Cases

European Commission v. Federal Republic of Germany (C-142/16) (European Court of Justice, Second Chamber) (26 April 2017)

European Commission v. Federal Republic of Germany, Case C 142/16 (April 26, 2017)
European Court of Justice
 

German officials authorized construction of the Moorburg coal-fired power plant in the port of Hamburg along the Elbe River.  The river serves as the migratory route for fish listed in Annex II of the European Union (EU) Habitats Directive. 

Writ Petition No. 30237 of 2018 and Writ Miscellaneous Petition No. 35289 of 2018, Madras High Court, 19.11.2018

The Madras High Court determined that the operator of a coal-fired power plant isn't beneficially utilizing fly ash, as required by the fly ash utilization notification of 03/11/2009, among other regulatory violations, which are causing environmental degradation and health hazards that may result in irreparable loss.  Accordingly, the court ordered an ad-interim injunction restraining the operator from dumping material that would affect the marsh land in Vallur Village, Tamil Nadu. 

Greenpeace Nordic Ass’n and Nature and Youth v. Ministry of Petroleum and Energy, Case no. 16-166674TVI-OTIR/06 (Oslo District Court) (4 January 2018)

Greenpeace Nordic Ass’n and Nature and Youth v. Ministry of Petroleum and Energy, Case no. 16-166674TVI-OTIR/06 (Oslo District Court) (4 January 2018)

Greenpeace Nordic Association and Natur og Ungdom (Nature & Youth) filed a case challenging licenses for offshore oil production granted by the Ministry of Petroleum and Energy.

In January, 2018, the Oslo District Court found Article 112 of the Norwegian Constitution creates an enforceable right to a healthy environment. The court acknowledged that this right includes the right to a healthy climate. 

Castle Mountain Coalition v. Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Case No. 3:15-cv-00043-SLG (D. Alaska 2016)

In Castle Mountain Coalition v. Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, several non-profit organizations and the governing body of a federally-recognized Native Village challenged a federal agency’s determination that a state may interpret the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA) to require an administrative proceeding be initiated in order to terminate a coal mining permit (rather than automatic termination) when the permit holder fails to commence mining operations within three years of the permit issuance.

Pages

Subscribe to Cases