...
首页> 外文期刊>Canadian environmental law reports >Clayton et al. v. Attorney General of Canada
【24h】

Clayton et al. v. Attorney General of Canada

机译:Clayton et al. v. Attorney General of Canada

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Selection Note: The court refused to set aside a tribunal's damages award under Chapter 11 of NAFTA to US-based applicants whose proposed quarry in Nova Scotia had been rejected for environmental reasons by a federal-provincial joint review panel. Environmental law-Statutory protection of environment - Environmental assessment - Federal assessment-Applicants, with encouragement of government officials from Nova Scotia, undertook efforts to investigate feasibility of, and seek approvals to develop quarry in Nova Scotia - As part of approvals process, federal-provincial joint review panel studied project and delivered report that concluded that changes to community's core values was significant adverse environmental effect that could not be mitigated - After receiving panel's report, federal and Nova Scotia Ministers of Environment denied approval for quarry - Applicants commenced arbitration under Chapter 11 of North American Free Trade Agreement, and majority of Tribunal determined that Canada had breached obligations owed to applicants under Agreement regarding treatment of their investment - Tribunal found that applicants were denied reasonable notice of community core values approach taken by panel and opportunity to seek clarification and respond to it, and awarded damages in amount of $7 million USD - Applicants brought application to set aside damages award - Application dismissed - Applicants had failed to establish any basis on which arbitral award ought to be set aside as contrary to public policy - Decision to assess damages for loss of chance to have fair environmental assessment process, rather than for loss of right to operate quarry for 50 years was not morally repugnant - Tribunal's damages decision was not arrived at in manner that was contrary to notions of morality and justice - Tribunal's approach to damages flowed from its finding, on significant record and after lengthy hearing, that applicants did not establish that it was probable they would have received permission to develop and operate quarry - There was nothing perverse or contrary to morality about Tribunal's causation findings.

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号