In this connection, support was expressed for the principle laid down in the Handelskwekerij G. J. Bier v. Mines de Potasse d'Alsace S.A. Case.

In this connection, support was expressed for the principle laid down in the Handelskwekerij G. J. Bier v. Mines de Potasse d'Alsace S.A. case.

The company (Mimes de Potasse d'Alsace) had discharged over 10,000 tons of chloride every 24 hours into the Rhine river in France and the damage had been suffered by horticultural business in the Netherlands.

Mines de Potasse d'Alsace S.A. case (1976), the European Court of Justice held that article 5(3) of the Convention, which conferred jurisdiction in matters relating to “tort, delict or quasi-delict, in the courts for the place the harmful event occurred”, should be interpreted to mean that the choice of the forum between the State in which the harm was suffered and the State in which the harmful activity was situated was left to the plaintiff.

Most of the compensation was paid to States but some private parties also received compensation); Bhopal Gas case, pp. 253-254 (claim was settled out of court between the Union Carbide Corporation, the United States of America and the Government of India for US$ 470 million, while the initial claim for compensation was more than that); The Mines de Potasse d'Alsace, pp. 254-258 (A French company polluted the River Rhine with chlorides through discharge of waste salts.

Most of the compensation was paid to States but some private parties also received compensation); Bhopal Gas case, in Lefeber, pp. 253-254 (claim was settled out of court between the Union Carbide Corporation, the United States of America and the Government of India for US$ 470 million, while the initial claim for compensation was more than that); The Mines de Potasse d'Alsace, in Lefeber, pp. 254-258 (A French company polluted the River Rhine with chlorides through discharge of waste salts.

In Handelskwerkerij G.J. Bier v. Mines de Potasse d'Alsace S.A., the Court of Justice of the European Communities construed the phrase “in the courts of the place where the harmful events occurred” in article 5 of the 1968 Brussels Convention on Jurisdiction and Enforcement of Judgements in Civil and Commercial Matters as meaning the choice of forum between the State in which the harm occurred and the State in which the harmful activity was situated; and determined that the choice of forum belonged to the plaintiff whom the Convention seeks to protect.