Nevada Case

The people of Marinduque, through the Provincial Government, has filed a suit against Placer Dome, Inc. (PDI) in Nevada, U.S.A. on October 4, 2005 for environmental remediation and natural resource damage in the hope of obtaining just compensation favorable to the Marinduqueño people and for the next generations of Filipinos. PDI is the giant Canadian mining company that managed and controlled Marcopper Mining Company (MMC). PDI operated the mine until 1997 when it divested its shares in Marcopper. Attys. Walter Scott, David Ammons and Reda Dennis, three members from a powerhouse team of many other American lawyers representing the Province, were one with the people in the commemoration, as they prepare to defend the case against countermoves filed by Place Dome, Inc.

“Placer Dome has filed a Motion to Dismiss last March 1, 2006 after several requested extensions,” said Scott. The moves to dismiss by Placer Dome were on the basis of personal jurisdiction and forum non conveniens. “There were no surprises as we have anticipated these grounds,” Scott added.

According to Scott, Placer Dome first makes a simplistic assertion that the Court lacks general jurisdiction over Placer Dome, and that the Province – and every other plaintiff – is not allowed to sue Placer Dome in Nevada because it supposedly does not conduct any business there despite the enormous profits it reaps from mining operations in Nevada. Placer’s particular jurisdictional challenge is premised on a sworn statement of Mark Ruus, Placer Dome’s Vice President of Taxation, which has already been

contested as false and misleading by one of Placer Dome’s own former executives. “Placer Dome’s position is disproved by the facts, and the Province has responded to Placer Dome’s jurisdictional challenge with a more than one foot-thick motion of its own highlighting Placer Dome’s pervasive contacts in Nevada while also demanding jurisdictional discovery to further probe Placer Dome’s contentions,” Scott said.
Placer Dome’s forum non conveniens argument contends that, instead of Nevada, the only appropriate or convenient forum for the case is Canada – and not the Philippines. Under the applicable tests and considerations, there is nothing to argue in favor of Canada over Nevada other than that some, but not even all, of Placer Dome’s personnel reside in Canada; however, that fact is not of any real consequence to the determination at hand, according to Scott. Placer Dome does not even consider the Philippines as an alternative forum. “It is ironic that Placer Dome uses forum non conveniens to defend against suits brought in Canada while in this case, it argues in favor of Canada,” he said. “Of course Placer Dome would want the case to be in Canada. It’s home court advantage. What we want is a neutral hearing so that a fair decision can be reached by the court. I am hopeful that we can get justice from the U.S. Federal Court in Nevada,” said Marinduque Governor Carmencita Reyes.