uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
BETA
Darpö, Jan
Publications (10 of 59) Show all publications
Darpö, J. (2017). “Environmental Rights” in a European Context: About the Aarhus Convention, the principle of judicial protection under EU law and the role of the national courts in the member States. In: Sanja Bogojevic; Rosemary Rayfuse (Ed.), Environmental Rights in Environmental Law: . Hart Publishing Ltd.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>“Environmental Rights” in a European Context: About the Aarhus Convention, the principle of judicial protection under EU law and the role of the national courts in the member States
2017 (English)In: Environmental Rights in Environmental Law / [ed] Sanja Bogojevic; Rosemary Rayfuse, Hart Publishing Ltd, 2017Chapter in book (Refereed)
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Hart Publishing Ltd, 2017
National Category
Law (excluding Law and Society)
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-311788 (URN)
Available from: 2017-01-02 Created: 2017-01-02 Last updated: 2017-03-27
Darpö, J. (2016). Så nära, och ändå så långt bort!: En svensk betraktelse av norsk vattenrätt och frågan om tillstånds rättskraft. Uppsala: Uppsala universitet.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Så nära, och ändå så långt bort!: En svensk betraktelse av norsk vattenrätt och frågan om tillstånds rättskraft
2016 (Swedish)Report (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

This report is from a study on permits for hydro power in Norway, narrated from the perspective of a Swedish legal scholar. The main focus is on the possibilities to update and amend granted permits, in order to adapt them to new and developing conditions in the environment and changes in the values of society. The author concludes that even though the applicable regulation is quite similar to the Swedish Environmental Code, differences between the two legal systems have a major impact. One such difference is that the Norwegian system for decision-making and appeal lies, in its entirety, within the administration – at least in practical terms – whereas the Swedish system is court-based. Another is that whereas provisions on compensation play a decisive role in determining the possibilities to update permits according to the Swedish Environmental

Code, no such rights exist in Norway despite similarities in circumstances. The report concludes with some recommendations on how to construe environmental law so as to allow for permits to be adaptable to changes in the environment and social values, while still respecting the permit holder’s legitimate expectations to legal certainty.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Uppsala: Uppsala universitet, 2016. 51 p.
Series
Skrifter från Juridiska fakulteten i Uppsala, ISSN 0282-2040 ; 2016:1
Series
Uppsala Faculty of Law, Working Paper, 2016:1
Keyword
Water law, hydro power, permit, updating, water framework directive
National Category
Law (excluding Law and Society)
Research subject
Environmental Law
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-279518 (URN)
Projects
SPEQS
Funder
Swedish Environmental Protection Agency
Available from: 2016-03-02 Created: 2016-03-02 Last updated: 2016-03-10Bibliographically approved
Darpö, J. (2016). The Commission: a sheep in wolf’s clothing? On infringement proceedings as a legal device for the enforcement of EU law on the environment, using Swedish wolf management as an example.. Journal for European Environmental & Planning Law, 13(3-4), 270-293.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>The Commission: a sheep in wolf’s clothing? On infringement proceedings as a legal device for the enforcement of EU law on the environment, using Swedish wolf management as an example.
2016 (English)In: Journal for European Environmental & Planning Law, ISSN 1613-7272, E-ISSN 1876-0104, Vol. 13, no 3-4, 270-293 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

This article centres on the effectiveness of Article 258 TFEU proceedings for the enforcement of EU environmental law. Employing as an example the case between the Commission and Sweden on the licensed hunting of wolves – a species enjoying strict protection in accordance with the Habitats Directive – the pros and cons will be discussed of infringement proceedings for the enforcement of the common responsibilities in the environmental area. While these proceedings can be effective in situations where they are used, they suffer unpredictability and a lack of consistency owing to political balancing within the Commission. Furthermore, lack of transparency in communication between the Commission and the governments of the Member States prevent public scrutiny of the system, which contributes to alienation of the EU from the public. Finally, on areas of environmental law – which are highly dependent upon scientific expert knowledge and thus dominated by ‘soft guidelines’ – infringement proceedings are an important complement to references from national courts to CJEU for preliminary rulings on controversial issues in order to avoid ‘circular decision-making’. Thus, the Swedish wolf issue can serve as a background for a more general discussion on infringement proceedings as an effective means for the enforcement of environmental law within the Union.

