This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
In the 2018 case, the plaintiffs were found not to have standing because their interest in not suffering damage from climate change was not considered an individual interest to be protected (see Japanese Courts Admit the Operation of New Coal-Fired Power Plants in Kobe for more discussion). Kobe Steel Ltd.,
The Supreme Court of Japan may soon weigh in on a growing field of climate litigation in Japan against coal-fired power plants. On May 6, 2022, the Citizens’ Committee on the Kobe Coal-Fired Power Plant filed an appeal to Japan’s Supreme Court in Citizens’ Committee on the Kobe Coal-Fired Power Plant v. Civillaw cases.
Violating obligations under the Treaty can result in victims claiming remedies before national courts, including the right to ecological restoration and environmental remediation. Thereby, actions against corporate entities for climate-related human rights harms can be brought before the courts.
From the Italian Recovery and Resilience Plan to the guidelines of the Italian Ministry of Justice, the urgency of a reform to strengthen out-of-court dispute resolution procedures clearly emerges. In this article, the author argues that these court orders are against the above-mentioned Legislative Decree.
Criminologically speaking, how does a schism exist between his 2024 supporters who believe in Trump’s persecution by the state and those who oppose the habitually corrupt former president’s third run for POTUS as Trump continues to provoke violence in violation of court orders not to?
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 99,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content