Guideline: Version 2000 Chapter IV Paragraph IV.1 Subparagraph IV.1.C
| Description | Enterprises should contribute to the elimination of all forms of forced or compulsory labour. |
|---|
13 cases relating to 'Version 2000 Chapter IV Paragraph IV.1 Subparagraph IV.1.C':
| Title | Issue | Date filed | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| ECCHR, Sherpa & UGF vs Louis Dreyfus | Child labour in the Uzbek cotton trade | 23 December 2010 | Agreement |
| ECCHR, Sherpa & UGF vs ICT Cotton | Child labour in the Uzbek cotton trade | 12 December 2010 | Agreement |
| ECCHR, Sherpa & UGF vs Cargill Cotton | Child labour in the Uzbek cotton trade | 12 December 2010 | Agreement |
| ECCHR, Sherpa & UGF vs Devcot S.A. | Child labour in the Uzbek cotton trade | 25 October 2010 | Concluded |
| ECCHR, Sherpa and UGF vs Otto Stadtlander | Child labour in the Uzbek cotton trade | 25 October 2010 | Agreement |
| ECCHR, Sherpa & UGF vs ECOM Agroindus-trial Corp Ltd. | Child labour in the Uzbek cotton trade | 25 October 2010 | Agreement |
| ECCHR, Sherpa & UGF vs Paul Reinhart AG | Child labour in the Uzbek cotton trade | 25 October 2010 | Agreement |
| EarthRights International et al. vs. Daewoo | Daewoo & KOGAS' pipeline project in Burma | 29 October 2008 | Rejected |
| EarthRights International et al. vs. KOGAS | Daewoo & KOGAS' pipeline project in Burma | 29 October 2008 | Rejected |
| 11.11.11 et al vs. Cogecom | Belgian companies illegal resource exploitation in DRC | 24 November 2004 | Rejected |
| FoE US & RAID vs. Trinitech | US companies & illegal resource exploitation in DRC | 4 August 2004 | Rejected |
| RAID vs. Alex Stewart (Assayers) Ltd | UK companies & illegal resource exploitation in DRC | 28 June 2004 | Withdrawn |
| NiZA et al. vs. CPH | CPH & illegal resource exploitation in DRC | 3 July 2003 | Rejected |
