On 22 December 2020, the Norwegian Supreme Court ruled on its first climate case. It dealt with the claim that petroleum licences, issued by the Norwegian government, violate the ‘right to a healthy environment’ as contained in the Norwegian Constitution. The Court rejected the claim and found that the constitutional protection of the environment applies not as a right but as a substantive limit to governmental action, and only in very limited circumstances. Rather than taking the opportunity to give guidance on this constitutional provision, the Court provided a judgment that aligned law with the current politics in favour of continuous petroleum extraction on Norwegian territory.
{"title":"The First Climate Judgment before the Norwegian Supreme Court: Aligning Law with Politics","authors":"C. Voigt","doi":"10.1093/jel/eqab019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jel/eqab019","url":null,"abstract":"On 22 December 2020, the Norwegian Supreme Court ruled on its first climate case. It dealt with the claim that petroleum licences, issued by the Norwegian government, violate the ‘right to a healthy environment’ as contained in the Norwegian Constitution. The Court rejected the claim and found that the constitutional protection of the environment applies not as a right but as a substantive limit to governmental action, and only in very limited circumstances. Rather than taking the opportunity to give guidance on this constitutional provision, the Court provided a judgment that aligned law with the current politics in favour of continuous petroleum extraction on Norwegian territory.","PeriodicalId":46437,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Environmental Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2021-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49210290","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Climate Constitutionalism of the UK Supreme Court","authors":"N. Ghaleigh","doi":"10.1093/jel/eqab013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jel/eqab013","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46437,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Environmental Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2021-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47154564","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This analysis recapitulates the Hague Court of Appeal’s decisions in a series of lawsuits brought by Nigerian farmers against Dutch oil giant Shell. The ruling upholds Shell’s civil liability for the pollution ensuing from several oil spills and has been widely hailed as a blueprint for similar claims before European courts. Beyond these headlines, the judgment charters unexplored legal territories and elicits burning questions about judicial and environmental expertise in complex transnational settings. I propose a three-pronged analysis to cut through this complexity. First, the case deals with the international ‘anchor’ jurisdiction of Dutch courts over claims against foreign defendants. Secondly, the ruling marks a significant contribution to the jurisprudence on tort liability across corporate structures. Finally, the verdict sheds a new light on the interplay between environmental rights and tort actions. The confluence of these three perspectives projects a kaleidoscopic vision of environmental liability across borders.
{"title":"Transnational Experts Wanted: Nigerian Oil Spills before the Dutch Courts","authors":"D. Bertram","doi":"10.1093/JEL/EQAB008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/JEL/EQAB008","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This analysis recapitulates the Hague Court of Appeal’s decisions in a series of lawsuits brought by Nigerian farmers against Dutch oil giant Shell. The ruling upholds Shell’s civil liability for the pollution ensuing from several oil spills and has been widely hailed as a blueprint for similar claims before European courts. Beyond these headlines, the judgment charters unexplored legal territories and elicits burning questions about judicial and environmental expertise in complex transnational settings. I propose a three-pronged analysis to cut through this complexity. First, the case deals with the international ‘anchor’ jurisdiction of Dutch courts over claims against foreign defendants. Secondly, the ruling marks a significant contribution to the jurisprudence on tort liability across corporate structures. Finally, the verdict sheds a new light on the interplay between environmental rights and tort actions. The confluence of these three perspectives projects a kaleidoscopic vision of environmental liability across borders.","PeriodicalId":46437,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Environmental Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2021-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43391572","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Friends of the Earth: Implications for Planning Law","authors":"Ned Westaway","doi":"10.1093/JEL/EQAB014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/JEL/EQAB014","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46437,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Environmental Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2021-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47756004","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Friends of the Earth & Legal Interdisciplinarity: Introduction by the Analysis Editors","authors":"J. Bell, S. Bogojevic, O. Hamlyn","doi":"10.1093/JEL/EQAB011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/JEL/EQAB011","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46437,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Environmental Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2021-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42961584","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Scholarship increasingly reveals the distinct interplay between international environmental law and domestic legal systems, and the important role of courts the world over in fleshing out this relationship. Africa, however, seems to be underrepresented in these discussions, despite its being a key stakeholder in the development of international environmental law. As a contribution to this debate, we offer here an analysis of the relationship between international environmental law and domestic African legal systems, by focusing on how domestic courts in Kenya and South Africa have been engaging with the precautionary principle, the principle of public participation and the principle of sustainable development. Our analysis of a range of judgments shows that these courts have been exceptionally innovative in their growing support of these principles that they seem to embrace in their efforts to strengthen domestic environmental protection and to contribute to a nascent transnational judicial dialogue.
{"title":"African Courts and Principles of International Environmental Law: A Kenyan and South African Case Study","authors":"L. Kotze, C. Soyapi","doi":"10.1093/JEL/EQAB004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/JEL/EQAB004","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Scholarship increasingly reveals the distinct interplay between international environmental law and domestic legal systems, and the important role of courts the world over in fleshing out this relationship. Africa, however, seems to be underrepresented in these discussions, despite its being a key stakeholder in the development of international environmental law. As a contribution to this debate, we offer here an analysis of the relationship between international environmental law and domestic African legal systems, by focusing on how domestic courts in Kenya and South Africa have been engaging with the precautionary principle, the principle of public participation and the principle of sustainable development. Our analysis of a range of judgments shows that these courts have been exceptionally innovative in their growing support of these principles that they seem to embrace in their efforts to strengthen domestic environmental protection and to contribute to a nascent transnational judicial dialogue.","PeriodicalId":46437,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Environmental Law","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2021-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"61656581","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The Supreme Court of the Netherlands in Urgenda held that States had a customary obligation to implement their ‘fair share’ in achieving the 2 °C temperature limitation target they had agreed upon. Yet, this article argues, the notion that States must adopt or implement mitigation action in line with temperature targets finds no support in treaty or customary law. States’ acceptance of temperature targets as a collective objective is relevant to interpreting the standard of due diligence applicable to mitigation obligations only inasmuch as this objective is actually reflected in consistent State practice. At present, temperature targets represent essentially an agreement on a direction of travel: the need for more mitigation action. Over time, the acceptance of this objective could facilitate further legal developments as States agree on particular implications of temperature targets and on a requirement that each of them acts consistently with its interpretation of these targets.
