Jiangsu court did not make chemical firms pay for Changzhou land cleanup
Short record: the main facts, with sources. A full case file has not been prepared.
- The record does not name which of my species, waters, soils or forests were harmed.
A Jiangsu appeal ruling in the Changzhou poisoned-land case left remediation to the state rather than the chemical companies. Reported land sales and school illnesses are not verified in the sources reviewed.
- Chemical companies in the case (not named in the source) — Not ordered to pay remediation costs; apologised and paid 230,000 yuan in costs Beijing News (新京报)
- Chinese state — Carried out the remediation Beijing News (新京报)
What happened
Beijing News reported that the Jiangsu High Court's appeal ruling in the Changzhou poisoned-land case did not impose remediation costs on the chemical companies.
According to the same report, the companies apologised and paid 230,000 yuan in costs, and the state carried out the remediation.
In court and with insurers
Lawsuits and rulings
- 2018-12Outcome not on recordChangzhou poisoned-land case (appeal)Jiangsu Higher People's Court · Civil · → Chemical companies (not named in the source)
The appeal ruling did not impose remediation costs on the companies; they apologised and paid 230,000 yuan in costs. The state carried out the remediation. Beijing News (新京报)
Insurers
What we don't know
Nature
- Not measured Harm to nature: The record holds no measurement of harm to nature.
Court
- Unclear Changzhou poisoned-land case (appeal): outcome not on record.
Record
- Insufficient Reported but not verified: the chemical factory land was sold; Greenpeace and Nanjing University found that a quarter of 174 polluted parcels were sold, and about 44 percent of those were not fully cleaned up.
- Insufficient Reported but not verified: provincial capitals earn 20 to 52 percent of their revenue from land sales.
- Insufficient Reported but not verified: in 2016 hundreds of pupils at a school beside a former chemical plant fell ill, and NGOs sued two cleanup companies (Sixth Tone, 2016).
- None on record Not known: which companies were defendants, and the filing date of the case.
Did the harm stop?
Not stated in the sources reviewed.
Who paid?
Not stated in the sources reviewed.
Sources
Press and investigations
- 常州毒地案二审宣判Beijing News (新京报) · 2018-12
Connected cases
- Chinese appeal court did not make chemical firms pay remediation at Changzhou China · 2016–2018
- Jiangsu Higher People's Court (Government) — here: Appeal court; there: second-instance court