El "Daño Ecológico", el caso "Chevron-Texaco": Estudio del régimen jurídico de la Directiva 2004/35/CE y la legislacion española de responsabilidad ambiental así como de la legislación comparada

From 1964 to 1990, Texaco, now Chevron, drilled and operated 356 oil wells and opened 1,000 graves in the Amazon of Ecuador (Lago Agrio). According to the lawsuit, the oil company did their work without many environmental care, causing serious damage affecting natural resources and the quality of life of members, especially indigenous local communities. The company poured approximately 80,000 tons of toxic waste in the Amazon rain forest, and polluted freshwater sources. In 1993, Ecuador filed its first lawsuit against Chevron in the United States. In 2001, Chevron sought to move the trial to Ecuador, arguing that Ecuadorian courts were suitable to hear the case and pledged to abide by the decision that the courts would take. In in 2011, after nine years of work, the Ecuadorian Court of Sucumbios, ordered the company to pay Chevron Texaco affected nine thousand six hundred million dollars, and to apologize. Not apologize in the next two weeks, the fine would be doubled. Chevron-Texaco refused to apologize, so the fine reached 19 billion dollars. Environmental damage, from the legal point of view, has a double effect. On the one hand, it can affect the subjective rights of one or more persons. On the other hand, it can affect the separate property of each individual or common property, shared by an undetermined generality of individuals. That is why environmental law aims primarily to avoid, prevent and repair environmental damage to natural resources. The United States and the European Union unlike Ecuador have several specific rules and appropriate to determine whether damage actually occurred. There are certain requirements that must be met for environmental damage, which will be analyzed in my thesis set. The designated law establishes a legal framework for environmental liability impute who have caused harm against the environment. But nevertheless, the main objective of the legislation is primarily natural resources that suffered damage return to their former base status and that the culprit assume repair costs. Undoubtedly, oil extraction generates a significant environmental impact. The idea is to compares the Tort Law and Environmental Law and demostrates which ones is the best tool to impose liability in environmental damages