Date: 20 April 2018
Date: 8 January 2018
Date: 20 December 2017
Date: 27 June 2017
Date: 27 June 2017
As to the other side of the coin, the rupture will also possibly affect, somehow, environmental law and policy in the EU. In the rich encounter of various conceptual approaches, the UK has indeed brought a wave of challenging new ideas, in the ‘big bowl’ in which EU law is being processed. And this not least because the UK is a country abiding by a strong common law tradition.
The two first contributions of this issue, one on the ‘UK Environmental Law Post Brexit’ and the other on ‘The Implications of Brexit for Future EU Environmental Law and Policy’, are the written tracks of presentations that were given by Prof. Veerle Heyvaert (LSE, London) and Céline Charveriat (IEEP, Brussels), on 11 May 2017 in Brussels, at the occasion of a new elni forum. That forum on Brexit and Environmental Law took place at the Université Saint-Louis Bruxelles, at the joint invitation of CEDRE and ELNI, under the chair of Prof. Delphine Misonne and Prof. Gerhard Roller.
In their contribution on UK Environmental Law Post Brexit, Veerle Heyvaert and Aleksandra Cavoski go beyond assumptions and investigate what a gradual repatriation of EU law might mean, for specific areas (climate, ETS, biodiversity, air and water), for public authorities but also for civil society – where will be the guarantees civil society shall still need in order to challenge domestic policies? The authors also envisage how cooperation between the UK and the EU could actually proceed in the future, on environmental law issues. Because there is actually no escape, or rather “an inescapable physical reality”: environmental problems will continue to require concerted action.
In their paper on ‘The Implications of Brexit for Future EU Environmental Law and Policy’, Céline Charveriat and Andrew Farmer present their thoughts on the possible consequences of Brexit for EU environmental policy in a, by necessity, quite speculative context. But they actually demonstrate that the first effects of Brexit on EU policy are already at work. There is a “general atmosphere of environmental policy making”, that should not be underestimated. The context might further lead to a ‘distraction’ from important issues and even impede crucial discussions, such as on the possible renewed interest in an EU carbon tax.
Thomas Ormond in his programmatically entitled article ‘The EU as guarantor of environmental protection in Germany’ adds another perspective as to how the EU shapes Member State environmental law and policy, highlighting inter alia “innovation from Brussels” such as EIA, access to environmental information and climate protection, as well as the systematic and risk-based approach as hallmark of EU legislation.
Next, Ludwig Krämer comments on ECJ C-442/14 and C-673/13P (see already the case report in elni Review 2016/2) which concern the diverging interests of disclosing environmental information on the one hand, and protecting confidential business information on the other – two judgments which according to Krämer are likely to have a far-reaching influence on the disclosure of product information.
Finally, Fatima Arib in ‘Promoting the Green Economy in Morocco’ analyses the main contextual features, including socio-economic, environmental as well as regulatory aspects and identifies progress made by Morocco and the challenges lying ahead.
We hope you enjoy reading.
Date: 4 April 2017
Date: 17 January 2017
Date: 15 December 2016
Date: 6 September 2016
Date: 28 June 2016
Date: 28 June 2016
Date: 2 June 2016
Date: 3 March 2016
Date: 12 January 2016
Date: 20 November 2015
Date: 3 November 2015 UPDATE
Date: 2 November 2015
Date: 25 June 2015
Date: 24 March 2015
3. According to certain WFD’s objectives, European waters have to achieve ‘good ecological and chemical status’ by 2015
o Review and needs for action
o situation in different MS
Submission deadline for contributions will be 30 June.
Submissions or submission proposals can be sent via e-mail.
Please feel also free to share this call with your networks.
Date: 17 December 2014
The negotations of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) began in 2013 and have been the source of heated debate since then. In addition to various concerns regarding a feared reduction of statutory health and environmental standards, the main discussion has centered around the introduction of the so-called Investor-to-State Dispute Settlements (ISDS). Against this background the current elni issue focuses on issues relevant to TTIP with the following contributions.
Andrea Carta addresses the question of whether the Investor-to-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) fits in the EU legal system. His article describes the framework underlying the inclusion of ISDS in EU international investment agreements (IIAs) and discusses the concerns raised, particularly by NGOs, regarding the potential impact of ISDS on EU and Member States’ regulatory powers.
