Human rights and environmental wrongs: Incorporating the European convention on human rights: Some thoughts on the consequences for UK environmental law

Journal of Environmental Law

Volumn 11, Issue 1, 1999, Pages 35-57

  Thornton, Justine ^a   Tromans, Stephen ^a  

^a Simmons and Simmons ^*

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION; HUMAN RIGHTS; INTERNATIONAL LAW;

UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 0032858076     PISSN: 09528873     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/jel/11.1.35     Document Type: Article

References (108)

1. Fredin v Sweden (1990) 13 EHRR 784.
2. X and Y v Federal Republic of Germany, 5 Eur Com HR Dec & Rep (1976). The court followed Article 25(1).
3. Lopez Ostra v Spain, App 16798/90, (1995) 20 EHRR 277.
4. Guerra v Italy (116/1996/735/932) 4 BHRC, p 63.
5. There is a debate as to whether the effect of the Human Rights Act will be to 'incorporate' the Convention into UK law. The government is wary of referring to 'incorporation'. See, W. Upton, The European Convention on Human Rights and Environmental Law (1998) JPL 315 at 316
6. 21 ILM 58 (1982).
7. Human Rights and the Environment, final report of the Special Rapporteur, UN DX E/CN 4/Sub 2/1994/9 (6 July 1994).
8. The Role of International Human Rights Law in the Protection of the Environment. A. Boyle, Human Rights Approaches to Environmental Protection (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998), p 43.
9. Birnie and Boyle, International Law and the Environment (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992).
10. See, R. Macrory, 'Environmental Citizenship and the Law: Repairing the European Road' (1996) JEL 8(2), 219. Original diffidence within the Community as to going beyond economic integration to safeguard individual rights was probably due in part to the failure of such provisions in Article 3 of the European Defence Treaty: see, J. Hanlon, European Community Law (Sweet & Maxwell, 1998), p 50.
11. See, R. Macrory, 'Environmental Citizenship and the Law: Repairing the European Road' (1996) JEL 8(2), 219. Original diffidence within the Community as to going beyond economic integration to safeguard individual rights was probably due in part to the failure of such provisions in Article 3 of the European Defence Treaty: see, J. Hanlon, European Community Law (Sweet & Maxwell, 1998), p 50.
12. See, for example, Internationale Handelsgesellschaft Gmbh, Case 11/27, [1970] ECR 1125; Hauer v Rhineland Pfalz, Case 44/79, [1979] ECR 3727; Johnston v Chief Constable of RUC, Case 222/84, [1987] QB 129; [1986] ECR 1651; ERT, Case C-260/89, [1991] ECR I-2925.
13. See, L. Clements, European Human Rights. Taking a Case under the Convention (Sweet & Maxwell, 1994).
14. Protocol 11 - the amendment came into force on 1 November 1998. See, Opinion - The Legacy of the Commission to the New Court under the Eleventh Protocol, N. Bratza QC and M. O'Boyle (1997) EHRLR, 2111.
15. Supra, n 3.
16. Para 51.
17. App 7889/77; 23 YB Eur Con HR 166 (1980).
18. Rayner v United Kingdom 9310/81 47 Eur Com HR Dec & Rep 5 (1986) paras 12-14.
19. Powell and Rayner v United Kingdom, 172 Eur Ct HR Ser A (1990); para 41.
20. App 13728/88 (May 1990), reprinted in 3 RUDH 236 (1991).
21. Desgagné, Incorporating Environmental Values into the European Convention on Human Rights, 89 AJIL 263.
22. Supra, n 4.
23. Directive 82/501/EEC on the major accident hazards of certain industrial activities dangerous to the environment.
24. The Court did not consider the alleged violation of Article 2 in view of this finding. The complaint that there had been a breach of Article 10 (freedom to receive information) was not upheld, on the basis that the Article did not require positive steps to collect and disseminate information.
25. Case 10/1997/794/99S-996, The Times, 15 June 1998.
26. See also, LCB v United Kingdom, Case 14/1997/798/1001, The Times, 15 June 1998.
27. Supra, n 18.
28. Supra, n 3.
29. Supra, n 4.
30. G and E v Norway, Apps 9278/81 and 9415/8135 35 Eur Com HR Dec & Rep 30, 35-6 (1984).
31. Guerra v Italy, supra, n 4.
