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 Japan, climate litigation ( / Kiko soshou ) has been used to challenge the legality of the construction and operation of the coal-fired power plants and promote coal phase-out. This blog post provides an overview of those cases and the broader landscape of climate litigation in Japan. Sendai Power Station ). 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. Through May 2022, all existing climate litigation cases in Japan concern the construction or operation of coal-fired power plants and refer to citizens’ attempts to stop the use of coal. Civillaw cases.
Litigation against major corporate greenhouse gas (GHG) emitters has proven extremely tough. A civillaw breakthrough came in 2021, with the ruling of a Dutch court against Shell. In Smith v Fonterra , decided by New Zealand’s Supreme Court this week, we have perhaps the biggest common law breakthrough.
Ecological restoration and environmental remediation are some responses to climate change, and thereby this Treaty is likely to impact future climate litigation. This is likely to impact the success rate of litigation claims, since the clearer an obligation is in its scope and nature, the more likely it is that non-compliance is sanctioned.
On March 9, 2023, the Japanese Supreme Court refused to hear the first climate change litigation brought before it without specifying substantive reasons. Background information about the general climate context and litigation in Japan is available in a previous blog post. Citizens’ Committee on the Kobe Coal-Fired Power Plant v.
Under the Civil Procedure Law of China (CPL), the general rule of territorial jurisdiction is that a civil action shall be brought in the People’s Court of the place in which the defendant is domiciled subject to various exceptions grouped together under the title of “special jurisdictions”. [9]
The jurisdiction and applicable law in the specific case of Bonga spill litigation have been closely followed inter alia by Geert van Calster here. Noteworthy is the detail in which the UK Supreme Court discusses the authorities on the tort of nuisance under the heading ‘4.
The monograph predominantly examines 19 Indonesian court decisions on choice of law in international commercial contracts during the period, 2000-2020. Finally, this second chapter discusses the limits on choice of law, such as public policy and mandatory rules.
In particular, it examines the recognition of ancillary judgments in divorce cases, concluding that they fall under article 118 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The decision is the first to recognize a corporate duty to mitigate climate change under tortlaw.
12] Before and after the application, the defendant Sharp had brought tort claims arising from SEP (standard essential patent) licensing against OPPO by commencing several parallel proceedings before German courts, a Japanese court and a Taiwanese court. [13] 14] The breach of the ruling would entail a fine of RMB 1 million per day. [15]
It was clearly pronounced that “there appears to be no restriction on third parties (non-lawyers) funding the litigation and getting repaid after the outcome of the litigation” [18]. This was further supported when the Criminal Law Act, of 1967 did away with these crimes and torts of “maintenance” and “champerty”.
From the publisher’ site : About Climate Change Litigation. This book investigates and discusses the respective issues arising in the current discourse on climate protection from different legal perspectives (including international law, European law and national public and civillaw). Table Of Contents.
Paragraph 1 of Article 276 lists six jurisdiction grounds, including the place of contract formation, place of contract performance, place of the subject matter, place of distrainable property, place of tort, and place of representative offices. npc/c2/c30834/202112/t20211227_315637.html> html> accessed 13 October 2024. [2]
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