Multiple International Courts and the ‘Fragmentation’ of International Environmental Law

2006 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 227-271 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tim Stephens
Author(s):  
Klein Natalie

This chapter examines how international environmental law (IEL) disputes are resolved before international courts and tribunals, addressing when parties will decide to litigate an IEL dispute as opposed to utilizing another form of dispute settlement. Assuming there is reason to pursue adjudication or arbitration, it looks at questions of jurisdiction. The chapter also considers preliminary matters that emerge in these cases, notably questions of standing and whether provisional measures are needed and may be secured before an international court or tribunal. It then turns to substantive matters, but only in the context of presentation of the case in terms of evidence and use of experts. Finally, the chapter assesses the available reparations in the resolution of IEL disputes before international courts and tribunals. Ultimately, considerable progress may be noted in respect of the use of international courts and tribunals for IEL disputes, but it is prudent to observe that in this area of international law, preventing the emergence of IEL disputes is ultimately more important than ex post facto responses to environmental damage.


2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 102
Author(s):  
Sayyed Ghasem Zamani ◽  
Mohammadreza Alipour

The enhancement of environmental awareness in both domestic and international level has been accompanied by the growing number of internal authorities and international bodies within which environmentally related disputes can be addressed. Over the years, environmental issues have been discussed by different international judicial courts and arbitration tribunals. Their contribution to enhance the legitimacy of international concerns to the protection of environment is a significant one. They have acted to clarify the international environmental rules within the international legal order and have augmented the ability of domestic legal systems to deal with associated problems more effectively. The international judicial bodies as well as arbitration tribunals have been faced with a rather vague set of rules and principles that made it an enormous task to apply the law to the particular facts of a case in question. Issues relating to the existence, contents and meaning of the certain related concepts took considerable spaces in the contributions of international courts and tribunals in<em> </em>the course of developing international environmental law, particularly the concepts of environmental damage and the liable party to make reparation.<em> </em>International judicial bodies mostly relied on procedural obligations of states and arbitration tribunals on damage itself and the necessity to compensate them. While the damage is mostly confined to significant damage of value-use aspects of the environment, and liable party is focused on the damage causing activities of the operator, the reparation modes are unsteady between only financial compensation and, if possible,<em> </em>near to<em> </em>restitution.


2016 ◽  
Vol 18 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 248-277
Author(s):  
Zena Hadjiargyrou

The article addresses the unfolding of the concept of intergenerational equity, which aims to ensure the conservation of planetary resources amongst generations within the realm of the law of trusts. The article explicates the concept’s ambiguities through confronting its conflicting understandings in academia whilst elucidating how it operates and expresses itself in legal documents, constitutions and national and international courts. An afterthought follows which envisages intergenerational equity as a multifarious utopia, which is to be addressed uniformly for its potential attainment.


2019 ◽  
Vol 88 (4) ◽  
pp. 489-524 ◽  
Author(s):  
Justine Bendel

This article examines the ways in which international courts and tribunals should utilise their powers to prescribe provisional measures in the context of environmental disputes. The article makes the case that the system of dispute resolution has the capacity to adapt to the specific needs of environmental disputes. By analysing the key features of provisional measures and extracting new judicial trends, new light is shed on two core issues: first, this article develops a theoretical framework within which provisional measures should be understood in order to achieve their aim. Second, it shows how a certain level of judicial creativity in the design of provisional measures can have implications on whether such measures can be enforced through innovative cooperation with other institutional bodies. As a result, this article argues that provisional measures can fill the gap of enforcement in international environmental law and become a pivotal instrument in environmental protection.


Author(s):  
Pierre-Marie Dupuy ◽  
Jorge E. Viñuales

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document