Previously, it had been suggested that the verdict would come on Tuesday 21 November. But this has now been postponed, confirms Markus Iestra, communications advisor at the Oslo District Court. – The adjournment comes from the combination of the complexity and duration of the Engebø case, and also known day hearings and several unscheduled judge assignments in other cases that could not wait. – We are looking forward to the verdict, but have no further comments while the verdict is being written, says Henrik Vaaler at the Government Attorney. The head of the Nature Conservation Association, Truls Gulowsen, tells news that he is surprised. – We do not know more details about the grounds, but we can hope that it is a sign that the court will do a thorough job, and then we should win the case, as we presented the best arguments. The question the court will decide on is whether the permit for a sea dump for mining waste in the Førdefjorden is in accordance with EU law, which Norway is bound by through the EEA agreement. – It’s a shame that you don’t get an explanation now Marius Dalin, MDG – It’s a shame that you don’t get an explanation now. An adjournment may indicate that this is a difficult legal nut and it gives good hope that one can win the case or get a judgment which, in any case, gives support in the long run and good chances of winning in the next court. Because this judgment will probably be appealed regardless of the outcome. The fjord is not lost until the facility for depositing waste in the fjord has been built and put into use. As far as I know, we are still a long way from having financing in place for the construction of the entire facility. As far as I have understood, there is no European bank that can loan finance the project as it is considered to be unsustainable and contrary to the rules for financing within the EU/EEA. It is still far from clear whether this project will go so far as to build the expensive disposal facility, even if something so crazy were to happen that nature conservation loses out to capital interests. Luckily. Truls Gulowsen was optimistic when the environmental court case started in September. – I am confident that we will win. We have been fighting for 15 years, and legally have a strong case. Photo: Rasmus Berg – Clear procedural errors The starting point for the plaintiffs is what they characterize as “clear procedural errors”. – Incorrect understanding of EEA-legal environmental requirements The lawsuit is based on the following legal objections: 1. Løyva is based on an incorrect understanding of EEA-legal environmental requirements; the water framework directive and the mineral waste directive. 2. There is a better alternative which the administration was obliged to sort out and assess. 3. The environmental consequences will be more serious than what is envisaged in the licence. The state rejects this, and writes in its final submission that the positive social effects of the Engebø project outweigh the disadvantages. They add: – The state nevertheless agrees with (the plaintiffs) that the environmental consequences of the marine landfill on marine life should be minimised. The dispute over the fjord landfill in Førdefjorden has been going on for a number of years and, politically speaking, the time for rematches was over when the Ministry of Trade and Industry confirmed on 12 May last year that Nordic Mining can retain the licence. – The ministry has gone through the matter thoroughly, said Minister of Business Jan Christian Vestre (Ap). At the same time, he announced that he would tighten the environmental requirements in the operating license with three additional conditions. In June, the dispute over the fjord landfill in the Førdefjord gained new political dynamics (albeit not legally) when the Norwegian Institute of Marine Research (HI) discovered more vulnerable and endangered species in the Førdefjord than were known. Photo: Vidar Gudvangen / news New climate lawsuit against the state 28 November In June, the environmental organizations Greenpeace and Nature and Youth announced a new climate lawsuit against the state. Processing of the lawsuit starts in the Oslo district court this month, with the first court day on 28 November. The plaintiffs believe that the state has broken Norwegian laws and the High Court’s requirements by failing to understand the climate consequences of approving three new oil and gas fields in the North Sea, and furthermore that the best interests of children have not been taken into account. In December 2020, the Supreme Court handed down its verdict in the first climate lawsuit that went through three rounds before the court in the years 2017–2020. The environmental organizations did not win with the claim that the allocation of new oil fields in the Barents Sea was contrary to the Constitution’s environmental section.
ttn-69
The judgment in the fjord lawsuit has been postponed – news Vestland
