Causation Presumed for Some Business Covered by BP Settlement
Posted by
Gabrielle D'AlemberteApril 23, 2012 11:15 AM
According to the BP Settlement that was filed last week and is awaiting preliminary approval from the judge, one of the requirements for businesses who file claims under the economic damages portion of the settlement is that the damage occurred because of the April 20, 2010 oil spill.
Proving causation can be a tricky matter, so the Settlement identifies several categories of economic loss claimants who do not have to provide evidence of causation. In other words, for these specific businesses, causation is simply presumed. Both the type of business and its geographic location (see the map below) matter for whether or not causation is presumed.
First, all businesses in Zone A are generally not required to provide any evidence of causation, with a few specific exceptions such as start-up or failed businesses.
“Landing Sites”, “Commercial Wholesale or Retail Dealers A” and “Primary Seafood Processors”, all of which are defined in the terms of the Settlement, are not required to provide any evidence of causation
Businesses in either Zone A or Zone B that meet the “Tourism” definition of the Settlement are exempt from proving causation
And finally, Businesses in Zone, A, B or C that meet the “Charter Fishing” Definition are not required to prove any evidence of causation.