National Category
Law (excluding Law and Society)
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-311786 (URN)10.1163/18760104-01303004 (DOI)000391049600003 ()
Available from: 2017-01-02 Created: 2017-01-02 Last updated: 2017-11-29Bibliographically approved
Darpö, J. (2015). Access to Justice in Environmental Decision-making in Sweden.: Standing for the public concerned, the scope of review on appeal and costs.. Uppsala.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Access to Justice in Environmental Decision-making in Sweden.: Standing for the public concerned, the scope of review on appeal and costs.
2015 (English)Report (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Sweden has a “universally” applicable Environmental Code, which harmonised the general rules and principles in this field. The Code applies to all human activities that might harm the environment. However, certain activities are also regulated in special pieces of legislation, such as the Planning and Building Act. Infrastructure installations also have regulations of their own, as do mining and forestry. Fauna is protected, in part, through hunting law. As for environmental decision-making, the municipalities play a key role under both the Environmental Code and the Planning and Building Act. The County Administrative Boards are also responsible for important environmental legislation and issue permits for environmentally hazardous activities. Installations and activities involving a substantial environmental impact must obtain a permit from the Land and Environmental Court, as must all kinds of water operations. Also national authorities, such as the Environmental Protection Agency and the Swedish Chemicals Agencyare responsible for some environmental decision-making. Sweden has administrative courts for the appeal of administrative decisions and ordinary courts for civil and criminal cases. The administrative courts decide cases on the merits in a reformatory procedure, meaning that they replace the appealed decision with a new onefollowing analysis of all the relevant facts of the case. Furthermore, the ultimate responsibility for the investigation of the case rests with the court according to the “ex officio principle”.The Environmental Code establishes a system of five Land and Environmental Courts and one Land and Environmental Court of Appeal. They are all divisions within the ordinary courts, but essentially act as administrative courts for cases under the En-vironmental Code and the Planning and Building Act. A Land and Environmental Court has some of the characteristics of a tribunal, consisting of both law-trained judges, technicians and experts. All members of the courts have an equal vote. The route for appeals in cases concerning the environment is always the same: Municipal level → County Ad-ministrative Board → Land and Environmental Court → Land and Environmental Court of Appeal (MÖD). Some cases can also be brought to the Supreme Court. Thus all appeals of environmental decisions follow this route, although the starting-point and terminus differ. The decision-making procedure in environmental cases in Sweden is open, meaning that in principle everybody can participate in the proceedings leading to the first decision. On appeal, the scope of the trial is set by the claims of the action, which the appeal body will decide upon in accordance with the “ex officio principle”. Thereby, the appeal body or court decides the case on the merits, thus addressing both substantial and procedural issues raised in the administrative decision. The procedure may includeall kinds of “actions” for annulment, performance, altering the decision, remit, etc.The Swedish concept of standing in administrative cases is strongly “interest-based”. If the provisions in an Act are meant to protect certain interests, the representatives of those interests can challenge the decision by way of appeal. Standing is generally definedas belonging to the “person to whom the decision concerns”. Additional criteria are that the decision affects him or her adversely and that it is appealable, which it always is as long as the decision entails factual or legal consequences in a very broad sense.To get a clearer picture of that scope of persons, one must study the case law that has been established in each administrative area or even under specific pieces of legislation. Under the Environmental Code, the courts have applied a generous attitude, stating that in principle, every person who may be harmed or exposed to more than a minor inconvenience by the environmentally harmful activity at stake is considered a party with interest. Thus,everyone who may be harmed by an activity or exposed to even minor risks – for example neigh-bours, people affected by emissions or other disturbances from the activity – should have the right to appeal the decision in question. As the Environmental Code brought together all kinds of legislation which previously was separate, this formula is generally applicable. Accordingly, if a permit concerns water operations such as a marina, neighbours who will be affected by the road traffic to the marina