CONSTITUTION, INTERNATIONAL TREATIES, CONTRACTS AND TORTS 1. 2.3 OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises Whilst as has been indicated above, it is submitted that the case of the echr provides sufficient illustration for the mpact of intemational treaty noms on private agreements and tort actions under Dutch lw, attention should be drawn also to the fact that under specific circumstances such impact has also been found for certain rules which on the face of it were not intended to be binding. The prime illustration of this is the so-called BATCO-case which was adjudged by the Court of Appeals, Amsterdam on 21 June 1979, (NJ 1980, 71). The Court found that the closing by BATCO Nederland of its Amsterdam factory was illegal under the circumstances and should be blocked by an injunction. Amongst the circumstances relied on by the ourt, specific attention should be drawn here to the so-called Guidelines for ultinational enterprises (Annex to the Declaration of 21 June 1976 by Governments of OECD Mem ber Countries on Intermational Investment and Multinational Enterprises). These Guidelines provided i a. that nterpnises should (. in the case of the closure of an entity imolving collective lay-offs or dismissals, provide reasonable notice of such changes to representatives of their employees (.. and co-operate with the employee representatives (.) so to mitigate to the maximumextent practicable effects As it is, the Chairman of BAT Industries(the parent com pany of BATCO Nederland) ad gone on record as stating: The standards they (i.e. the Guidelines)set are very much in line with ourown established policies in these matters and we certainly support their efforts to have then widely applied It was under those circumstances that the Court found It is not without significance that BAT Industries has accepted the OECD Guidelines as guideline for its policy. These Guidelines too provide that m a case like the one umder consideration"consultations"with the representatives of the employees should take place. Under these circumstances, the termination by Batco Nederland of the consultations with the unions and the works council is a serious neglect of its obligation to consult. Therefore, BATCO Nederland acted in violation of fundamental principles of responsible entrepreneurship. The decision of B.alCO Nederland to cose its factory in Amsterdam, taken in violation of these principles, therefore is to be considered as mismanagement and should be annulled 1.2.4 General principles of public international law This translation has been taken from Andre Nollkaemper, Public Intemational law in Transnational Litigation Against Multinational Corporations: Prospect and problems in the Courts of The Netherknds, n M.T. Kamminga and S. Zia-Zarific (eds) Liabilty of Multinational Corporations Under International law, 200(p. 265).CONSTITUTION,INTERNATIONAL TREATIES,CONTRACTS AND TORTS 9 1.2.3 OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises Whilst as has been indicated above, it is submitted that the case of the ECHR provides sufficient illustration for the impact of international treaty norms on private agreements and tort actions under Dutch law, attention should be drawn also to the fact that under specific circumstances such impact has also been found for certain rules which on the face of it were not intended to be binding. The prime illustration of this is the so-called BATCO-case which was adjudged by the Court of Appeals, Amsterdam on 21 June 1979, (NJ 1980, 71). The Court found that the closing by BATCO Nederland of its Amsterdam factory was illegal under the circumstances and should be blocked by an injunction. Amongst the circumstances relied on by the Court, specific attention should be drawn here to the so-called Guidelines for multinational enterprises (Annex to the Declaration of 21st June 1976 by Governments of OECD Member Countries on International Investment and Multinational Enterprises). These Guidelines provided i.a. that: “Enterprises should (.) in the case of the closure of an entity involving collective lay-offs or dismissals, provide reasonable notice of such changes to representatives of their employees (.) and co-operate with the employee representatives (.) so to mitigate to the maximum extent practicable effects”. As it is, the Chairman of BAT Industries (the parent company of BATCO Nederland) had gone on record as stating: “The standards they (i.e. the Guidelines) set are very much in line with our own established policies in these matters and we certainly support their efforts to have then widely applied”. It was under those circumstances that the Court found: “It is not without significance that BAT Industries has accepted the OECD Guidelines as guideline for its policy. These Guidelines too provide that in a case like the one under consideration “consultations” with the representatives of the employees should take place. Under these circumstances, the termination by BATCO Nederland of the consultations with the unions and the works council is a serious neglect of its obligation to consult. Therefore, BATCO Nederland acted in violation of fundamental principles of responsible entrepreneurship. The decision of BATCO Nederland to close its factory in Amsterdam, taken in violation of these principles, therefore is to be considered as mismanagement and should be annulled.7 1.2.4 General principles of public international law 7. This translation has been taken from André Nollkaemper, Public International law in Transnational Litigation Against Multinational Corporations: Prospects and problems in the Courts of The Netherlands, in M.T. Kamminga and S. Zia-Zarific (eds) Liability of Multinational Corporations Under International law, 200 (p. 265)