Agrarian Policy and Land-Use Planning in Marajo – Pará

Carvalho, João Paulo Leão de; Cruz, Benedito Ely Valente da; Calvi, Miquéias Freitas

doi:10.4215/rm2019.e18013

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Yet the General Court's judgments are in line with previous Court of Justice case law. The fact that the Charter does not alter standing rules was previously decided in Inuit, 105 where an NGO tried to challenge a regulation of the European Parliament and the Council on seal products based on Article 47 of the Charter -that is, the right to an effective remedy and a fair trial. 106 Similarly, the idea that Codorniu establishes a narrow line of case law is similarly entrenched in EU law doctrine.…”

Section: Current and Future G Ener Ati On S' H Uman Ri G Hts In Eu mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…50 In Carvalho, which is discussed in more detail in Section 4, the General Court was asked to order the Council and the European Parliament to adopt measures that would increase the EU greenhouse gas emission targets beyond the legislated goals. 51 Such a plea runs the risk of blurring the line between political and legal procedures. Worth noting, climate actions that succeed in court (in so far as their pleas are upheld) tend to be claims that allow the court to apply the law.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Human rights of minors and future generations: Global trends and EU environmental law particularities

Bogojević¹

2020

Rev Euro Comp Intl Enviro

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A growing global wave of climate change litigation is led by minors, relying on their human rights, as well as those of future generations against governments and their failure to take action on climate change. Such litigation is emerging also before the Court of Justice of the European Union, where the ambitiousness of the EU’s climate change policies, embodied in the 2030 Climate and Energy Policy Framework, is challenged. This may suggest a possible ‘rights turn’ in EU climate change litigation, where the use of rights claims intensifies and allows stakeholders traditionally excluded from decision making to raise their concerns in a judicial forum. This article explains why this trend has failed to materialize in the EU through an analysis of EU environmental law particularities. From this view, it shows the shortcomings of the 2030 Framework, and by drawing inspiration from successful enforcement of statutory obligations in EU air quality legislation, the article suggests how these may be remedied in future legislative action.

show abstract

Section: Current and Future G Ener Ati On S' H Uman Ri G Hts In Eu mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%