Canada court action presses Ottawa to obey Kyoto
Legal World
[##_1L|1348647817.jpg|width="120" height="100" alt=""|_##]A legal action launched yesterday urges the Federal Court of Canada to force the federal government to live up to its obligations to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions under the Kyoto Protocol. The application alleges that an emission-reduction plan filed by the government last month fell so far short of meeting Canada's Kyoto commitments that it flouts previous legislation binding the government to strict targets.
"The Plan explicitly does not aim at complying with the Kyoto Protocol, and therefore does not conform to the requirements of the Act," lawyers Chris Paliare and Andrew Lokan wrote in the application, filed on behalf of Ecojustice Canada and Friends of the Earth Canada.
"On its terms, the Plan provides that emissions of greenhouse gases will far exceed the levels required by the Kyoto Protocol," they said.
A Federal Court judge could theoretically respond to the application by ordering the government to file a new plan that is in keeping with the Kyoto Protocol.
"In this particular case, even though the Act is highly complicated, there are key aspects of the fudged implementation plan that does indicate a 'thumbing of the nose' against the law," University of Ottawa law professor Errol Mendes said in an interview. "If the Ecojustice lawyers can keep it simple, there is a sound basis for seeking a declaration that the government is not complying with its own Act," Prof. Mendes said.
He said the case is particularly interesting because the country may be on the verge of a succession of minority governments. "If we have legislation on more than one area passed by the combined numbers of the opposition, can the minority government just ignore the law passed by Parliament or fudge any mandate to implement it by regulation?" Prof. Mendes said.
Several legal precedents exist in which courts forced provinces or the federal government to respect its own environmental legislation, according to Albert Koehl, a lawyer for Ecojustice.
"The court is not going to be stepping into the shoes of the Minister of the Environment or the Prime Minister," Mr. Koehl said in an interview. "It would simply look at whether the plan complies with the Act."
Mr. Paliare said the case boils down to whether a government can blithely ignore its own legislation: "This case is about being accountable to the will of Parliament," he said.
Garry Keller, director of communications for federal Environment Minister John Baird, said in a statement the department would have no comment on cases before the courts.
The Conservatives have consistently maintained that years of inaction on the part of their Liberal predecessors makes it impossible to meet the targets without serious consequences for the economy.
Related listings
-
EU court dismisses Microsoft antitrust appeal
Legal World 09/19/2007Microsoft's appeal of the record €497 million fine imposed on it by EU regulators was comprehensively rejected by Europe's second-highest court Monday.In a landmark ruling, the European Union's Court of First Instance backed the European Commission's...
-
2 in UK in court on terrorist charges
Legal World 09/19/2007Two people appeared in court Wednesday after being charged with terrorist offenses.Raingzieb Ahmed, 32, charged with three counts, spoke only to confirm his name and age during a five-minute hearing at London's City of Westminster Magistrates Court.A...
-
Russia warns against Iran war
Legal World 09/18/2007[##_1L|1332680339.jpg|width="100" height="125" alt=""|_##]Russia expressed worry Tuesday over the possibility of war with Iran as French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner pressed for tougher sanctions against the Islamic Republic's nuclear programme....
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.