DECEMBER 9, 2015 UPDATE: Today, the Central District Court its Order Granting Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss in Barber v. Nestle USA, Inc., et al., No. SACV 15-01364-CJC(AGRX), concluding that “Plaintiffs’ claims are barred by the safe harbor doctrine and therefore declines to reach the remainder of Nestlé’s arguments.” Nestlé successfully argued that “a safe harbor from Plaintiffs’ state law claims was created by the California Transparency in Supply Chains Act of 2010 (“Supply Chains Act”), Cal. Civ. Code § 1714.43.” This is an important issue for retail sellers and manufacturers subject to the Supply Chains Act.
UPDATE: We invite in-house counsel to join Amy and Robert at the upcoming conference. In-house counsel that are new registrants may use the code PILLSBURYVIP, subject to approval by the ALM Events Team.
Please join Amy Pierce and Robert Wallan at the West Coast General Counsel Conference on November 17 at Hotel Nikko in San Francisco for the panel discussion Social Consciousness – Not Just for the Millennials.
Under the California Transparency in Supply Chains Act of 2010, since January 1, 2012, every retailer, seller and manufacturer doing business in California and having annual worldwide gross receipts that exceed $100 million has been required to disclose on its website its efforts to eradicate slavery and human trafficking from its direct supply chain.
Even if you have disclosed your efforts and self-certified your compliance with the Act, you may still be required to defend your efforts and, for that matter, your supply chain in 2015 and beyond.
We will be discussing the Act and litigation exposure created by this “shaming” statute.
Additional Source: These Lawyers Want Slave Labor Warnings on Your Cat Food (December 11, 2015); Compliance Alert: California’s Transparency in Supply Chain Act of 2010; California Transparency in Supply Chains Act
Photo: Debs (ò‿ó)♪, Shiny! (Creative Commons)