National affairs: International environmental law in German courts

Environmental Policy and Law

Volumn 27, Issue 5, 1997, Pages 409-422

  Rest, Alfred ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COLOGNE   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION; INTERNATIONAL LAW;

GERMANY;

EID: 0031428554     PISSN: 0378777X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3233/EPL-1997-27504     Document Type: Article

References (115)

1. A. Rest, Tschernobyl und die Internationale Haftung, in: Versicherungsrecht 1986, pp. 609; pp.833
2. A. Rest, Internationaler Umweltschutz vor Verwaltungs-, Zivil- und Strafgerichten. Der niederländisch-französische Rheinverschmutzungsprozeß, in: (35) Österreichische Zeitschrift für öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht 1985, pp.225
3. Cf.for the details A. Rest, New Legal Instruments for Environmental Prevention, Control and Restoration in Public International Law, (23) Environmental Policy and Law (EPL) 1993, pp.260, p.266.
4. Regulation of 1 February 1993, in: EC OJ. 1993, No.L 30
5. Cf §§ 4 and 11 of the Act of 30. Sept. 1994, in: BGBl. 1994, 1, pp. 277
6. For an overwiew after the Rio-Declaration see A. Rest, Implementation of the Rio Targets. Preliminary Efforts in State Practice, (25) EPL 1995, pp. 312; p.313
7. In the version of 19 July 1995, in: BGBl. 1995, 1, pp.930
8. Act of 10 Dec. 1990, in: BGBl. 1990, 1, pp. 2634
9. Act of 8 July 1994, in: BGBl. 1994, 1, pp. 1490
10. Law of 12 February 1990, in: BGBl. 1990, 1, pp.205
11. For a historical survey see M. Kloepfer, Umweltschutz als Verfassungsrecht: Zum neuen Art. 20 a GG, in: DVB1. 1996, pp.73
12. BGB1. 1994 I, p.3146
13. Cf. the constitutions of Baden-Württemberg (Art.86), Bavaria (Art. 141), Berlin (Art.21 a), Brandenburg (Art.39,40), Bremen (Art.l 1 a), Hamburg (Preamble), Hessen (Art. 26 a), Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania (Art. 12), Lower Saxony (Art. 1, para.2), North-Rhine/Westphalia (Art.29 a), Rhineland-Palatinate (Art. 69), Saarland (Art.59 a), Saxony (Art. 10), Saxony-Anhalt (Art. 35), Schleswig-Holstein (Art.7) and Thuringia (Art.31)
14. M. Kloepfer, Umweltschutz als Verfassungsrecht: Zum neuen Art. 20 a GG, in: DVB1. 1969, p. 74
15. D. Murswieck, Staatsziel Umweltschutz (Art. 20 a GG). Bedeutung für Rechtsetzung und Rechtsanwendung, in: NVwZ 1996, pp.222, p.230
16. M. Kloepfer, Umweltschutz und Verfassungsrecht, in: DVB1. 1988, pp. 305, p. 307
17. D. Murswieck, NVwZ 1996, p. 223
18. D. Murswieck, NVwZ 1996, p. 224
19. M. Kloepfer, DVB1. 1996, p.77
20. Cf. decision of 13 April 1995, published in: NJW 1995, pp.2648; for a commentary on the decision see A. Uhle, Das Staatsziel "Umweltschutz" und das Bundesverwaltungsgericht, in: UPR 1996, pp.55
21. For the effective protection of future generations by judiciary cf. A. Rest, The Oposa Decision: Implementing the Principles of Intergenerational Equity and Responsibility, in: (24) EPL 1995, pp.314
22. M. Kloepfer, DVB1. 1996, p.78
23. As to the very complex details see D. Murswieck, NVwZ 1996, p.226
24. BVerfGE 31, pp.58; pp.75
25. Cf. I. Von Münchl Ph. Kunig (eds.), Grundgesetz-Kommentar, 1995, to Art.25, Nos. 16-23, with numerous references
26. M. Schweitzer, Staatsrecht III, 5 th ed., 1995, pp. 131
27. BVerfGE 15, pp.25, [32,34]; vol.16, pp.27, [33]; vol.23, pp. 208, [317]; vol.66, pp.39, [64]
28. Th. Maunzlg. Dürig, Grundgesetz, Kommentar, vol.II, 1994, to Art.25, No. 23 and seq.
29. Cf. the numerous examples given by M. Schweitzer, Staatsrecht III, 1995, pp. 131; I.
30. BVerfGE 15, pp. 25, [33]; BVerwGE 37, pp. 116, [126]