32. Dr S v Federal Republic of German, App 715/60 (5 August 1960, unreported).
33. Desgagné takes the view that Article 2 should be widened, supra, n 20.
34. See, Desgagné, supra, n 20.
35. See, Desgagné at 277, supra, n 20.
36. Supra, n 17.
37. Supra, n 1.
38. Cited in: Anderson, An Overview, supra, n 8.
39. R. Churchill, Environmental Rights in Treaties in Human Rights Approaches to Environmental Protection, supra n 8.
40. 279-BB Eur Ct HR (Ser A) (1993).
41. Benthem v Netherlands, 97 Eur Ct HR (Ser A) (1985).
42. Supra, n 1.
43. Supra, n 4.
44. The circumstances were, however, found to amount to a breach of Article 8. See discussion above under Article 8.
45. Steel and Others v UK, Case 67/1997/851/1058, ECHR, The Times, 1 October 1998. See also, Huntingdon Life Sentences v Curtin [1998] Env LR D9, and in particular, the concern expressed by Eady J as to the over-wide use the Protection from Harassmen Act 1997 to prevent protest or discussion of matters of public interest.
46. The Act received Royal Assent on 9 November 1998. The main provisions are expected to come into force sometime in the year 2000.
47. Section 3. The Convention rights are defined at section 1 by reference to Specific Articles of the Convention and Protocols and are set out in Schedule 1 to the Act.
48. Section 4(2).
49. Section 6. By section 6(2) this general provision does not apply if the authority was effectively constrained by legislation so that it could not have acted in any other way.
50. Section 7.
51. Section 2.
52. G. Hoon, Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department, Hansard, HL, col 402, 2 June 1998. The position under the Human Rights Act is to be contrasted with judgments and decisions of the European Court of Justice (under EC law) of which UK courts are required to take judicial notice by the European Communities Act 1972.
53. See, T. Corner, Planning Environment, and the European Convention on Human Rights [1998] JPL 301; A. Kitson, The European Convention on Human Rights and Local Plans [1998] JPL 321, and Encyclopaedia of Planning Law and Practice Monthly Bulletin, May 1998, p 14. See also, W. Upton, The European Convention on Human Rights and Environment Law [1998] JPL 315.
54. See, T. Corner, Planning Environment, and the European Convention on Human Rights [1998] JPL 301; A. Kitson, The European Convention on Human Rights and Local Plans [1998] JPL 321, and Encyclopaedia of Planning Law and Practice Monthly Bulletin, May 1998, p 14. See also, W. Upton, The European Convention on Human Rights and Environment Law [1998] JPL 315.
55. See, T. Corner, Planning Environment, and the European Convention on Human Rights [1998] JPL 301; A. Kitson, The European Convention on Human Rights and Local Plans [1998] JPL 321, and Encyclopaedia of Planning Law and Practice Monthly Bulletin, May 1998, p 14. See also, W. Upton, The European Convention on Human Rights and Environment Law [1998] JPL 315.
56. See, T. Corner, Planning Environment, and the European Convention on Human Rights [1998] JPL 301; A. Kitson, The European Convention on Human Rights and Local Plans [1998] JPL 321, and Encyclopaedia of Planning Law and Practice Monthly Bulletin, May 1998, p 14. See also, W. Upton, The European Convention on Human Rights and Environment Law [1998] JPL 315.
57. See, Bryan v UK [1996] JPL 386.
58. See, T. Corner, op cit, n 52 at 314.
59. [1998] PLCR 305.
60. Article 25.
61. R v Pollution Inspectorate ex parte Greenpeace (No 2) [1994] JEL 7(2) 224.
62. See, R v Somerset County Council and ARC Southern Ltd ex parte Dixon [ 1997] JPL 1030; and R v North Somerset District Council ex parte Garnet [1998] JEL 10(1) 161.
63. See, Hansard, HL, col 805, 5 February 1998.
64. [1998] JPL 693.
65. Sounders v UK [1997] 23 EHRR 313, The Times, 18 December 1996, Case 43/94/490/572. Saunders was denied a fair trial under Article 6 because the self-incriminating answers he was legally compelled to give to DTI inspectors were used in evidence against him.
66. [1998] Env LR 153.
67. Okrem SA v EC Commission [1991] 4 CMLR 502; R v Director of the Serious Fraud Office ex parte Smith [1993] AC 1.
68. See, [1998] Env LR 153 at 170.
69. Supra, n 1.