are allowed to appeal. The determination of the public concerned is straightforwardand depends on the kinds of disturbance (discharges into air and water, noise, odour, traffic, and so on) that the person in question can be affected by, and at what distance. In contrastto this case law created state of affairs, standing for ENGOs is decided by criteria in express legislation, at least as a starting point. In recent years, however, and in the wake of the case law of CJEU, ENGO standing rights have expanded by way of national courts applying the “so as to enable” formula according to the Slovak Brown Bearcase. In the Environmental Code,standing is given to certain organisations in orderto appeal decisions on permits, approvals or exemptions, the criteria being that it is a non-profit association whose purpose according to its statutes is to promote nature conservation, environmental protection or outdoor recreation interests. Additionalcriteriaare that the organisation has been active for at least 3 years in Sweden and has at least 100 members or else can show that it has “support from the public”. Thus, ENGOs meeting those criteria are able to defend the public interest according to their statutes, without any further qualification.These criteria have also been used by the courts in areas to which ENGO standing rights have been expanded in case law. As the administrative procedure in Sweden in all instances is reformatory, the starting point is that the court scrutinizes every part of the appealed decision. Once the applicant is allowed to appeal, the scope of review is complete, meaning that s/he can invoke all kinds of interests in favour of the cause. No arguments are precluded. Thus, the appellant can plead any private or public interest in the case irrespective of the instance of appeal in a higher level of administration or in the courts. Moreover, all kinds of administrative decisions can be brought to the administrative courts by way of appeal, including administrative omissions. Any member of the public who is affected by a certain activity can notify the supervisory authority and ask for administrative action in his or her interest. In this situation, the authority is obliged to issue a decision on the case, be it to take action or not. That decision is appealable using the route described above, and accordingly, the matter will be dealt with in substance by the environmental courts. Thus, there does not exist any administrativediscretion in Sweden, at least as a general rule.The environmental procedure in Sweden is as a general rule free of charge. There are no court fees, no obligation to pay the opponents’ costs, no bonds to be paid for obtaining injunctive relief, or other costs to be paid, irrespective of whether the case is on adminis-trative appeal or goes to court. As the ultimate responsibility to investigate the case lies with the administration and the environmental courts – which both have technicians par-ticipating inthe decision-making – neither are there any witness or experts’ fees to be paid. Basically, this makes the environmental procedure cheap and easily accessible to the public. The other side of the coin however is that when applicants want to be represented by counsel or use experts of their own– which may be necessary in complicated cases – they will have to pay out of their own pocket and the costs cannot be remunerated from a losing opponent. It is alsonoteworthy that there is no obligation to use lawyers in court, not evenatthe higher judicial levels.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Uppsala: , 2015
Series
www.jandarpo.se/In English
National Category
Law (excluding Law and Society)
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-270407 (URN)
Available from: 2015-12-28 Created: 2015-12-28 Last updated: 2015-12-28
Darpö, J. & Epstein, Y. (2015). Thrown to the Wolves: Sweden Once Again Flouts EU Standards on Species Protection and Access to Justice. Nordisk miljörättslig tidskrift (1), 7-20.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Thrown to the Wolves: Sweden Once Again Flouts EU Standards on Species Protection and Access to Justice
2015 (English)In: Nordisk miljörättslig tidskrift, ISSN 2000-4273, E-ISSN 2000-4273, no 1, 7-20 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Controversy continues over the return of the wolf to the Swedish landscape. Decisions to allow the licensed hunting of Sweden’s fragile wolf population in violation of the EU’s Habitats Directive have repeatedly been quashed by the Swedish administrative courts. In response, the law was changed: it is no longer possible to appeal those decisions to the courts. This article examines the decision to make impossible the judicial review of Sweden’s implementation of EU species protection law in light of the Aarhus Convention and in light of the EU law principles of useful effect and effective judicial protection. We conclude that while the access to justice requirements of the Aarhus Convention are likely fulfilled, the fact that Sweden’s hunting decisions pursuant to the Habitats Directive are no longer reviewable by a court contravenes EU law.

