ESG Supply Chain Due Diligence and Corporate Liability: Emerging Legal Obligations for Multinational Corporations Across Five Jurisdictions in 2026

Authors

Oghenehoro Evi Eni

Independent Immigration & Business Law Scholar | Ottawa, Canada (Canada)

Article Information

DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS.2026.100600532

Subject Category: Legal Policy and Regulations

Volume/Issue: 10/6 | Page No: 7615-7633

Publication Timeline

Submitted: 2026-06-03

Accepted: 2026-06-08

Published: 2026-06-29

Abstract

Supply chain due diligence has rapidly shifted from voluntary ESG self-regulation to binding legal obligation across multiple jurisdictions. By 2026, corporations are increasingly required to identify, prevent, and remediate human rights, labour, and environmental harms throughout global value chains under enforceable statutory and common law frameworks. This article provides a comparative legal analysis of evolving corporate liability regimes in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand, with particular emphasis on the extraterritorial reach of the EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) (Directive (EU) 2024/1760). The paper examines the convergence of modern slavery legislation, parent company duty of care jurisprudence, immigration-linked labour exploitation risks, and emerging director and officer liability for ESG disclosures. It argues that supply chain due diligence is no longer a corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiative but a structured legal obligation enforced through civil liability, regulatory penalties, and expanding personal accountability for corporate leadership.

Keywords

ESG, corporate liability, modern slavery, forced labour, immigration compliance

Downloads

References

1. ASIC (2025). ESG Misstatement and Disclosure Enforcement Trends. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. ASIC (2025). Report on ESG Misconduct and Greenwashing Enforcement. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Ashurst (2026). Parent Company Liability Post-Vedanta: Recent Developments. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Australian Border Force (2024). Modern Slavery Act Reporting Guidance. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Baker Botts (2026). Caremark and Corporate Governance Risk Update. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Baker Botts (2026). Corporate Governance Field Guide: Caremark Duties (2026 update). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Barnard, C. (2025). EU regulatory extraterritoriality and global corporate governance. Cambridge Law Journal. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Browne Jacobson (2025). Directors and officers: ESG and litigation trends. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Competition Bureau Canada (2025). Deceptive Marketing and ESG Enforcement Report. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Competition Bureau Canada (2025). Deceptive Marketing Practices and ESG Claims Enforcement Update. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Cossart, S., Chaplier, J., and Beau de Loménie, T. (2017). The French law on duty of vigilance. Business and Human Rights Journal, 2(2), 317–323. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Court of Appeal (2024). Limbu v Dyson Technology Ltd & Ors [2024] EWCA Civ 1564. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Debevoise and Plimpton (2025). Court of Appeal Allows Supply Chain Litigation to Proceed. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. De Schutter, O. (2024). Corporate due diligence and ESG governance. International Journal of Human Rights. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. De Schutter, O. (2024). Corporate due diligence and the end of voluntary CSR. International Journal of Human Rights. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Dentons (2024). ESG Supply Chain Litigation and Jurisdiction Trends. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Directors and Boards (2026). Board oversight in the digital age. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. DLA Piper (2020). Parent Company Liability: From Vedanta to BHP. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. ECGI (2025). Shapira, R. Conceptualizing Caremark. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Emory Corporate Governance Review (2023). McHugh, G. From Director Liability to ESG Caremark Claims. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. European Commission (2022). Proposal for a Directive on corporate sustainability due diligence. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. European Parliament and Council of the European Union (2024). Directive (EU) 2024/1760on corporate sustainability due diligence. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Fayezi, S., Klassen, R., Gold, S., et al., (2025). Reducing modern slavery risks in supply chains: socio-technical systems perspective. Production and Operations Management. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Fayezi, S., Klassen, R., and Gold, S. (2025). Supply chain risk and modern slavery governance. Production and Operations Management. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Fayezi, S., Klassen, R., and Gold, S. (2025). Supply chain transparency and modern slavery risk. Production and Operations Management. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Fostera, J., and Brintrup, A. (2026). It is all connected: modern slavery in complex global supply networks. International Journal of Operations & Production Management. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Fostera, J., and Brintrup, A. (2026). Complex supply networks and hidden labour exploitation. International Journal of Operations & Production Management. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Freshfields (2026). ESG Trends to Watch in 2026. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Federal Republic of Germany (2021). Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (LkSG). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Green, S. T., and Heys, A. (2025). Conducive environments and exploitation in migration systems. British Journal of Criminology. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Government of Canada (2024). Fighting Against Forced Labour and Child Labour in Supply Chains Act: Implementation Guidance. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Hill Dickinson (2025). Dyson Supply Chain Litigation: Key Implications for UK Companies. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. International Labour Organization (1930). Forced Labour Convention No. 29. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. International Labour Organization (2024). Global Estimates of Modern Slavery. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Krajewski, M. (2025). Civil liability under the CSDDD: A new frontier in EU corporatelaw. European Business Law Review. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. LegalClarity (2026). Does ESG fall under corporate governance? [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. LeBaron, G., and Lister, J. (2022). Modern slavery, supply chains and governance of labour exploitation. Journal of Human Rights Practice. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. LeBaron, G., and Lister, J. (2022). Governance of labour exploitation in supply chains. Journal of Human Rights Practice. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. LeBaron, G., and Phillips, N. (2024). Modern slavery, grievance mechanisms and corporate accountability. Business and Human Rights Journal. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. LeBaron, G., and Rühmkorf, A. (2024). From disclosure to liability: The evolution of modern slavery governance. Business and Human Rights Journal. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Linklaters (2026). ESG Legal Outlook 2026. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Martin-Ortega, O. (2023). Human rights due diligence in global supply chains. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. MBIE (New Zealand Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment) (2025). Fair Trading Act enforcement trends in ESG claims. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. New Zealand Parliament (2026). Immigration (Enhanced Risk Management) Amendment Bill. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. Norton Rose Fulbright (2025). Supply Chain Liability and Jurisdiction in Limbu v Dyson. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

46. OECD (2023). OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on Responsible Business Conduct. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

47. Olayiwola, P. (2026). Modern slavery, immigration regimes and migrant workers in social care. Sociology (online first). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

48. Schwede, L. (2024). Parent Company Liability after Vedanta: Duty of Care in Supply Chains. University of Oxford. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

49. Shapira, R. (2025). Corporate compliance and oversight duties. Indiana Law Journal. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

50. Smit, L., et al., (2024). Modern slavery reporting in the UK: effectiveness and enforcement gaps. Anti-Trafficking Review. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

51. Torys LLP (2024). Recent developments in director and officer liability. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

52. Touchstone Publishers (2026). Daniels, G. Officer Caremark Liability after 2025– 2026Chancery Decisions. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

53. Travers Smith (2025). Parent Company Liability: The Vedanta Framework. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

54. UK Home Office (2015). Modern Slavery Act 2015: Guidance on Transparency in Supply Chains. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

55. UK Home Office (2024). Modern Slavery Act Transparency Reforms Consultation Paper. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

56. UK Supreme Court (2019). Vedanta Resources plc v Lungowe [2019] UKSC 20. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

57. United Nations (2011). Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

58. UNODC (2025). Global Report on Trafficking in Persons. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

Metrics

Views & Downloads

Similar Articles