Civil Court accepts lawsuit against CPF in Blackchin tilapia invasion case

The country’s agro-industrial and food-producing conglomerate, Charoen Pokphand Foods PCL (CPF), has seven days to appeal against the court’s decision, whereas more fishermen and aquaculture farm owners plan to file lawsuits against the company, the country’s largest environmental court case so far

The Bangkok South Civil Court yesterday decided to accept the class action lawsuit filed by representatives of over 1,400 local fishermen and aquaculture farm owners in Samut Songkhram province, who claim that their livelihoods and the environment have been damaged as a result of the spread of the fish imported by the company years ago.

In total, they have demanded compensation worth around Bt 2,486 million.

Dr.Vichian Chubthaisong, President of the Lawyers Council of Thailand under the Royal Patronage, acting on behalf of the plaintiffs, has revealed that the Court had examined the plaintiffs’ suit since it was first filed to the Court in last September before it decided to issue an order as such yesterday.

The Court, he said, will not take any further action during the next seven days yet, pending for the higher court to consider an appeal against its decision, if any. The ruling of the Appeal Court will be definite, he noted. (Read: Series of legal action taken in Blackchin tilapia fish invasion case/ Lawyers Council sets to file lawsuits against concerned agencies and “the company” over Blackchin fish invasion)

According to the team of lawyers attending the Court’s session yesterday, the court had gone through four critical points to decide whether they have grounds to accept the case or not. 

First, the Court considered whether the lawsuit was direct and clear enough. Based on the plaintiffs’ narratives in the lawsuit, the court decided that the lawsuit was direct and clear enough to be taken up and proceeded further. 

Second, the Court considered whether the case should be taken up and proceeded as a class action. The Court said it’s a fact that the spread has affected up to 19 provinces so far, and the damage is extensive. The plaintiffs have also petitioned various concerned agencies as well as the Administration Court, it further noted.

As the case involves a large number of damaged parties, it would be complicated if it was deliberated separately based on facts and testimonies provided by each individual. So, the Court decided that taking up the case as a class action would be more feasible in court proceedings, the lawyers team said of the notes they took in the Court’s session.

Third, the Court considered whether the lawyers team is entitled to legal proceedings of the case. It viewed the lawyers were appointed by the LCT, which is an established legal support providing organisation that has experience working on similar environmental cases. The lawyers themselves also examined the case on the ground. So, it decided that they are entitled to proceed wth the case.

Last but not least, the Court decided that the case is limited to only three districts in the province, the lawyers team noted on the court’s final decision.

The lawyers team has revealed that representatives of fishermen and aquaculture farm owners from Petchaburi province and Bangkok plan to file a similar lawsuit. The lawyers have been working on collecting information in those two provinces and are ready to proceed with the case for them, pending their final decision whether they will go ahead with the plan. The team said it would not take much time to proceed with the case, probably within this month.

The fishermen and aquaculture farm owners in those 19 provinces, meanwhile, are also considering staging a protest to pressure the government once again after they have not heard any responses from it after they came to Bangkok to file a petition to it in mid-January to quickly solve the problem. (Read: World’s leading CSOs join Bio Thai to pressure CPF accountable for Blackchin tilapia outbreak)

If the case is deliberated in court, it will be the largest environmental court case to date, as over 1,400 people are involved so far. 

CPF’s response

Following the Court’s decision, CPF has made its response through its Corporate Communication and PR Office. The office noted in its public statement, stressing that this order merely authorizes the case to be proceeded as a class action and does not imply that CPF is guilty of the charges yet.

“It is important to emphasize that this order does not mean CPF is deemed at fault based on the allegations. Instead, it simply paves the way for a more efficient judicial process. The determination of the company’s guilt or liability will be made after a thorough examination of the evidence in court,” the office stated in the statement.

The company’s representative stresses that the company operates according to established standards and places a high priority on environmental sustainability. The representative maintains that the company’s operations are not the source of the issues raised.

CPF will appeal the decision as needed, contesting the case with scientific evidence and empirical data in accordance with due legal process, the representative confirms.

Dr.Vichian, meanwhile, said of the case with the Administration Court, under which 18 state agencies and individuals have been accused of negligence of duty in the case. He said the Court has also taken up the case for deliberation and is now deliberating it.