70. The Times, Scots Law Report, 24 September 1998.
71. ERT (Case C-260/89) [1991] ECR I-2925.
72. Benthem v The Netherlands, Series A 97, 1985.
73. See discussion on natural justice.
74. See, Harris n Evans [1998] 3 All ER 522.
75. The Act would, therefore, form another line of argument in cases of pollution by sewerage undertakers, as in Bowden v South West Water Services Ltd [1998] Env LR 015 where the livelihood of a mussel fisherman J was affected as a result of sewage, leading to restrictions under food safety legislation.
76. Hansard, HC, col 1057, 24 June 1998.
77. See, Osman v UK, Case 87/1997/871/1083, The Times, 5 November 1998. Full transcript of the judgment available from the ECHR website.
78. [1990] 2 QB 557. In Blue Circle Industries plc v Ministry of Defence [1998] 3 All ER 385, the Court of Appeal adopted a different approach to what constituted damage. In the leading judgment Lord Justice Aldous said that where land had been contaminated by radioactive material, it had been physically damaged. The fact that the Property was unsaleable until cleaned-up and thereafter affected by a residual diminution in value was an economic consequence of physical damage.
79. [1997] Env LR 488.
80. The Times, 11 November 1998.
81. See, Osman v UK, supra, n 73.
82. [1996] Env LR 273.
83. [1998] PLCR 30.
84. [1996] 3 WLR 373 (HL).
85. See, R. Meeran, Accountability of Transnationals for Human Rights Abuses [1998] NLJ 1686.
86. Guerra v Italy, supra, n 4. Also, Lopez Ostra v Spain, n 3 above, and Airey v Irland (197980) 2 EHRR 305.
87. See, Desgagne, supra, n 20.
88. See, D. Wyatt QC, Litigating Community Environmental Law - Thoughts on the Direct Effect Doctrine [1998] JEL 10(1).
89. See, A Dead End for Direct Effect? Prospects for Enforcement of European Community Environmental Law by Individuals, J. Holder, [1996] JEL 8, 313, and Public Interest Litigation in Environmental Matters for European Courts, L. Kramer, [1996] JEL 8(2), 1.
90. See, A Dead End for Direct Effect? Prospects for Enforcement of European Community Environmental Law by Individuals, J. Holder, [1996] JEL 8, 313, and Public Interest Litigation in Environmental Matters for European Courts, L. Kramer, [1996] JEL 8(2), 1.
91. App 7154/75 14 Eur Com HR Dec & Rep 31, 32 (1979).
92. Supra, n 4.
93. [1996] Env LR 325.
94. Supra, n 73.
95. See, discussion in M. Kidd, Environmental Law - A South African Guide (Juta, 1997) pp 34-8.
96. See, Kidd, op cit and articles cited therein, especially T. Winstanley, Entrenching Environmental Protection in the New Constitution (1995) 2 SAJELP 85.
97. See, J. Glazewski, The Environment, Human Rights and a New South African Constitution (1991) 7 SAJHR 167; J Glazewski, The Environment and the New Interim Constitution (1994) 1 SAJELP 1.
98. See, J. Glazewski, The Environment, Human Rights and a New South African Constitution (1991) 7 SAJHR 167; J Glazewski, The Environment and the New Interim Constitution (1994) 1 SAJELP 1.
99. See, Agius and Busutti (eds), Future Generations and International Law (Earthscan, 1998).
100. See, 'Environmental Victims', Social Justice Journal, (1996) 23(4).
101. B. Davy, Essential Injustice (Springer, 1997).
102. M.B. Gerrard, Whose Backyard, Whose Risk? (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1995).
103. Chester Residents Concerned for Quality Living v Self (3d Cir, 30 December 1997).
104. Sturges v Bridgman (1879) 11 Ch D 852.
105. See, R v Environment Agency and Another ex parte Leam, QBD (Crown Office List) Laws J, 18 March 1998. Env LR, Part 1, January 1998, D1. The applicants obtained leave to judicially review a decision by the Environment Agency to vary an IPC authorisation to allow the burning of SLF. The Environment Agency applied to set aside the leave. The court rejected the Agency's application, holding that orders to set aside would only be made in very plain case.
106. For a full discussion, see C. Miller, Environmental Rights - Critical Perspectives (Routledge, 1998).
107. Supra, n 8.
108. See, Scarcity of Water Emerging Legal and Policy Responses, Braus, de Haan, Nollkaemper and Riuzema (eds) (Kluwer Law, 1997).