Case - Canada - García v. Tahoe Resources Inc.

García v. Tahoe Resources Inc.

Summary of facts

In June 2014, seven Guatemalans launched a lawsuit in the British Columbia Supreme Court against Canadian mining company Tahoe Resources Inc. The plaintiffs sued Tahoe, a company incorporated in the Canadian province of British Columbia (B.C.), for battery and negligence. The plaintiffs claim that they suffered serious injuries when Tahoe’s security personnel shot at them during a peaceful demonstration against the company’s Escobal silver mine in April 2013. They also claim that the shooting was a premeditated attempt by Tahoe’s security personnel to silence sustained community opposition to the mine. The lawsuit was settled in 2019.

In addition to the civil case in Canada, criminal charges were filed in Guatemala against Tahoe’s former security manager. However, he subsequently fled to Peru, and as of 2019 it remained uncertain as to whether he would be extradited to Guatemala.

Timeline

2017 Supreme Court of Canada

Jurisdiction

Yes

Applicable Law

Canadian law

Legal issues

The company appealed.

Ruling / Outcome

In 2017 the Supreme Court of Canada denied Tahoe’s application for leave to appeal.
In July 2019 the plaintiffs reached a settlement with Pan American Silver, a company that had acquired Tahoe Resources months earlier. As part of the settlement, the company issued a public apology to the plaintiffs and their community, acknowledging that the plaintiffs’ human rights had been violated during the shooting.

2017 Court of Appeal for British Columbia

Jurisdiction

Yes

Applicable Law

British Columbia provincial law (in Canada)

Legal issues

The plaintiffs appealed the decision.

Ruling / Outcome

In 2017 the B.C. Court of Appeal granted the appeal, allowing the plaintiffs’ case to proceed to trial. The Court of Appeal found that evidence of endemic corruption in Guatemala meant that the plaintiffs faced a real risk of injustice if they brought their civil suit in Guatemalan courts.

2015 Supreme Court of British Columbia

Jurisdiction

Yes

Applicable Law

British Columbia provincial law (in Canada)

Legal issues

The plaintiffs sued Tahoe for battery and negligence, claiming that Tahoe’s manager of security ordered the shooting, and that Tahoe expressly or implicitly authorised the manager’s conduct or was negligent in its management of security personnel.
The plaintiffs argue that Tahoe was aware of widespread community opposition to the mine and the manager’s conflictive relationship with the community.

Ruling / Outcome

Dismissed: While Tahoe recognized that the B.C. court had jurisdiction to try the case, it sought to have the claim dismissed on forum non conveniens grounds. In 2015, a B.C. Supreme Court judge sided with the company, finding that Guatemala was a more appropriate forum to adjudicate the plaintiffs’ claim.

Court case