31. A. Rest, The More Favourable Law Principle in Transfrontier Environmental Law. A Means of strenghtening the Protection of the Individual?, in: A 68 Beiträge zur Umweltgestaltung, 1980
32. The judgement is published in: Justizblatt des Saarlandes 1958, pp.60; NJW 1958, pp.752 with annotation of K. Boisseree in: NJW 1958, pp.1239
33. see also S. McCaffrey, Private remedies for transfrontier environmental disturbances, 1975, pp.40
34. Cf. NJW 1958, p.753
35. See annotation of A. Weber to the judgement of the German Federal Administrative Court concerning the nuclear power installation at Lingen, in: DVB1. 1987, pp.377
36. Published in: Rechtsprechung zum Internationalen Privatrecht 1956/1957, No.38, pp.125
37. The defendants’ appeal was dismissed by the OLG Saarbrücken in its judgement of 5 March 1963. Cf Doc. 2 U 191/61
38. Cf. Art.8 of Annex 8 of the Vertrag zur Regelung der Saarfrage of 27 Oct. 1956, published in: BGBl. 1956 II, pp. 1587
39. For the details see A. Rest, The More Favourable Law Principle in Transfrontier Environmental Law, pp. 70
40. The judgement is reproduced in: RIW/AWD 1977, pp. 718
41. Cf judgement of the LG Freiburg of 5 August 1975, Ref. No. 2076/74
42. For the details see A. Rest, Plaintiff can choose his court, in: (3) EPL 1977, pp.41 with further references
43. As to the details of the lawsuit cf A. Rest, Decision against France? The Rhine Pollution, in: (5) EPL 1979, pp.85
44. For a survey of the 14 years lasting litigation before the various courts see A. Rest, Internationaler Umweltschutz vor Verwaltungs-, Zivil- und Strafgerichten. Der niederländisch-französische Rheinverschmutzungsprozeß, in: (35) Österreichische Zeitschrift für Öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht 1985, pp.225
45. K. Siehr, Grenzüberschreitender Umweltschutz. Europäische Erfahrungen mit einem weltweiten Problem, in: (45) RabelsZ 1981, pp.377; p.379
46. Cf. B. Bender, Zur staatshaftungsrechtlichen Problematik der Waldschäden, in: (77) Verwaltungs-Archiv 1986, pp.335; p.363
47. See decisions of LG Bonn of 27 June 1984 in: NJW 1985, pp.71; of OLG Köln of 16 Sept. 1985, in: NJW 1986, pp. 589; of LG Stuttgart of 29 January 1986, in: VersR 1986, pp.249
48. Cf. judgements of LG Augsburg of 22 Nov. 1985, No. 2 0 1069/85 with commentary of H.P. Sander in: MDR 1986, p.14; of OLG München of 5 June 1986, in: NVwZ 1986, pp.611
49. Published in: DVB1. 1988, pp.232
50. For the details see H. Engelhardt, Wald-Immissionen-Eigentum. Nach-gedanken zu den Waldschädenurteilen des Bundesgerichtshofes, in: NuR 1989, pp. 77
51. Reproduced in: NJW 1983, pp. 2931
52. Umweltgutachten of 19 Sept. 1978 in: BT-Drs. 8/1938, pp.130
53. Erster Immissionsschutzbericht der Bundesregierung of 24 July 1978, in: BT-Drs. 8/2006, pp. 7, 18, 29
54. Umweltprogramm der Bundesregierung of 14 Oct. 1981, in: BT-Drs. VI/ 2710, pp.41
55. Sondergutachten "Waldschäden und Luftverunreinigungen" of March 1983, in: BT-Drs.9/2347, pp.2
56. Große Anfrage zur Umweltpolitik of 27 February 1980, in: BT-Drs. 8/3713, pp.14
57. Kleine Anfrage zur Verbesserung der Luftreinhaltung of 15 Dec. 1982, in: BT-Drs.9/2347, pp.2
58. BT-Drs. 8/3712, p. 42
59. BT-Drs. 10/113, p. 143
60. E. Von Hippel, Staatshaftung für Waldsterben?, in: NJW 1985, pp.30.
61. D. Murswiek, Entschädigung für immissionsbedingte Waldschäden, in: NVwZ 1986, pp.611
62. For a commentary to the case and numerous references in legal literature see: A. Weitbrecht, Der Salzburger Flughafenfall, in: NVwZ 1986, pp.897.
63. I. Seidl-Hohenveldern, A propos des nuisances dues aux aéroports limitrophes: le cas de Salzbourg et le traité Austro-Allemand du 19 Décembre 1967, in: (19) AFDI 1973, pp.890
