...
首页> 外文期刊>The Environmental Law Reporter >United States v. Atlantic Research: The Supreme Court Almost Gets It Right
【24h】

United States v. Atlantic Research: The Supreme Court Almost Gets It Right

机译:美国诉大西洋研究:最高法院几乎正确了

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Editors 'Summary: Cooper Industries v. Aviall Services, a 2004 U.S. Supreme Court case, challenged the legal community's understanding of rights of cost recovery under CERCLA, ruling that PRPs who voluntarily cleaned up property did not have a cause of action in contribution under §113(f). However, earlier this year, in United States v. Atlantic Research Corp, the Court held that PRPs who voluntarily clean up contaminated properties may have a right of recovery under §§107 (a)(4)(B) or 113(f). In this Article, Jeffrey M. Gaba explores the issues left unresolved or convoluted by these two opinions. He begins with background on the private rights of cost recovery under CERCLA, and then parses these two decisions. He concludes by encouraging the Court to reconcile the different parts of CERCLA to create a coherent set of rights to cost recovery for PRPs.
机译:编辑的摘要:2004年美国最高法院的一宗Cooper Industries诉Aviall Services案,对法律界对CERCLA规定的成本回收权的理解提出了质疑,并裁定自愿清理财产的PRP没有根据§提起诉讼的诉因。 113(f)。但是,今年早些时候,在美国诉大西洋研究公司案中,法院裁定,自愿清理受污染财产的PRP可能根据§§107(a)(4)(B)或113(f)享有追偿权。 。在本文中,Jeffrey M. Gaba探索了这两种意见未解决或困扰的问题。他首先介绍了CERCLA规定的成本回收的私权背景,然后分析了这两个决定。最后,他鼓励法院调和CERCLA的不同部分,以建立一套连贯的权利来收回PRP的成本。

著录项

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