Question

Case Study

In 1962 the Atlantic Cement Company began operating a cement plant outside of Albany, New York. The Company employed over 300 local residents and by 1970 had invested $45 million in the plant. The plant was insured but plant insurance will not cover any damage which is related with environmental and health problem. The insurance company made an agreement with the Cement Company that, if anything goes wrong, insurance company will pay the losses. The plant emitted large amounts of pollution, however, as well as causing constant vibrations and loud noise. Local residents filed suit against the Company, claiming that the loud noise and the vibrations were harming their health and property. The suit asked that the court issue an injunction that would close down the plant until the pollution and vibrations could be eliminated. The Company was already using the best available technology, which meant that the suit was asking that the plant be closed down indefinitely. The court refused to issue the injunction, reasoning that the costs of closing the plant outweighed the benefits to be gained by the residents. Instead of closing the plant, the court ruled that the cement company should pay residents a one—time fee to compensate them for ongoing harms. This fee was calculated to be a fair market price for what the residents would receive if they were inclined and able to rent their property.

1          Was the compensation is justified?

2          Was the decision of the court in this case fair? Explain

3          If you are agree with the judgment of the court so, explain why? If you are not agree with the judgment of the court so, explain why?

4          In your opinion, will you compromise your health and property with the amount of compensation?

5          Who will pay the loss? Cement company or insurance company?

6          Environmental pollution is very harmful, is it acceptable to compromise your surroundings and environment in term of money? Explain

Answer 1

1) The compensation was not justified as one time fees can't be compensated by the disturbances & health issues face by the local people.

2) No, the decision of the court was not fair.

I think the decision was inclined towards the Atlantic Cement Company.

3) I don't agree with the court's decision.

Court must think about the local people considering their problems faced because of cement factory. The problem faced by them was not solved. The court must advice the company to make some residency for the local people away from factory or should compensate high enough so that local residents can buy their houses away from that region.

4) I will never compromise my health and property with the amount of compensation because health is a god gift it can't be compensated with any amount of money. Once the health is lost it can't be purchased from any sum of money.

5) The loss will be beared by the company because it was a clear agreement between cement company & insurance company that plant insurance will not cover any damage which is related with environmental and health problem.

6) It is a very big debatable topic because without affecting or exploiting our surrounding we can't sustain our lives nowadays keeping in mind the current scenario. But I think laws & orders must be drafted to keep an eye on the activities related to this. There must be some bearable limit that must be approved by the law. One must keep in mind to maintain the sustainability of environment so that it can replenish itself with due coarse of time.