Abstract I undertake a comparative doctrinal study of the due diligence and liability provisions of the European Union’s Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive, also accounting for some of the changes and omissions proposed under the so-called “Omnibus” process to streamline the already passed directive. In relation to the due diligence provisions, my main thrust is in comparing the directive to the practice-oriented state-of-the-art of private supply chain governance, the Accord on Fire and Building Safety in Bangladesh. In relation to the liability provisions (or proposed lack thereof), my focus is on the development of both national and transnational private law doctrine and regulation in European legal systems to account for production related liability deficits. While lacklustre in many ways, the directive signals interesting tendencies. The gradual black letter transnationalization of local rules of reasonability in contracting (even if based on international consensus) is one. The possible shift in importance from causation to rules of prioritization in a data-rich global economy is, potentially, another.
Jaakko Salminen (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: