{"id":57614,"date":"2025-09-19T14:14:25","date_gmt":"2025-09-19T22:14:25","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/elaw.org\/?post_type=resource&#038;p=57614"},"modified":"2025-09-19T14:14:26","modified_gmt":"2025-09-19T22:14:26","slug":"d-g-khan-cement-company-v-government-of-punjab-supreme-court-of-pakistan-2019","status":"publish","type":"resource","link":"https:\/\/elaw.org\/fr\/resource\/d-g-khan-cement-company-v-government-of-punjab-supreme-court-of-pakistan-2019","title":{"rendered":"DG Khan Cement Company c. Gouvernement du Pendjab, Cour supr\u00eame du Pakistan (2019)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">La Cour supr\u00eame du Pakistan a reconnu la n\u00e9cessit\u00e9 d&#039;accorder la personnalit\u00e9 juridique aux personnes physiques dans un arr\u00eat de 2019. Une entreprise de ciment a contest\u00e9 aupr\u00e8s du gouvernement provincial du Pendjab une notification interdisant la construction de nouvelles cimenteries et l&#039;agrandissement d&#039;usines existantes dans des zones \u00e9cologiquement sensibles. La Cour a estim\u00e9 que la protection constitutionnelle des droits fondamentaux du public n\u00e9cessitait la protection de l&#039;environnement, et que \u00ab l&#039;environnement doit \u00eatre prot\u00e9g\u00e9 en tant que tel \u00bb. <em>Identifiant.<\/em> \u00e0 la p. 12. La Cour a expliqu\u00e9 :\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">La protection de la nature ne se limite pas \u00e0 un r\u00e9gime de droits centr\u00e9 sur l&#039;humain. Partout dans le monde, les l\u00e9gislateurs et les tribunaux attribuent d\u00e9sormais \u00e0 la nature des \u00e9l\u00e9ments de personnalit\u00e9. L&#039;approche consistant \u00e0 personnifier l&#039;environnement afin de prot\u00e9ger et de pr\u00e9server la nature et ses objets constitue l&#039;une des derni\u00e8res \u00e9volutions du droit de l&#039;environnement. L&#039;homme et son environnement doivent chacun faire des compromis pour le bien commun, et cette coexistence pacifique exige que le droit traite les objets environnementaux comme des titulaires de droits.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">\u00a0<em>Identifiant.<\/em> aux pp. 12-13. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">La Cour a confirm\u00e9 la d\u00e9cision du gouvernement, estimant que l&#039;entreprise de ciment n&#039;\u00e9tait pas autoris\u00e9e \u00e0 agrandir ses installations.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>*Remarque : les traductions sont automatis\u00e9es. Toutes les citations traduites doivent donc \u00eatre v\u00e9rifi\u00e9es par rapport \u00e0 la langue d&#039;origine.*<\/strong><br><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The Supreme Court of Pakistan acknowledged the necessity to grant legal personality to natural entities in this 2019 ruling. A cement company challenged the Provincial Government of Punjab for a notification barring construction of new cement plants and expansion of existing plants in environmentally sensitive areas. The Court found that the constitutional protection of the [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":18,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","resource-topic":[246,76,30482],"resource-type":[528],"resource-category":[30097],"content-for-websites":[],"region":[694,542],"class_list":["post-57614","resource","type-resource","status-publish","hentry","resource-topic-cement-plants","resource-topic-pollution-industrial","resource-topic-rights-of-nature","resource-type-cases","resource-category-legal","region-pakistan","region-south-asia"],"blocksy_meta":[],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/elaw.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/resource\/57614","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/elaw.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/resource"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/elaw.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/resource"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/elaw.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/18"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/elaw.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=57614"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/elaw.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=57614"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"resource-topic","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/elaw.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/resource-topic?post=57614"},{"taxonomy":"resource-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/elaw.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/resource-type?post=57614"},{"taxonomy":"resource-category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/elaw.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/resource-category?post=57614"},{"taxonomy":"content-for-websites","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/elaw.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/content-for-websites?post=57614"},{"taxonomy":"region","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/elaw.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/region?post=57614"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}