Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 04 JANUARY 2007

BP Alaska Derivative Claim

The derivative action filed in October in the Alaska State Court against directors and officers of BP Plc and its US subsidiaries may develop into an important precedent. Although only in its infancy, the case raises significant issues for UK companies doing business in the US, notably in connection with the reforms in the new Companies Act.

United KingdomCorporate/Commercial Law
Francis Kean
Francis Kean
Roderic McLauchlan
Roderic McLauchlan

Originally published in BLG’s Directors’ and Officers’ Liability Review, Winter 2006

What happens when the US Plaintiff’s Bar seeks to deploy tactics in reliance on English laws on directors’ duties?

The derivative action filed in October in the Alaska State Court against directors and officers of BP Plc ("BP") and its US subsidiaries (the "BP Action") may develop into an important precedent. Although only in its infancy, the case raises significant issues for UK companies doing business in the US, notably in connection with the reforms in the new Companies Act.

The claimants in the BP Action include the City of London Pension Fund, as well as other claimants purporting to sue derivatively on behalf of BP and certain of its US subsidiaries. The allegations focus on the corrosion problems in the pipelines at Prudhoe Bay, the Texas refinery explosion, and the investigations into alleged price fixing in the propane market. It is contended that the conduct of the executives damaged

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from