Ecolex Logo
The gateway to
environmental law
Search results » Jurisprudence

Cassation 383-212

Country/Territory
Peru
Type of court
National - higher court
Date
Aug 27, 2008
Source
UNEP, InforMEA
Court name
Sala Penal Permanente de la Corte Suprema
Seat of court
Lima
Judge
Villa Stein, Pariona Pastrana, Barrios Alvarado, Neyra Flores, Morales Parraguez
Reference number
No 383-2012
Language
Spanish
Subject
Mineral resources, Legal questions
Abstract

The cassation court is asked to rule on the case of a mining company accused of soil pollution.

 

The defendants claimed that the right to prosecute for environmental damages resulting from their mining activities was expired because the law provides a three years’ time-limitation to prosecute. In that case the damage took place in 1999 when the mine was exploited by another mining company. The defendant points out that he acquired the mine in 2006; six years after that the contamination took place and therefore there was no liability-transfer, with regards to the soil contamination, between him and the former company because the three years’ time limit had expired. Therefore, the defendant could not be held responsible for the environmental damages caused by mining activities taking place in 1999.

 

The supreme court did not follow the ruling of the two lower courts who considered that the time limit had expired. Indeed, the supreme court pointed out that in that case the soil contamination could not be considered to be a single damage committed in 1999 but a permanent damage taking place resulting from the omission from the defendant to set up and implement a plan to restore the environment. Therefore, the court considered that the time delay to prosecute started to run when the damage stopped; in 2011 when the defendant finally set up his environmental restoration plan.

Full text
JU20140425.pdf