Friends of the Earth, Inc., et al. v. Laidlaw Environmental Services (TOC), Inc. Pays/Territoire États-Unis d'Amérique Type de cour Nationale - cour supérieure Date Jan 12, 2000 Source UNEP, InforMEA Nom du tribunal Supreme Court of the United States Siège de la cour Washington D.C. Juge GinsburgRehnquist, StevensOConnor, KennedySouterBreyer, Stevens, KennedyScaliaThomas Numéro de référence No. 98-822 Langue Anglais Sujet Eau, Questions juridiques Mot clé Eau à usage récréatif Infractions/sanctions Accès-à-la-justice Eaux usées/déversement Procédures judiciaires/procédures administratives Résumé 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. Texte intégral getcase.pl Références Cites Manuel Lujan, Jr., Secretary of the Interior, Petitioner v. Defenders of Wildlife et al. Jurisprudence | Nationale - cour supérieure | États-Unis d'Amérique | Jui 12, 1992 Mot clé: Accès-à-la-justice, Espèces animales protégées, Procédures judiciaires/procédures administratives Source: UNEP, InforMEA Steel Co., aka Chicago Steel & Pickling Co. v. Citizens for a better Environment Jurisprudence | Nationale - cour supérieure | États-Unis d'Amérique | Mar 4, 1998 Mot clé: Substances dangereuses, Accès-à-l'information, Procédures judiciaires/procédures administratives, Accès-à-la-justice Source: UNEP, InforMEA Sierra Club, Petitioner, v. Rogers C.B. Morton, Individually, and as Secretary of the Interior of the United States, et a. Jurisprudence | Nationale - cour supérieure | États-Unis d'Amérique | Avr 19, 1972 Mot clé: ONG, Zone de montagne, Forêt de protection, Faune sauvage, Parcs nationaux, Aire protégée, Protection de l'habitat, Procédures judiciaires/procédures administratives Source: UNEP, InforMEA Cited by Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition, et al., Plaintiffs, v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, et al., Defendants Jurisprudence | Nationale- cour inférieure | États-Unis d'Amérique | Mar 23, 2007 Mot clé: Zone de montagne, Eaux continentales, Licence d'exploitation minière, Charbon Source: UNEP, InforMEA