PIL.OT / DEVELOPMENT
PIL.OTv0.62.2
Giesela Rühl questions whether the removal of Article 29(1) CSDDD in 2026 ends Member States’ obligation to establish civil liability for breaches of human rights due diligence obligations. Recital 49 and the remaining operative provisions still refer to damages claims, but she considers the existence of that obligation uncertain. She argues that Member States should provide for civil liability regardless and ensure that victims can effectively pursue damages claims in European courts.
Rühl also identifies an applicable-law obstacle: under Article 4(1) Rome II, supply-chain claims are generally governed by the law of the country where the damage occurs. She proposes giving national liability provisions overriding mandatory status under Article 16 so that they can apply irrespective of the otherwise applicable law.
Civil liability for breaches of human rights due diligence obligations in global supply chains after the removal of Article 29(1) CSDDD, and victims’ effective pursuit of damages claims in European courts.
Rühl links the effectiveness of national CSDDD liability regimes to applicable law: she proposes using Article 16 Rome II to prevent the place-of-damage rule from leaving those regimes largely ineffective.
Verfassungsblog · 2026
DOI 10.59704/8fae37bf5afb2ca1
Giesela Rühl, “The King is Dead, Long Live the King: Despite the Removal of Article 29(1) CSDDD Member States Should Establish a Civil Liability Regime to Protect Human Rights in Global Supply Chains”, Verfassungsblog, 2026-10-23, 10.59704/8fae37bf5afb2ca1. https://doi.org/10.59704/8fae37bf5afb2ca1