...
首页> 外文期刊>Environment reporter - Cases >Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc. v. Metro. Water Reclamation Dist. of Greater Chi.
【24h】

Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc. v. Metro. Water Reclamation Dist. of Greater Chi.

机译:纳特Res。防御Council,Inc.诉Metro。水回收区。大志。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Environmental groups are not judicially estopped from alleging in Clean Water Act citizen suit in federal district court that water reclamation district discharged phosphorous effluent in violation of Illinois water quality standards incorporated into special condition of 2002 national pollutant discharge elimination system permits, because: (1) under doctrine of judicial estoppel courts have discretion to bar party who successfully litigates one position from later arguing opposite position in another proceeding; (2) even though groups litigated adequacy of same special condition incorporated into 2013 permits in Illinois court proceeding, groups did not argue that standards are unenforceable; (3) groups' position in federal district court that standards are enforceable against district is not clearly inconsistent with position espoused in Illinois proceeding; (4) groups did not prevail on unenforceability allegation that they did not argue in Illinois proceeding; and (5) district court determined barring groups' claims would be inequitable.
机译:环保组织并未在联邦地方法院针对《清洁水法》公民诉讼提起司法诉讼,该诉讼称,开垦区排放的磷废水违反了纳入2002年国家污染物排放消除系统许可的特殊条件的伊利诺伊州水质标准,原因是:(1)根据司法禁止反言的原则,法院有权禁止成功对一个立场提起诉讼的当事方,以后再在另一程序中争论相反立场; (2)即使小组在伊利诺伊州法院程序中对纳入2013年许可的相同特殊条件的充分性进行诉讼,但小组并未争辩说标准不可执行; (3)团体在联邦地方法院对标准可以针对地方执行的立场与伊利诺伊州诉讼中所主张的立场并没有明显矛盾; (4)在伊利诺伊州诉讼中没有争论的不可执行性指控中,团体没有胜诉; (5)地方法院裁定,禁止团体的主张是不公平的。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Environment reporter - Cases》 |2017年第16期|1930-1936|共7页
  • 作者

  • 作者单位
  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
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