Friends of the Earth, Inc., et al. v. Laidlaw Environmental Services (TOC), Inc. País/Territorio Estados Unidos de América Tipo de la corte Nacional - corte superior Fecha Ene 12, 2000 Fuente UNEP, InforMEA Nombre del tribunal Supreme Court of the United States Sede de la corte Washington D.C. Juez GinsburgRehnquist, StevensOConnor, KennedySouterBreyer, Stevens, KennedyScaliaThomas Número de referencia No. 98-822 Idioma Inglés Materia Cuestiones jurídicas, Agua Palabra clave Efluente de aguas residuales/vertido Agua de uso recreativo Procedimientos judiciales/procedimientos administrativos Infracciones/sanciones Acceso-a-la-justicia Resumen Defendant-respondent Laidlaw Environmental Services (TOC), Inc., bought a wastewater treatment plant in South Carolina. Laidlaw began to discharge various pollutants into the waterway. These discharges, particularly of mercury, repeatedly exceeded the limits set by a discharge permit Laidlaw had obtained. Plaintiff-petitioners Friends of the Earth filed this citizen suit against Laidlaw, alleging noncompliance with the permit and seeking declaratory and injunctive relief and an award of civil penalties. Laidlaw contended that the Plaintiff-petitioners lacked standing to bring the lawsuit. Laidlaw also argued that the case was moot because it had ceased polluting, and had closed the factory responsible for the pollution complained of. The Supreme Court held that the plaintiff-petitioners had reasonable concerns about the effects of those discharges, directly affecting their recreational, aesthetic, and economic interests. This was enough to adequately document an injury in fact. Therefore the plaintiff-petitioners had standing to bring the suit. Besides that, a citizen suitor’s claim for civil penalties could not be dismissed as moot when the defendant, after commencement of the litigation, had come into compliance with its discharge permit. The violations could continue if undeterred by the fine sought. A case could only become moot if subsequent events made it absolutely clear that the allegedly wrongful behavior could not reasonably be expected to recur. Texto completo getcase.pl Referencias Cites Manuel Lujan, Jr., Secretary of the Interior, Petitioner v. Defenders of Wildlife et al. Jurisprudencia | Nacional - corte superior | Estados Unidos de América | Jun 12, 1992 Palabra clave: Procedimientos judiciales/procedimientos administrativos, Especies animales protegidas, Acceso-a-la-justicia Fuente: UNEP, InforMEA Steel Co., aka Chicago Steel & Pickling Co. v. Citizens for a better Environment Jurisprudencia | Nacional - corte superior | Estados Unidos de América | Mar 4, 1998 Palabra clave: Procedimientos judiciales/procedimientos administrativos, Acceso-a-la-justicia, Sustancias peligrosas, Acceso-a-la-información Fuente: UNEP, InforMEA Sierra Club, Petitioner, v. Rogers C.B. Morton, Individually, and as Secretary of the Interior of the United States, et a. Jurisprudencia | Nacional - corte superior | Estados Unidos de América | Apr 19, 1972 Palabra clave: ONG, Zona protegida, Bosques de protección, Zona de montaña, Procedimientos judiciales/procedimientos administrativos, Parques nacionales, Protección del hábitat, Fauna silvestre Fuente: UNEP, InforMEA Cited by Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition, et al., Plaintiffs, v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, et al., Defendants Jurisprudencia | Nacional - corte inferior | Estados Unidos de América | Mar 23, 2007 Palabra clave: Carbón, Zona de montaña, Aguas continentales, Licencia minera Fuente: UNEP, InforMEA