconstitutional.

5
CONCLUSION
The Bhopal gas leak case continues to rank as the greatest industrial catastrophe ever. Its aftermath served as
a reminder that industrialization is loaded with risks to people, the environment, and the economy. Here is
where the idea of sustainable development becomes crucial. Even the verdict in the case received harsh
criticism because neither the punishment imposed on the firm nor the contributions made by the government
were fully adequate given that there were additional victims in addition to those who were directly harmed in
the catastrophe. Every year, there are more people dying, getting sick, having cancer or birth defects, and
being totally disabled. In addition to this, the government should ensure that a suitable system for victim
compensation exists. It should provide prompt justice and make certain that the victims receive appropriate
relief. Who is right and who is wrong, who was irresponsible and who was not, become completely
meaningless in the wake of a calamity of the magnitude of Bhopal when thousands of people are harmed in a
single night. To fail to provide assistance to even one victim is completely unjustifiable. Ideally, such
catastrophes won't happen again, but even if they do, we should remember the lessons from Bhopal and make
sure that any legislation setting a limit on the culpability of disasters of this scale is ruled unconstitutional.