There _ _ _ a _ _ _ _ _ here last year Unit 5. listening PICTURE C PICTURE B PICTURE D PICTURE A.
Columns Picture here
description
Transcript of Columns Picture here
Columns Picture here
Aarhus Convention & Irish Environmental Law:
Key Points & Potential Impact
Áine Ryall Twitter: @EnvJusticeUCC
Dublin, 4 February 2014
Aarhus Convention
Aarhus Convention
↓
EU environmental law
↓
Set of international & EU law standards
Different sources of legal authority → complex intersections
AarhusConventio
n
National LawEU Law
Intersections in enforcement context
Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee
(ACCC)
Public authorities & national courts
European Commission &Court of Justice
(CJEU)
Irish environmental law pre-Aarhus
Significant rights of access to information
Extensive provision for public participation
Right of appeal to An Bord Pleanála
Judicial review & statutory enforcement provisions
So what does Aarhus add?
Information → Dir 2003/4/EC
Participation→ Dir 2003/35/EC (PP Dir)
Access to justice → Dir 2011/92/EU (EIA Dir)
Dir 2010/75/EU (IED) (ex IPPC)
A new general EU legislative measure on access to environmental justice? Aarhus Art 9(3)
Uncharted waters ...
Impact of Aarhus & EU related measures on national law
Significant uncertainty
Difficult to advise with confidence
Aarhus Convention:Implementation Guide
2nd edition, 2013
http://www.unece.org/index.php?id=32764
Aarhus - Role of the Courts
Courts in the spotlight - at EU & national level
Gradual evolution of basic principles & emerging trends in the case law
Aarhus Convention & emerging principles in CJEU case law
An integral part of EU legal orderCase C-240/09 ‘LZ’ – ‘Slovak Brown Bear case’
Impact on interpretation of EU environmental directivesCase C-416/10 Križan
Aarhus Convention & emerging principles in CJEU case law
Aarhus-inspired Directives interpreted in light of objectives and scheme of Aarhus Convention
Strong purposive approach – also pragmatic
Keen to ensure environmental rights are effective in practice – Case C-416/10 Križan
Public interest in environmental protection
Aarhus Convention & emerging principles in CJEU case law
Aarhus Article 9(4) – an obligation of costs protection – a ‘ban’ on prohibitive costs
Public interest in protection of the environment
Aarhus Convention & emerging principles in CJEU case law
Case C-260/11 Edwards, 11 April 2013
Case C-530/11 Commission v UK - Opinion of Advocate General Kokott, 12
September 2013- Judgment due 13 February 2014
Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee (ACCC) - Geneva
- Not a “court”
- Operates in very transparent way
- Makes findings & recommendations
- Impact of its findings & recommendations?
Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee (ACCC)
Public may bring “communications” (complaints) concerning Ireland to ACCC from 18 September 2013
Ireland – Access to Justice - Costs
Planning and Development Act, section 50B
Environment (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2011, Part 2
Special costs rules
Ireland – Access to Justice - Costs
Holly Hunter v Nurendale Ltd t/a Panda Waste [2013] IEHC 430 Hedigan J
Holly Hunter v EPA [2013] IEHC 591 Hedigan J
Ireland – Access to Justice - Costs
Tesco Ireland Ltd v Cork County Council, Ireland and the Attorney General (No 2) [2013] IEHC 580 Peart J
PDA s50B(2A)
The successful applicant was awarded their costs – without any deduction or discount
Challenges
Incredibly rapid pace of development →
Member States in constant state of “catch up”
Lack of legal certainty & predictability
National legal systems slow to respond to change
Challenges
Economic context → resources to support Aarhus rights and enforcement activity are scarce
Future Directions
Evolving case law from ACCC, CJEU and national courts will (hopefully) bring greater legal certainty & predictability
Future Directions
Political will to deliver on environmental rights and provide the necessary resources to underpin Aarhus implementation?
Future Directions
Aarhus rights must be championed at national level
Awareness raising & cultural change to integrate Aarhus successfully into the national system