Possibilities for Locus Standi and Non-Contractual Damages for Private Parties under the European Emissions Trading Scheme

2010 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 473-478
Author(s):  
Josephine van Zeben

Case T-16/04, Arcelor SA v. European Parliament and Council of the European Union nyr1.The applicant has failed to demonstrate that, in adopting the contested Directive, the Community legislature acted unlawfully or committed a sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law designed to confer rights on the applicant.2.Consequently, the application for damages must be rejected without there being any need to rule on the other conditions giving rise to non-contractual liability on the part of the Community or on the plea of inadmissibility raised raised by the Council in relation to certain annexes to the reply. (official headnotes)

2008 ◽  
Vol 26 (5) ◽  
pp. 938-953 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Toke

The appropriateness and importance of market-based environmental governance systems vary according to different cases. Although so-called ‘market trading’ regimes can be useful in some circumstances, a false belief in the inevitability of their cost-effectiveness compared with so-called ‘command and control’ systems has allowed policy distortions to occur. So-called ‘command and control’ policies are being underemphasised, despite the fact that they may achieve reductions in carbon emissions that are cheaper than those likely to be achieved through emissions (or ‘certificate’) trading regimes. I address theoretical arguments which I then place in context with analysis of some features of the British Renewables Obligation and the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document