National Category
Law
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-267868 (URN)
Available from: 2015-11-27 Created: 2015-11-27 Last updated: 2017-12-01Bibliographically approved
Darpö, J. (2015). Vindkraft, fåglar och brister i höjden. : Om artskyddet vid prövningen av vindkraftverk.. Nättidningen JPMiljönet 2015-10-15.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Vindkraft, fåglar och brister i höjden. : Om artskyddet vid prövningen av vindkraftverk.
2015 (Swedish)In: Nättidningen JPMiljönet 2015-10-15Article in journal (Other academic) Published
Abstract [sv]

Frågan omhur ordet ”avsiktligt” bör tolkas i artskyddssammanhang blev omdiskuterad efter två domar frånMark-och miljööverdomstolen (MÖD)som meddelades i slutet av 2014.Diskussionen gällde om vindkraftenären verksamhet som kan undantas från delar av artskyddet, eftersom verksamheten syftar till att producera elektricitet, inte att döda eller störa fåglar. Därefter har MÖD förtydligat rättsläget genom ett avgörande om en skidanläggning i Härjedalen. I denna artikel –som är uppdelad i två delar –analyserar vi de tre domarna utifrån det internationella regelverket och EU-domstolens rättspraxis kring artskydd. Vår slutsats är att vindkraft –liksom alla andra slags verksamheter –kan innebära ett avsiktligt dödande eller störande av fåglar under vissa förutsättningar. Vi menar också att de tre avgörandena från MÖD ligger ilinje med tidigare praxis, det vill sägaatt artskyddet utgör en precisering av de allmänna hänsynsreglerna i 2 kap. miljöbalken(1998:808). Samtidigt innehållerdomarna skrivningar som gör att det har blivit otydligare hur man inom ramen för tillståndsprövningar ska hantera försiktighetsmått som i sig kräver dispens från artskyddsförordningen (2007:845)vilketvi bedömer vara problematiskt EU-rättsligt.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Stockholm: , 2015
National Category
Law (excluding Law and Society)
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-270406 (URN)
Available from: 2015-12-28 Created: 2015-12-28 Last updated: 2015-12-28
Darpö, J. (2014). Article 9.2 of the Aarhus Convention and EU law. Some remarks on CJEUs case law on access to justice in environmental decision-making.. Journal of European Environmental and Planning Law, 367.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Article 9.2 of the Aarhus Convention and EU law. Some remarks on CJEUs case law on access to justice in environmental decision-making.
2014 (English)In: Journal of European Environmental and Planning Law, 367- p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

One important means for the implementation of the third pillar of the Aarhus Convention into EU law is the provisions on access to justice in the EIA Directive (2011/92). The case-law of the CJEU on those provisions has developed rapidly in the last couple of years. This body of cases has given the concept “access to justice in environmental decision-making” a new meaning and improved the understanding of the requirement for judicial protection under EU environmental law. The aim of this article is to highlight this development and discuss a couple of key issues on access to justice. First, the relationship between “direct effect” and the individuals “rights” and the principles of effectiveness and judicial protection according to EU law is analysed. Thereafter, the meaning of “substantive and procedural legality” and the distinction between general and personal interests in relation to individual’s standing are discussed. The next issue concerns the role of environmental non-governmental organisations. Finally, the concept “courts or tribunals” in environmental decision-making procedures is considered.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Brill Academic Publishers, 2014
National Category
Law
Research subject
Environmental Law
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-236669 (URN)
Available from: 2014-11-20 Created: 2014-11-20 Last updated: 2014-11-20
Darpö, J. (2014). Med lagstiftaren på åskådarplats: Om implementeringen av Århuskonventionen genom rättspraxis. InfoTorg Juridik.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Med lagstiftaren på åskådarplats: Om implementeringen av Århuskonventionen genom rättspraxis
2014 (Swedish)In: InfoTorg JuridikArticle in journal (Other academic) Published
Abstract [sv]

I mitten av februari meddelade Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen dom i det omtalade Änok-målet. Avgörandet är ett riktigt "land mark case" för tillgången till rättslig prövning på miljöområdet och värt att uppmärksamma av flera skäl.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Stockholm: Bisnode, 2014
National Category
Law
Research subject
Environmental Law
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-236666 (URN)
Available from: 2014-11-20 Created: 2014-11-20 Last updated: 2015-06-03Bibliographically approved
Darpö, J. (2014). Med lagstiftaren på åskådarplats: om implementeringen av Århuskonventionen genom rättspraxis. InfoTorg Juridik.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Med lagstiftaren på åskådarplats: om implementeringen av Århuskonventionen genom rättspraxis
2014 (Swedish)In: InfoTorg JuridikArticle in journal (Other academic) Published
Abstract [sv]

I mitten av februari meddelade Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen dom i det omtalade Änok-målet. Avgörandet är ett riktigt "land mark case" för tillgången till rättslig prövning på miljöområdet och värt att uppmärksamma av flera skäl.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Stockholm: Bisnode, 2014
National Category
Law (excluding Law and Society)
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-220412 (URN)
Available from: 2014-03-13 Created: 2014-03-13 Last updated: 2015-06-12Bibliographically approved
Darpö, J. (2014). Tradition och förnyelse på vattenrättens område.  Om mötet mellan gamla tillståndsregimer och moderna miljökrav. . Nordisk miljörättslig tidskrift.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Tradition och förnyelse på vattenrättens område.  Om mötet mellan gamla tillståndsregimer och moderna miljökrav.
2014 (Swedish)In: Nordisk miljörättslig tidskrift, ISSN 2000-4273, E-ISSN 2000-4273Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
www.nmt.se, 2014
National Category
Law
Research subject
Environmental Law
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-236668 (URN)
Available from: 2014-11-20 Created: 2014-11-20 Last updated: 2017-12-05
Organisations

Search in DiVA

Show all publications