首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Natural Resources & Environmental Law >SIERRA CLUB V. EPA: Is CHANGING THE AMERICAN RULE FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES UNAMERICAN? THE DEBATE ON CONGRESSIONAL FEE-SHIFTING STATUTES
【24h】

SIERRA CLUB V. EPA: Is CHANGING THE AMERICAN RULE FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES UNAMERICAN? THE DEBATE ON CONGRESSIONAL FEE-SHIFTING STATUTES

机译:SIERRA CLUB V. EPA:是否更改了美国律师费规则(美国规则)?统一收费条例的辩论

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Congress' purpose in altering the American Rule by creating these fee-shifting statutes was to encourage citizen suits by granting attorneys' fees to private citizens who brought suit, thus further[ing] the goals of the underlying statute in their role as private attorneys general." This purpose is central to the environmental-relief statutes containing the language "whenever appropriate." The citizen suit, coupled with the catalyst theory, has allowed for substantial advances in environmental law over the past thirty years. If the catalyst theory was banned from environmental statutes such as the CAA or the ESA, all of the recent accomplishments would start a harmful backslide that could endanger the health and welfare of all citizens.
机译:国会通过制定这些费用转移法规来改变美国规则的目的是通过向提起诉讼的私人公民授予律师费来鼓励公民诉讼,从而进一步提高基本法规在其作为私人律师一般角色方面的目标。 “此目的对于环境救济法规而言是至关重要的,该法规包含“在适当情况下”的用语。公民诉讼,再加上催化剂理论,在过去三十年中已使环境法取得了实质性进展。如果催化剂理论被禁止根据CAA或ESA等环境法规,所有最近的成就都会引发有害的后退,可能危及所有公民的健康和福祉。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
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