The regulatory coherence in the TTIP Agreement in the context of chemicals is discussed by Vito Buonsante. He outlines the conflict between seeking regulatory coherence and at the same time maintaining the right to choose different levels of protection in regard to health, safety, consumer, labour and the environment.
In the recent developments section Julian Schenten reports on activities to strengthen REACH provisions concerning (imported) articles which also touch a sensitive point in the relationship between the EU und the USA.
A second series of contributions to this issue of the elni Review covers a variety of other topical legal issues.
In an article by Viktoria Raczyńska the main provisions of Ukrainian legislation regulating hazardous waste management are analysed in terms of its compliance with the Basel Convention and the Directive 2008/98/EC.
Furthermore, the contribution of Gerhard Roller deals with the ambiguous relationship between speed and quality in decision-making in Germany by analyzing the measures taken to expedite procedures.Finally, the issue concludes with recent developments – described by Nicola Below -with regard to participatory rights in the environmental decision-making process and the implementation of the Aarhus Convention.
Call for contributions for the elni Review issue 1/2015: Contributions for the next issue of the elni Review are very welcome and may be sent to the editors by mid-March 2015.
Date: 13th October 2014
Date: 15th July 2014
Date: 13th January 2014
Date: 6th January 2014
Date: 5th December 2013
Finally, Peter Kremer examines whether mercury depositions which are emitted by Coal-Fired Power Stations are in line with the Industry Emission Directive and the Water Framework directive. Furthermore, he analyses what instruments are available under prevailing law to prohibit the construction of new coal-fired power stations and to make their approval subject to judicial review.
Date: 14th October 2013
Date: 14th February 2013
Date: 8th November 2012
Date: 7th November 2012
Date: 30th May 2012
Date: 18th November 2011
First of all, Christoph Then and Ruth Tippe examine the impact of biopatents on animal and plant breeding in their article “Patents on melon, broccoli and ham?”. After shedding light on current German and European patent legislation they discuss the consequences of patents on conventional breeding regarding genetic resources and food production.
The second article “Biopatents in Brazil” by Edson Paula de Souza provides insights into current legislation on biotechnological inventions in Brazil. He explores the impact of limitation on patent protection for R&D.
Susette Biber-Klemm and Michelangelo Temmerman then provide us with an overview of Rights to Animal Genetic Resources by comparing the different legal frameworks for plant and animal breeding/genetic resources on national and international levels.
The two subsequent articles address different aspects of the Aarhus Convention:
Sandra Aline Nascimento da Nóbrega gives an overview of access to environmental information in Brazil (access to environmental information is one of the three pillars of the Aarhus Convention). She compares the Aarhus Convention with Brazilian legislation and discusses which regulations have been implemented in Brazilian law.
In her contribution Eva Julia Lohse asks whether there is unrestricted access to justice for environmental NGOs. She examines the judgement of the European Court of Justice (Case C-115/09) on the nonconformity of the German Environment Appeals Act with Directive 2003/35 and the Aarhus Convention.
Ralf Lottes’s article analyses what civil society can expect from the Commission’s proposal for a legislative review of the European standardisation policy. He concentrates on the standardisation of NGOs through the review of the EU framework for standardisation regarding environmental NGO participation on a national level.
Hendrik Schoukens’ contribution on temporary nature and conservation law examines the adaptability of European nature conservation law for temporary nature, focusing on the situation in Belgium.
Finally, we cover recent developments in environmental law with three different contributions concentrating on intellectual property rights in terms of genetic resources.
The article by Lisa Minkmar provides insights from a biopatent case: the “Teff-Patent” (EP 1646287).
Subsequently, Claudia Fricke reviews the current debate on the revision of Directive 98/44/EC on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions.
Lastly, Graham Dutfield comments on the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food and the interplay between traditional knowledge, intellectual property rights and the right to food.
Date: 11th of October 2011
Date: 13th of July 2011
Date: 21st of June 2011
Date: 1st of June 2011
Date: 25th of March 2011
Date: 8th of November 2010
Date: 27th of August 2010
Date: 7th of May 2010
Date: 5th of November 2009
Date: 4th of November 2009
Date: 21th of October 2
Date: 17th of September 2009
Date: 16th of June 2009
Date 29th of May 2009
Date 26th of May 2009
Date 22th of May 2009
Date: 6th of May 2009
Date: 28th of April 2009
Date: 31th of March 2009
Date: 4th of December 2008
Date: 13th of November 2008