In Nevsun Resources Ltd. v. Araya, the Supreme Court of Canada declined to dismiss a series of customary international law claims brought by Eritrean refugees against a Canadian mining corporation for grave human rights abuses committed in Eritrea. In doing so, the Supreme Court opened the possibility of a novel front for transnational human rights litigation: common law tort claims based on customary international law. Under the doctrine of adoption, customary international law is directly incorporated into the Canadian common law. However, Canadian courts have not yet upheld a private right of action for violations of customary international law. Writing for a divided court (5–4), Justice Abella allowed the plaintiffs’ claims to proceed, finding that it is not “plain and obvious” that the plaintiffs’ customary international law claims are bound to fail under either Canada's burgeoning “transnational” or “foreign relations” law, or international law itself. In reaching this conclusion, she offered a unique and overdue reflection on the role of national courts in identifying, adopting, and developing custom. A larger majority of the court (7–2) also rejected outright the application of the act of state doctrine in Canada, tracking several common law systems in limiting the doctrine in favor of human rights litigants.

中文翻译：

---

Nevsun Resources Ltd. 诉 Araya

在Nevsun Resources Ltd. 诉 Araya, 加拿大最高法院拒绝驳回厄立特里亚难民针对加拿大矿业公司在厄立特里亚犯下的严重侵犯人权行为提起的一系列习惯国际法诉讼。通过这样做，最高法院为跨国人权诉讼开辟了一条新战线的可能性：基于习惯国际法的普通法侵权索赔。根据收养原则，习惯国际法直接并入加拿大普通法。然而，加拿大法院尚未支持违反习惯国际法的私人诉讼权。阿贝拉大法官为一个分裂的法院 (5-4) 写作，允许原告的索赔继续进行，认为原告的习惯国际法索赔在加拿大任何一方都必然失败，这并不是“显而易见的”。新兴的“跨国”或“外交关系”法，或国际法本身。在得出这一结论时，她对国家法院在识别、采纳和发展习俗方面的作用提出了独特的、姗姗来迟的反思。绝大多数法院（7-2）也完全拒绝了国家行为学说在加拿大的适用，并追踪了几个普通法系统限制该学说以支持人权诉讼当事人的做法。