the trail smelter arbitration(1937)

Ionathan GusminiShinhyeong You

The Trail Smelter ArbitrationUnited States v. Canada

Fact PatternI: IssueR: Rules of LawA: ApplicationC: ConclusionArgument for PlaintiffArgument for DefendantCase Analysis

Index

Index

Fact Pattern

A Canadian company built a lead & zinc smelt-ing plant at Trail, British Columbia, 10 miles north of the state of Washington border.

In 1928, US & Canada agreed on referring the matter to the Boundary Water’s Treaty of 1909.

Fact PatternI: IssueR: Rules of LawA: ApplicationC: ConclusionPlaintiffDefendantCase analysis

Index

Fact Pattern

By 1930, more than 300 tons of sulfur, in-cluding large quanti-ties of sulfur dioxide was emitted daily.

Some emissions were carried down and caused damages to Washington property.


Index

Fact Pattern

In 1931, Canada paid $350,000 for damages reported by the commis-sions Arbitral Tribunal. The smelter continues to operate

In 1938, the tribunal grants $78,000 to US’s claim that the plant has caused damages up to $2 million.


Index

Fact Pattern

In 1941, The United States sought to have the opera-tion of the smelter en-joined.

The questions, “whether the plant should be closed to refrain from further damage to the state of Washington and, if so, to what extent” was pre-sented to the tribunal.


Index

Fact PatternFact PatternI: IssueR: Rules of LawA: ApplicationC: ConclusionPlaintiffDefendantCase analysis

Index

Issue

Whether damages caused by the Trail Smelter in the state of Washington occurred since the first day of January , 1932, and, if so, what indemnity should be paid there-fore


Index

Issue

If the first question is answered affirmative, should the Trail Smelter be required to be refrained from caus-ing future damages and, if so, to what ex-tent?


Index

Issue

In accordance to the previous questions, what measures should be taken by the Trail Smelter?


Index

Issue

What compensation should be paid?


Index

Rules of Law

States have the right to use resources how it wants, but has to stop when it starts to in-fringing on rights of other states to use their environment.

US Supreme Court Law


Index

Application

The Smelter had caused sufficient dam-ages to Washington thus violating state rights

Canada is responsible for the damages caused by the Smelter


Index

Conclusion

The tribunal found that the smelter has caused damages

The smelter shall pay US $78,000 for com-pensation


Index

Conclusion

The smelter shall re-frain from causing any more damages to the US


Index

Argument for Plaintiff

The sulfur dioxide emissions from the Trail Smelter damaged the Columbia River Val-ley

The conditions did not improve after the first suit


Index

Argument for Defendant

Previously paid the US compensation for damages

There is no reason to close the smelting plant since the dam-ages can be contained


Index

Argument for Defendant

There is no substantial proof that crops had been damaged due to the smelting plant


Index

Case Analysis

First case of air pollu-tion to come before an international tribunal

Established a prece-dent case for trans-boundary environmen-tal law


Ray August, International Business Law: T ext, Cases, and Readings

Keith A. Murray, The Trail Smelter Case: International Air Pollution in the Columbia Valley

References

Thank you

the trail smelter arbitration(1937)

Technology

defendant fact pattern

plaintiff fact pattern

application c

issue r

indexfact pattern fact

indexrules of law fact

indexissue fact pattern

indexconclusion fact