64. The judgement of the LG Traunstein of 16 April 1975 is partially published in: Rechtsprechung zum Internationalen Privatrecht, 1976, No. 29 a, pp. 92
65. Cf. decision of 30 May 1969, in: Erkenntnisse und Beschlüsse des Verwaltungsgerichtshofs, administrativrechtlicher Teil, 1969, p.264, No. 7, 591 [A]
66. The English translation of the Agreement of 19 Dec. 1967 which entered into force in 1974 (BGB1.1974 II, pp.15) is published in: UNTS vol. 945, 1974, pp.93
67. See Article 4 which reads: "(1) Where measures taken by German authorities in connexion with construction and operation of the Salzburg airport give rise under German law to liability for compensation on the part of the airport operator, such liability shall be assumed by the Federal Republic of Germany. (2) The Republic of Austria shall reimburse the Federal Republic of Germany, the state of Bavaria and its municipal corporations for all necessary costs and all damage incurred in connexion with construction and operation of the airport, especially costs arising under paragraph (1) or other costs incurred in meeting third-party claims. (3) Claims arising from the effects of airport traffic or of operation of the airport on persons, property or interests in the territory of the Federal Republic of Germany may be based either on German law or Austrian law. If a claim is based on German law, section 11 of the German Air Transport Act, in conjunction with section 26 of the German Commercial Code shall apply mutatis mutandis, provided that the airport is being operated in accordance with the Austrian laws and regulations in force and within the framework of this Agreement. The ordinary courts of the Federal Republic of Germany shall have exclusive competence to adjudicate disputed claims".
68. The judgement of 29 January 1976 - No. 1 U 2968/75 - is unpublished
69. Decision of the BGH of 10 March 1978, in: DVB1. 1979, pp.226; to the details see comment of K. Küppers, in: DVB1.1979, pp.228
70. Decision of 12 March 1986, in: NJW 1986, pp.218877
71. See judgement of the BGH of 10 January 1977, in: NJW 1977, pp. 1920
72. Judgement of 11 February 1982, in: UPR 1983, pp.14
73. Treaty of 7 Dec. 1944, in: BGBl. 1956 II, pp.412
74. Agreement of 7 Dec. 1944, in: BGBl. 1956 II, pp. 442
75. As to the details and further references see A. Rest, Need for an International Court for the Environment? Underdeveloped Legal Protection for the Individual in Transnational Litigation, in: (24) EPL 1994, p. 174
76. The decision is published in: UPR 1988, pp. 79 and IPRax 1988, pp. 351
77. The cultivation was situated in Dörverden-Barme in the North of Germany and not in the Bonn region.
78. Published in: IPRax 1988, p. 354.
79. For a commentary of both decisions see: L Gündling, Rechtsschutz nach Tschernobyl, in: IPRax 19988, pp.338
80. For the details of the case and numerous references cf. A. Rest, in: (24) EPL 1994, pp.17
81. This sum has been paid by the Federal Administration Office (Bundesverwaltungsamt) until June 1987. See Documentation of the Bundesverwaltungsamt "Der Schadensausgleich nach dem Reaktorunfall in Tschernobyl", June 1987, Annex 7
82. For the various cases see: A. Rest, in: (24) EPL 1994, pp.176
83. Published in: DVB1. 1985, pp.802 with a consenting comment of M. Kilian at pp.804
84. See A. Weber, in: DVB1. 1987, pp.377 with numerous references
85. As to the protection by Human Rights see: A. Rest, Improved Environmental Protection through an expanded Concept of Human Rights in Europe, in: EPL 1997, pp. 213.
