Reports, Studies, UCC Opinions, and Court Decisions
The following will provide additional information and insight with regard to the tragedy in Bhopal, India.
Investigation of Large-Magnitude Incidents: Bhopal as a Case Study (152KB PDF), Ashok S. Kalelkar, Arthur D. Little, Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA, May 1988.
Union Carbide: Disaster at Bhopal (136KB PDF), by Jackson B. Browning, Retired Vice President, Health, Safety, and Environmental Programs, Union Carbide Corporation, Copyright 1993.
Madhya Pradesh Pollution Control Board's press release announcing it had taken over control the Bhopal plant, July 28, 1998.
Opinion of the Attorney-General of India: Extradition of Mr. Warren Anderson, August 6, 2001.
UCC statement on the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upholding upholding the dismissal of remaining claims for property damages, remediation in the case of Bano vs. Union Carbide Corporation, Aug. 10, 2006.
U.S. Court Decisions:
U.S. Court of Appeals Affirms Transfer of Litigation to India. Court Rules that UCIL is a separate entity, owned, managed and operated exclusively by Indian citizens in Inida, January, 14, 1987.
Opinion of the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in New York in the case of Bano vs. Union Carbide Corporation (271KB PDF) Aug. 10, 2006.
Opinion of the U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York in the Janki Bai Sahu v. Union Carbide Corp. case, June 26, 2012 (Sahu I)
Opinion of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in the Janki Bai Sahu v. Union Carbide Corp. case, June 27, 2013.
Opinion of the U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York in the Jagarnath Sahu v. Union Carbide Corporation and Madhya Pradesh State case, July 30, 2014 (Sahu II)
Indian Court Rulings:
Union Carbide statements on the Government of India's and related parties' 2011 legal filings regarding the Bhopal settlement:
To view some information, you will need to download Adobe Reader.