The Supreme Court Refuses to Let BP Pay Less for Its Oil Spill byAri Phillips, Climate Progress in Nation of Change, December 9, 2014
On Monday, the Supreme Court rejected BP’s attempt at appealing its own settlement with businesses and individuals that lost money due to the massive 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill. The court’s refusal to hear the appeal means BP will have to make payments to those that it argues cannot tie their losses to the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon platform and drilling rig, which killed 11 people and spilled an estimated 4.9 million barrels of oil into the Gulf. The Supreme Court justices did not comment on the case in their refusal to hear it.
According to Tom Young, a Florida attorney who filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court opposing BP’s appeal, business owners and individuals that experienced a loss of profit or earnings tied to the incident now have six months to file for compensation. “One would be hard pressed to identify too many Gulf area businesses that did not endure some loss, small or large, that related in some way to the disaster,” writes Young. “A loss is a loss and BP has agreed to compensate all those so affected. With today’s decision, the Supreme Court has confirmed this arrangement.”
BP has been pursuing a number of different routes to avoid paying fines and compensations related to the disaster. In November, BP asked a federal judge to cap the amount of spill-related fines at $12.3 billion — almost a third less than the amount U.S. prosecutors are seeking.
Under the Clean Water Act, a finding of “gross negligence” — a term meaning an extreme lapse in attention — triggers the maximum permitted fine. In September, U.S. District Judge Carl Barbier found that the series of mistakes surrounding the spill did in fact amount to gross negligence. Barbier reinforced his findings when he rejected BP’s request for a new trial. The gross negligence ruling opens BP up to the maximum $18 billion in fines, which could be imposed if the judge finds that the disaster spilled more than four million gallons into the Gulf.
BP signed the settlement agreement in 2012, but has since made the claim that its interpretation is causing the company to pay compensation to those that cannot prove damages. This settlement is separate from the environmental and criminal penalties relating to the spill, which are undergoing their own court proceedings. BP has estimated that it will pay at least $9.7 billion to plaintiffs, about $2.3 billion of which has already been paid.
In the appeal, BP claimed that it had made more than $600 million in illegitimate payments to claimants not actually harmed by the spill. A federal district court in New Orleans and the 5th U.S. Court of Appeals upheld the settlement earlier this year before the Supreme Court refused to hear it.
While the lasting impacts of the oil spill on the Gulf and coastal communities is still being determined, the outlook is not good. In October, a study documented a 1,235-square-mile “bathtub ring” of oil on the ocean floor where 10 million gallons of oil settled and coagulated after the spill. [Emphasis added]
[Refer also to:
BP to appeal both decisions: BP oil spill lawsuit in U.S. wins class-action status; BP loses at 5th Circuit Court of Appeals letting stand a March decision forcing BP to pay businesses for damages without the business having to prove the spill caused the losses
Battered Encana taps former BP exec Doug Suttles, who reportedly covered-up the extent of the Deepwater Horizon disaster, as new CEO
Investors sue BP’s ex-CEO Tony Hayward and Doug Suttles, now Encana CEO; Encana chops executives, five senior managers gone including USA President Jeff Wojahn, who headed the unit when it was accused of collusion
New Encana head Doug Suttles [past senior BP executive who reportedly lied about the Gulf of Mexico Deepwater Horizon disaster] plays cards close to chest ]