86. BVerwG E 75, pp.285; reproduced in: DVB1.1987, pp.375 with a commentary of A. Weber at pp.378
87. Cf. for example the lawsuits against the nuclear power plants of Cattenom (France) and Chooz (Belgium), C. Lepage-Jessua, Grenzüberschreitende Umweltbelastungen aus der Sicht der Praxis, in: M. Bothe/M. Prieur/G. Ress, (eds.), Rechtsfragen grenzüberschreitender Umweltbelastungen, 1984, pp.67
88. The judgement Doc. 3 OS VG A 20/87 Gö is unpublished.
89. The judgement of OVG Lüneburg, Doc. 7 L 121/90 is not published.
90. Cf Doc. 8 Q 4/93; concerning the procedural aspects the decision is published in: NVwZ 1995, pp.97
91. Cf. EC Doc. 85/337/EC; EC OJ 1985, No.L 175, pp.40
92. For the details and further references see A. Rest, Need for an International Court for the Environment?, in: (24) EPL 1994, pp.180
93. Judgement of the Bay VGH of 29 January 1988, in: UPR 1988, pp.316
94. By decision of 29 April 1987 the BayVerfGH decided on the claim of the municipality of Nürnberg which felt disturbed in its right to self-administration. According to the development plans Nürnberg should tolerate the transportation of nuclear wastes crossing its area. The decision is published in: UPR 1988, pp.306
95. Cf decision of 14 August 1987, in: UPR 1988, pp.307
96. Cf. B Moser, Die Wiederaufarbeitungsanlage in Wackersdorf - aus österreichischer rechtlicher Sicht, in: ÖJZ 1987, pp.97.
97. A. Rest, (24) EPL 1994, pp. 180
98. Cf. G. Mandl, Grenzüberschreitendes nukleares Risiko und völkerrechtlicher Schutzanspruch, 1992, p.14
99. Cf Judgement of 4 July 1980, in: DVB1. 1981, pp.269
100. The Law of 11 February 1977 is published in: BGBl. 1977, II, pp.165. Art.2 para.2 No. 2 rules that an authorization is mandatory for dumping activities, if these can lead to detrimental changes in the quality of sea water; could create hazards to human health; could harm living resources and marine life; and could harm forms of recreation or interfere with other legitimate uses of the sea.
101. Reproduced in: DVB1. 1983, pp.353
102. Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and other Matter of 29 Dec. 1972; BGBl. 1977, II, pp.180
103. Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping from Ships and Aircraft of 15 February 1972; BGBl. 1977, pp.169
104. NuR 1991, pp.388
105. Cf. Neue Zeitschrift für Strafrecht (NStZ) 1994, pp.436
106. Published in: NuR 1994, pp.409
107. See for instance the Basle Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal of 22 March 1989
108. For a critical statement see E. Dreher IH. Tröndle, Kommentar zum Strafgesetzbuch, 47 th ed., 1995, to § 326 under No. 5a; for a consenting opinion to the judgement cf. H. Otto, in: NStZ 1994, P.437
109. For the numerous arguments speaking in favour of such a court see A. Rest, Need for an International Court for the Environment?, in: (24) EPL 1994, pp.173 with further references; idem., Die rechtliche Umsetzung der Rio-Vorgaben in der Staatenpraxis, in: (34) AVR 1996, pp. 163
110. Cf. Optional Rules for Arbitrating Disputes between Two Parties of which only one is a State of July 1993.
111. Optional Rules for Arbitration Involving International Organizations and States of May 1996
112. Optinal Rules for Arbitration between International Organizations and Private Parties, May 1996
113. For the details see A. Rest, in: AVR 1996, pp.163
114. A. Postiglione, For the Sustainability of Life on Earth, in: Publication of the International Court of the Environment Foundation (ICEF), Rome, 1995
115. Ph.Sands, Environmental Disputes and the Permanent Court of Arbitration: Issues for Consideration, Background Paper for the Secretary-General of the PC A, March 1996