Views
Nothing Found
Sorry, no posts matched your criteria
News
Transboundary Environmental Pollution in PIL from a Comparative Perspective
Guillaume Laganière has published his doctoral thesis (McGill University, May 2020) “Liability for transboundary pollution in private international law: a duty to ensure prompt and adequate compensation” online here. Because of the author’s comparative approach to the topic, the work is not only interesting to Canadian readers. The abstract reads as follows:
Our legal response to transboundary pollution depends not only on the adoption of preventive measures and regulatory oversight but also on the existence of civil liability mechanisms. Victims fundamentally seek to hold polluters liable for breaching their duties or deviating from basic standards of diligence, to obtain redress for the damage that ensued and to prevent it from continuing. The process becomes difficult, however, when pollution crosses borders and several domestic regimes are involved. This is where private international law comes into play.
This thesis investigates the regulatory function of private international law with respect to transboundary pollution. It uses the International Law Commission’s Principles on the Allocation of Loss in the Case of Transboundary Harm as a benchmark and assesses Canadian private international law accordingly. It suggests that states have a duty to ensure the availability of prompt and adequate compensation for all victims of transboundary pollution (local or foreign). States must implement domestic measures to facilitate claims against transboundary polluters. This includes equal access to justice and equal remedies for all victims. Private international law plays a crucial role in this context: courts must have jurisdiction to hear cross-border claims and apply a law that is favourable to compensation under choice of law rules.
This thesis builds from international environmental law to identify preferable rules of jurisdiction and choice of law for transboundary pollution in the Canadian context. It also addresses the enforcement of foreign judgments against local polluters. The conclusions of this thesis have implications for all cross-border environmental litigation, including climate change litigation against greenhouse gas emitters currently unfolding in domestic courts around the world.
Universal Civil Jurisdiction – Which Way Forward?
Serena Forlati and Pietro Franzina edited a book on the Universal Civil Jurisdiction, which was published by Brill a couple of days ago. The book features contributions prepared by colleagues from four different European countries and eight universities.
The contributions included are the following:
- ‘The Case of Naït-Liman before the European Court of Human Rights – A Forum Non Conveniens for Asserting the Right of Access to a Court in Relation to Civil Claims for Torture Committed Abroad?’ (Andrea Saccucci, University of Campania);
- ‘The Role of the European Court of Human Rights in the Development of Rules on Universal Civil Jurisdiction – Naït-Liman v Switzerland in the Transition between the Chamber and the Grand Chamber’ (Serena Forlati, University of Ferrara);
- ‘The Interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights – Lessons from the Naït-Liman Case’ (Malgosia Fitzmaurice, Queen Mary University);
- ‘Public International Law Constraints on the Exercise of Adjudicatory Jurisdiction in Civil Matters’ (Lucas Roorda and Cedric Ryngaert, University of Utrecht);
- ‘Universal Civil Jurisdiction and Reparation for International Crimes’ (Beatrice I. Bonafè, University of Rome La Sapienza);
- ‘Limitations to the Exercise of Civil Jurisdiction in Areas Other Than Reparation for International Crimes’ (Fabrizio Marongiu Buonaiuti, University of Macerata);
- ‘Residual Jurisdiction under the Brussels I bis Regulation – An Unexpected Avenue to Address Extraterritorial Corporate Human Rights Violations (Mariangela La Manna, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Milan);
- ‘The Law Applicable to the Civil Consequences of Human Rights Violations Committed Abroad’ (Patrick Kinsch, University of Luxembourg);
- ‘The Changing Face of Adjudicatory Jurisdiction’ (Pietro Franzina, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Milan).
More info available here.
EUFams II Online Final Conference, Friday 30 October 2020, 9.30 – 13.00 h
EUFams II is a study funded by the European Commission with the objective of assessing the functioning and the effectiveness of European family and succession law. The project is coordinated by the Institute for Comparative Law, Conflict of Laws and International Business Law at Heidelberg University (Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Thomas Pfeiffer). Project partners are the Universities of Lund, Milan, Osijek, Valencia and Verona as well as the MPI Luxembourg.
The project will come to a close with an Online Final Conference on Friday, 30 October from 9.30 until 13.00 h. The conference is open to the general public and can be accessed without pre-registration and free of charge. It will cover a wide range of topics in the field of European family and succession law presented by speakers from across Europe.
A detailed program and the access link can be found in the conference leaflet.
More information on EUFams II and its research outputs can be found on the project website and in previous posts on conflictoflaws.net here and here.
This project was funded by the European Union’s Justice Programme (2014-2020). The content of this study represents the views of the authors only and is their sole responsibility. The European Commission does not accept any responsibility for use that may be made of the information it contains.