IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: Araya v. Nevsun Resources Ltd., 2016 BCSC 1856 Date: 20161006 Docket: S148932 Registry: Vancouver Between: Gize Yebeyo Araya, Kesete Tekle Fshazion and Mihretab Yemane Tekle Plaintiffs And Nevsun Resources Ltd. Defendants Before: The Honourable Mr. Justice Abrioux Reasons for Judgment Counsel for Plaintiffs: J. Fiorante, Q.C. R. Mogerman D. Lascaris J.D. Winstanley J. Yap Counsel for Defendant: A. Nathanson A. Borrell G. Cameron M. Tsurumi C. Senini (A/S) Place and Date of Hearing: Vancouver, B.C. January 4-8, 11-15 and 19-22 2016 March 7-11, 2016 Supplementary Written Submissions: August 3, 2016 Araya v. Nevsun Resources Ltd. Page 2 Place and Date of Judgment: Vancouver, B.C. October 6, 2016 Araya v. Nevsun Resources Ltd. Page 3 Table of Contents I: INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 7 II: SUMMARY OF DECISION .................................................................................. 11 III: EVIDENCE ON THE PRELIMINARY APPLICATIONS: BACKGROUND, CLAIMS AND RESPONSE ..................................................................................... 11 A: Introduction ...................................................................................................... 11 B: Eritrea .............................................................................................................. 12 C: The National Service Program ......................................................................... 14 D: The Bisha Mine ................................................................................................ 15 E: Economy and the Mine .................................................................................... 16 F: Claims in the Action ......................................................................................... 17 The Plaintiffs ..................................................................................................... 17 Nevsun.............................................................................................................. 19 G: Administration of Justice in Eritrea .................................................................. 26 Laws ................................................................................................................. 26 H: The Eritrean Courts ......................................................................................... 30 The High Court ................................................................................................. 30 The Special Court ............................................................................................. 39 The Labour Court .............................................................................................. 39 I: Jurisdiction ........................................................................................................ 41 J: Additional Background Relevant to Forum ....................................................... 42 IV: THE EVIDENCE APPLICATION ........................................................................ 44 A: Introduction ...................................................................................................... 44 B: Unattributed Hearsay ....................................................................................... 47 C: The Secondary Reports ................................................................................... 52 D: Mr. Connell’s Reports ...................................................................................... 60 E: The Evidence of the Former Judges and Lawyers ........................................... 66 F: The IRB Decisions and the Subcommittee Transcripts .................................... 68 G: Miscellaneous Objections ................................................................................ 70 H: Conclusions ..................................................................................................... 73 V: THE FORUM APPLICATION .............................................................................. 73 A: Introduction ...................................................................................................... 73 B: The Legal Framework ...................................................................................... 74 C: Parties’ Positions ............................................................................................. 79 Araya v. Nevsun Resources Ltd. Page 4 D: Discussion ....................................................................................................... 81 The CJPTA Factors .......................................................................................... 81 (a) the comparative convenience and expense for the parties to the proceeding and for their witnesses, in litigating in the court or in any alternative forum ...... 82 (b) the law to be applied to issues in the proceeding ........................................ 97 (c) the desirability of avoiding multiplicity of legal proceedings, ........................ 99 (d) the desirability of avoiding conflicting decisions in different courts and ....... 99 (e) the enforcement of an eventual judgment ................................................... 99 (f) the fair and efficient working of the Canadian legal system as a whole ...... 100 Additional Factors ............................................................................................... 103 Conclusion.......................................................................................................... 105 VI: THE ACT OF STATE APPLICATION .............................................................. 105 A: Introduction .................................................................................................... 105 B: Applicable Principles ...................................................................................... 106 Rules 21-8 and 9-5 ......................................................................................... 106 Act of State ..................................................................................................... 107 C: Parties’ Positions ........................................................................................... 109 D: Discussion ..................................................................................................... 110 (a) Does the act of state doctrine form part of the Common Law of Canada? 110 (b) Is the act of state doctrine engaged in the circumstances of this case such that the plaintiffs’ action should be dismissed pursuant to either Rule 21-8 or 9- 5? .................................................................................................................... 114 E: Conclusion ..................................................................................................... 122 VII: THE CUSTOMARY INTERNATIONAL LAW APPLICATION ......................... 123 A: Introduction .................................................................................................... 123 B: Applicable Principles ...................................................................................... 124 Rule 9-5 .......................................................................................................... 124 C: Customary International law and the Doctrine of Adoption ............................ 125 D: Parties’ Positions ........................................................................................... 128 E: Discussion ...................................................................................................... 130 F. Conclusion ..................................................................................................... 139 VIII: THE REPRESENTATIVE ACTION APPLICATION ....................................... 140 A: Introduction .................................................................................................... 140 B: Common Law Class Actions in British Columbia and Rule 20-3 .................... 140 C: Have the Rule 20-3 Requirements Been Satisfied? ....................................... 148 Araya v. Nevsun Resources Ltd. Page 5 D: Application of the Dutton Criteria to this Case ............................................... 150 (a) is the class capable of clear definition? ..................................................... 150 (b) there must be issues of fact or law common to all class members; ........... 152 (c) success for one class member means success for all ............................... 156 (d) proposed representative adequately represents the interests of the class 157 (e) countervailing considerations .................................................................... 158 E: Conclusion ..................................................................................................... 160 F: Going Forward ............................................................................................... 160 VIX: CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................ 160 Araya v. Nevsun Resources Ltd. Page 6 ACRONYMS AI Amnesty International ATS Alien Tort Statute (US) BMSC Bisha Mining Share Company CIL Customary International Law CJPTA Court Jurisdiction and Proceedings Transfer Act CPA Class Proceedings Act CSR Corporate Social Responsibility Program DIS Danish Immigration Service EASO European Asylum Support Office ENAMCO Eritrean National Mining Corporation EPCM