{"title":"Temperature Targets and State Obligations on the Mitigation of Climate Change","authors":"B. Mayer","doi":"10.1093/JEL/EQAB003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/JEL/EQAB003","url":null,"abstract":"The Supreme Court of the Netherlands in Urgenda held that States had a customary obligation to implement their ‘fair share’ in achieving the 2 °C temperature limitation target they had agreed upon. Yet, this article argues, the notion that States must adopt or implement mitigation action in line with temperature targets finds no support in treaty or customary law. States’ acceptance of temperature targets as a collective objective is relevant to interpreting the standard of due diligence applicable to mitigation obligations only inasmuch as this objective is actually reflected in consistent State practice. At present, temperature targets represent essentially an agreement on a direction of travel: the need for more mitigation action. Over time, the acceptance of this objective could facilitate further legal developments as States agree on particular implications of temperature targets and on a requirement that each of them acts consistently with its interpretation of these targets.","PeriodicalId":46437,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Environmental Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2021-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42501489","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Stephen Tromans Qc, Katherine Barnes, Adam Boukraa, S. David, N. Helme
{"title":"Significant UK Environmental Law Cases 2020–21","authors":"Stephen Tromans Qc, Katherine Barnes, Adam Boukraa, S. David, N. Helme","doi":"10.1093/JEL/EQAB009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/JEL/EQAB009","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46437,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Environmental Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2021-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47592573","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Environmental impact assessment (EIA) is an important environmental protection tool introduced into the environmental governance framework to evaluate and inform the administrative decision-making processes regarding whether certain developments or projects are to be allowed. In this article, EIA’s legal status and procedure are examined in relation to a Middle Eastern context, specifically to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). Two different types of analysis are employed. The first is doctrinal analysis, focusing on the legal and statutory provisions regulating and organising this environmental protection tool—this genre of analysis entails identifying and unpacking the laws and regulations that govern this tool. The second type is qualitative analysis involving original data from 27 semi-structured interviews—one of the first of its kind on this topic in the KSA. The key contribution of the article comprises the examination and synthesis of the current status of different theories in the current international literature with regard to the underexplored issue of EIAs in the KSA.
{"title":"Environmental Impact Assessment: A Middle Eastern Experience","authors":"Mohammad A. Alomari, R. Heffron","doi":"10.1093/JEL/EQAB002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/JEL/EQAB002","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Environmental impact assessment (EIA) is an important environmental protection tool introduced into the environmental governance framework to evaluate and inform the administrative decision-making processes regarding whether certain developments or projects are to be allowed. In this article, EIA’s legal status and procedure are examined in relation to a Middle Eastern context, specifically to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). Two different types of analysis are employed. The first is doctrinal analysis, focusing on the legal and statutory provisions regulating and organising this environmental protection tool—this genre of analysis entails identifying and unpacking the laws and regulations that govern this tool. The second type is qualitative analysis involving original data from 27 semi-structured interviews—one of the first of its kind on this topic in the KSA. The key contribution of the article comprises the examination and synthesis of the current status of different theories in the current international literature with regard to the underexplored issue of EIAs in the KSA.","PeriodicalId":46437,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Environmental Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2021-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46186666","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The Habitats Directive will remain central to the EU’s continuing efforts to halt and ultimately reverse biodiversity loss under its 2030 Strategy for Biodiversity. Understanding the role this Directive plays in protecting European species is, therefore, critical if the EU is to deliver on its ambitious nature conservation agenda. This article presents a new study that furthers our understanding of EU law’s ability to deliver meaningful changes to a species’ conservation status by comparing the status of European plants that are protected under the Habitats Directive with those that are not, using the International Union for Conservation of Nature’s (IUCN) Red List. Its findings suggest that the Directive has had only a limited impact on European flora. The article concludes by proposing reforms that could address the shortcomings in the EU’s approach to conservation which are highlighted by the study.
{"title":"Assessing the Impact of the Habitats Directive: A Case Study of Europe’s Plants","authors":"Rob Amos","doi":"10.1093/JEL/EQAB006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/JEL/EQAB006","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The Habitats Directive will remain central to the EU’s continuing efforts to halt and ultimately reverse biodiversity loss under its 2030 Strategy for Biodiversity. Understanding the role this Directive plays in protecting European species is, therefore, critical if the EU is to deliver on its ambitious nature conservation agenda. This article presents a new study that furthers our understanding of EU law’s ability to deliver meaningful changes to a species’ conservation status by comparing the status of European plants that are protected under the Habitats Directive with those that are not, using the International Union for Conservation of Nature’s (IUCN) Red List. Its findings suggest that the Directive has had only a limited impact on European flora. The article concludes by proposing reforms that could address the shortcomings in the EU’s approach to conservation which are highlighted by the study.","PeriodicalId":46437,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Environmental Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2021-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48443206","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：