State Defense Council vs. Quiborax S.A .

On July 2, 2024, the plaintiff filed a judicial complaint under Article 17, No. 2 of Law No. 20.600, aiming to hold the defendant accountable for environmental damage resulting from the open-pit mining of ulexite deposits in the Salar de Surire. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant violated Ley N.º 19.300 (General Environmental Law) by failing to implement mitigation, repair, and compensation measures, as well as neglecting to enter the Environmental Impact Assessment System (SEIA). Consequently, significant environmental harm ensued, including the destruction of sediments, alteration of topography, loss of surface runoff, and degradation of critical ecosystem services. The plaintiff further emphasizes the damage to microbiota and extremophile microbial ecosystems (EMEs), which possess scientific value, particularly in astrobiology. The plaintiff emphasizes that climate change intensifies these impacts, citing the Sixth IPCC Report (2021), which highlights the vulnerability of unique ecosystems like the Salar to climate change. Increased summer rainfall worsens environmental degradation and disrupts the Salar’s role as a climate refuge, which is critical for sustaining biodiversity both regionally and globally. The plaintiff also references Chile’s international obligations under the Ramsar Convention, the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the Paris Agreement, along with the Climate Change Framework Law (Ley N.º 21.455), which outlines long-term climate management strategies. Furthermore, the plaintiff invokes Article 19, No. 8 of the Chilean Constitution, which guarantees the right to live in an environment free from pollution and requires the State to protect nature. The plaintiff contends that the defendant’s actions, which violate both domestic and international environmental obligations, have inflicted irreparable damage on the ecosystem and biodiversity of the Salar de Surire. To mitigate further harm, the plaintiff has requested a complete suspension of Quiborax’s mining operations, a measure granted by resolution on September 11, 2024. The plaintiff seeks reparative or compensatory measures in line with relevant environmental laws and commitments. The defendant argues that the claim is inadmissible due to res judicata, as a prior judgment by the First Civil Court of Arica, confirmed by the Court of Appeals, ruled over a decade ago that there was no environmental damage in the Salar de Surire, no negligence by Quiborax, and no obligation to enter the SEIA process. The defendant also asserts that the action is time-barred, as the alleged damage began 37 years ago, far exceeding the statutory limitation period. Additionally, the defendant contends that the claimed environmental harm does not exist, as the impacts are inherent to regulated mining activities conducted under valid authorizations and continuous oversight. It denies causation, attributing changes in the Salar’s lagoons to climatic factors such as temperature and rainfall. Finally, it rejects the presumption of liability under Article 52 of Law No. 19.300, arguing that no infringement has been proven and that the court lacks direct sanctioning authority. The defendant requests the complete dismissal of the claim, including costs.