首页> 外文期刊>European environmental law review >Subsidiarity - A conventional industry defence: Is the Directive on Environmental Liability with regard to Prevention and Remedying of Environmental Damage justified under the subsidiarity principle?
【24h】

Subsidiarity - A conventional industry defence: Is the Directive on Environmental Liability with regard to Prevention and Remedying of Environmental Damage justified under the subsidiarity principle?

机译:辅助性-常规的工业防御:在辅助性原则下,关于预防和补救环境损害的环境责任指令是否合理?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Is the "Directive on Environmental Liability with regard to prevention and remedying of environmental damage" justified under the subsidiarity principle? This article examines the pros and cons of arguments submitted by recognised lawyers, nongovernmental organisations and industry on the one hand to show whether the agreed Directive complies with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in the Treaty establishing the European Community (ECT) but on the other that the Community institutions have failed in their duty to adequately observe the application of the subsidiarity principle. The author draws two conclusions: the subsidiarity principle remains a "dynamic concept" and the Commission, Parliament and Council have collectively failed to acquit themselves of their duty to justify the Directive.
机译:根据辅助性原则,“关于预防和补救环境损害的环境责任指令”是否合理?本文一方面考察了公认的律师,非政府组织和业界提出的论点的利弊,以表明议定的指令是否符合建立欧洲共同体(ECT)条约中规定的辅助性原则,但另一方面其他原因是社区机构没有履行充分遵守辅助性原则的职责。作者得出两个结论:辅助性原则仍然是“动态概念”,而委员会,议会和理事会集体没有放弃其为该指令辩护的责任。

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