Judgment concerning Norway in the case Greenpeace Nordic and Others v. Norway
oktober 28
In the case Greenpeace Nordic and Others v. Norway, the Court held that there had been no violation of the right to respect for private and family life.
The case concerned the procedural aspect of the obligation to effectively protect individuals from the serious adverse effects of climate change on their life, health, well-being and quality of life in the context of petroleum exploration preceding extraction. On 10 June 2016 the Norwegian Ministry of Petroleum and Energy awarded ten exploration licences to 13 private companies for petroleum gas production. A judicial review requested by the applicant organisations, Greenpeace Nordic and Young Friends of the Earth Norway, of the validity of that decision was unsuccessful. The Court held, in particular, that when making a decision in the context of the environment and climate change, the State had to carry out an adequate, timely and comprehensive environmental impact assessment in good faith, and based on the best available science. While the processes leading to the 2016 decision had not been fully comprehensive and, in particular, the assessment of the activity’s climate impacts had been deferred, there was no indication that deferring such an assessment had been inherently insufficient to support the State’s guarantees of respect for private and family life within the meaning of the Convention.
In the case Greenpeace Nordic and Others v. Norway, the Court held that there had been no violation of the right to respect for private and family life.
The case concerned the procedural aspect of the obligation to effectively protect individuals from the serious adverse effects of climate change on their life, health, well-being and quality of life in the context of petroleum exploration preceding extraction. On 10 June 2016 the Norwegian Ministry of Petroleum and Energy awarded ten exploration licences to 13 private companies for petroleum gas production. A judicial review requested by the applicant organisations, Greenpeace Nordic and Young Friends of the Earth Norway, of the validity of that decision was unsuccessful. The Court held, in particular, that when making a decision in the context of the environment and climate change, the State had to carry out an adequate, timely and comprehensive environmental impact assessment in good faith, and based on the best available science. While the processes leading to the 2016 decision had not been fully comprehensive and, in particular, the assessment of the activity’s climate impacts had been deferred, there was no indication that deferring such an assessment had been inherently insufficient to support the State’s guarantees of respect for private and family life within the meaning of the Convention.
Links:
Judgment concerning Norway
Landen moeten van Europees Hof bij oliewinning kijken naar klimaatgevolgen
Greenpeace Nordic and Others v. Norway
European human rights court sets climate limits for the oil industry
Gegevens