Soil Protection Law in Ireland

2006 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 213-226
Author(s):  
Owen McIntyre

AbstractIn the absence of Community rules relating to soil contamination and protection, the Irish authorities have neglected to legislate for this issue. While a few common law tortious grounds of action and certain statutory regimes may be applicable to particular cases of soil contamination, their application is arbitrary and piecemeal, depending, for example, on the type of operation originally causing the contamination, on the extent of understanding of the problem at that time, on the nature of its related adverse effects, or on plans for the future use or development of the contaminated site. One particular lacuna in the coverage of the relevant Irish law relates to the problem of historical soil contamination, for which the Irish authorities have felt unable to legislate on account of a constitutional prohibition on retrospective liability. This paper seeks to set out the possible application of existing Irish rules to the problem of historical soil contamination and to highlight the shortcomings inherent therein. It also outlines the non-legislative solutions employed by Irish lawyers in the face of such legal uncertainty. It then goes on to examine the likely impacts of recent key developments, including the 2004 decision of the European Court of Justice in the Van de Walle case and the entry into force of the 2004 Environmental Liability Directive.

2004 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 1-34
Author(s):  
Anthony Arnull

The purpose of this article is to consider the effect of the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe on the European Court of Justice (ECJ). At the time of writing, the future of the draft Constitution is somewhat uncertain. Having been finalised by the Convention on the Future of Europe in the summer of 2003 and submitted to the then President of the European Council, it formed the basis for discussion at an intergovernmental conference (IGC) which opened in October 2003. Hopes that the text might be finalised by the end of the year were dashed when a meeting of the IGC in Brussels in December 2003 ended prematurely amid disagreement over the weighting of votes in the Council. However, it seems likely that a treaty equipping the European Union with a Constitution based on the Convention’s draft will in due course be adopted and that the provisions of the draft dealing with the ECJ will not be changed significantly. Even if either assumption proves misplaced, those provisions will remain of interest as reflecting one view of the position the ECJ might occupy in a constitutional order of the Union.


2004 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 1-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony Arnull

The purpose of this article is to consider the effect of the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe on the European Court of Justice (ECJ). At the time of writing, the future of the draft Constitution is somewhat uncertain. Having been finalised by the Convention on the Future of Europe in the summer of 2003 and submitted to the then President of the European Council, it formed the basis for discussion at an intergovernmental conference (IGC) which opened in October 2003. Hopes that the text might be finalised by the end of the year were dashed when a meeting of the IGC in Brussels in December 2003 ended prematurely amid disagreement over the weighting of votes in the Council. However, it seems likely that a treaty equipping the European Union with a Constitution based on the Convention’s draft will in due course be adopted and that the provisions of the draft dealing with the ECJ will not be changed significantly. Even if either assumption proves misplaced, those provisions will remain of interest as reflecting one view of the position the ECJ might occupy in a constitutional order of the Union.


2007 ◽  
Vol 66 (2) ◽  
pp. 288-301
Author(s):  
C.J.S. Knight

An important current issue in the conflict of laws is how to deal with the decision of the European Court of Justice in Owusu v. Jackson. It has left numerous unanswered questions on the scope of the Brussels I Regulation and the future is deeply uncertain. Much could be written on whether Owusu is correct, and even more on where one should progress from the current position. But the concern of the present article is more limited: how does the decision in Owusu interact with the previous decision of the European Court of Justice in Turner v. Grovit? Before addressing that question, however, it is necessary to introduce both decisions, and, in particular, the different views of where the future after Owusu may lie.


2001 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 219-231 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eugene Regan

The Member States of the European Union have diverse legal traditions explained in part by the dichotomy of common law and civil law systems. Yet notwithstanding this diversity all Member States have adjusted to the new legal order created by the European Community in accepting the primacy of EC law and the legal principles establishing by the European Court of Justice. This paper examines briefly the Irish experience in making that adjustment.


2018 ◽  
Vol 58 (3) ◽  
pp. 194-198
Author(s):  
Alec Samuels

The brief history of causation in medicine and science. The law. Setting the scene. Negligence but no causation. Duty to warn. Prognosis. Loss of opportunity. Consecutive negligence. Indivisible injury. Unknown culprits. Obstetrics. The European Court of Justice. The future.


2013 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 113-139 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vestert Borger

On 27 November 2012, the European Court of Justice (“the Court”) rendered its judgment in thePringlecase. Sitting as a plenum, which is extremely rare, the Court did what had been expected. Just as theBundesverfassungsgericht(German Federal Constitutional Court orBVerfG) had done two months earlier, it gave the go-ahead for the euro area's permanent emergency instrument, the European Stability Mechanism (“ESM”). With this decision, the possibility of granting assistance to financially distressed euro area Member States has now been secured for the future.


eLife ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-Denis Faure ◽  
Johnathan A Napier

On 5 June this year the first field trial of a CRISPR-Cas-9 gene-edited crop began at Rothamsted Research in the UK, having been approved by the UK Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs. However, in late July 2018, after the trial had started, the European Court of Justice ruled that techniques such as gene editing fall within the European Union’s 2001 GMO directive, meaning that our gene-edited Camelina plants should be considered as genetically modified (GM). Here we describe our experience of running this trial and the legal transformation of our plants. We also consider the future of European plant research using gene-editing techniques, which now fall under the burden of GM regulation, and how this will likely impede translation of publicly funded basic research.


2004 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
John Wilkinson ◽  
Frederick J Dorey

Pending the coming into force in November 2005 of the changes to the regulatory data protection regime under European Medicines Legislation to be effected under the 'Future Medicines Legislation', the European Court of Justice (ECJ) continues to deal with cases referred to it concerning the existing law of regulatory data protection. Thus it gave Judgment on 29th April, 2004, in The Queen (on the application of Novartis Pharmaceuticals UK Ltd) v The Licensing Authority established under the Medicines Act 1968 (acting by the Medicines Control Agency), and the Advocate General gave his Opinion on 8th July, 2004, in Approved Prescription Services v The Licensing Authority (acting by the Medicines Control Agency).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document