Environmental Liability - Law, Policy and Practice - Volume 24 - Issue 5
The instrumentality of time: climate change – temporal anomalies and black holes
Head of Lincoln Law School, Professor of International Law, University of Lincoln.
Mass environmental harm – massive challenges and novel potential solutions
JOANNE BLENNERHASSETT Assistant Professor, Sutherland School of Law,
University College Dublin
This article examines the distinctive features of mass environmental harm and the challenges that these present for litigation, including issues surrounding toxic torts, causation and evidential complexity, latency, legal cost, and the corporate veil. The article explores novel remedies for mass environmental harm, but also discusses routes to collective redress, including the role of public law and regulation, private enforcement and techniques such as alternative dispute resolution. The article also examines solutions that multiparty actions may offer as one form of collective redress for environmental mass harm.
Biodiversity protection: the Norwegian perspective
INGVILD ULRIKKE JACOBSEN
Associate Professor, K G Jebsen Centre for the Law of the Sea, UiT, Norway
MARGHERITA PAOLA POTO
Postdoctoral Fellow, K G Jebsen Centre for the Law of the Sea, UiT, Norway
Using the Norwegian example, this article illustrates how the term ‘biodiversity’ has contributed to shaping legal solutions and to strengthening national compliance with international recommendations where the protection of the environment is at the core, ultimately demonstrating the importance of topdown and bottom-up participation.
The Paris Agreement Implementation Blueprint: legal avenues to Blueprint implementation (Part 2)
Plan B, UK
The Global Commons Institute, UK
University of the South Pacific, Vanuatu
There is currently no plan or framework for closing the gap between action and goal in climate policy. More specifically there is no common framework to support either the equitable division of the remaining carbon budget or the quantification of rights to finance (upon which any equitable division of the carbon budget must depend). This is Part 2 of a two-part paper where Part 1, published in the previous issue of Environmental Liability, proposed a rational, integrated methodology (‘the Blueprint’) for: limiting global CO2 emissions to the ‘carbon budget’ consistent with the temperature goal; quantifying rights and obligations to climate finance; and apportioning responsibility, in public international law, for climate change loss and damage. Part 2 describes the legal avenues to implementation of the Blueprint framework and lays out the legal routes available for translating theory into practice.
Highlight on solar energy tariffs in France
Enedis SA v Axa Corporate Solutions SA, Ombrière Le Bosc SAS
CJEU Case C–515/16 (15 March 2017).
US Litigation and Regulation – selected issues
AMERICAN COLLEGE OF ENVIRONMENTAL LAWYERS
Does Chevron ever permit the EPA to rewrite a statute?.
A “major rule” or “significant regulatory action”.
Perhaps it should be renamed the “Really, Really Endangered Species Act”.
Can we really expect an administrator not to administrate?.
Superfund reform, part 2: giving credit where credit is due.
State challenge Trump administration’s approach to climate change through energy efficiency rules.
The opportunity and promise of decommissioning.
DAVID BAKER et al White & Case LLP
Plastics in a circular economy: the European Commission strategy and goals and focus on energy sector.
GIOVANNI MOSCHETTA EU Legal Advisor, NCTM Studio Legale
Key Policy Developments January–February 2017
Implementation of EU environmental law.
EU’s Environmental Implementation Review completes initial stage.
Essen: European Green Capital for 2017 .
Law Enforcement Issues January–February 2017.
Environmental Impact Assessment.
Environmental Legislation Update.
MARTIN HEDEMANN-ROBINSON University of Kent, Canterbury