header-logo header-logo

15 February 2007
Issue: 7260 / Categories: Legal News , EU , Environment
printer mail-detail

Brussels to set environmental crime agenda

News

A range of environmental crimes could be introduced across the EU, with sentencing levels set by Brussels.

A proposed European Commission Directive would set fines and jail terms for nine offences, and assign minimum levels of punishment for the most serious of these.

The Commission wants to ensure criminal sanctions are consistent across the EU so that those who commit environmental crimes cannot take advantage of more lenient areas. For example, the Dutch government is currently conducting a criminal investigation into the alleged dumping of chemical waste in the Ivory Coast by a Dutch-owned company, in which 10 people died and hundreds fell ill, but in some EU countries this would not be possible.

Franco Frattini, the Commission’s vice president responsible for justice, freedom and security, says: “The proposed directive is crucial to avoid criminals profiting from the existing discrepancies in member states’ criminal law systems which damage the European environment. We cannot allow safe-havens of environmental crime inside the EU.”

The government says that although legislation is already in place in the UK to ensure that citizens and companies are held responsible for such crimes—ranging from those involving death or injury to the illegal disposal of waste—there is clearly a need to ensure that all member states effectively enforce environmental offences.

A Home Office spokeswoman adds: “It should not be the case that serious polluters can move around the EU in order to avoid facing penalties. This proposal from the European Commission is the starting point for future negotiations and UK ministers will have a full opportunity to determine how environmental offences are penalised across the EU. We will seek to ensure the legislation is both necessary and proportionate and clearly supported by the evidence.”

Under the proposed directive, member states would be required to ensure that a range of activities, such as the illegal shipment of waste and unlawful trade in endangered species or in ozone-depleting substances, already prohibited by EU or national legislation are considered criminal offences, when committed intentionally or with serious negligence.

Member states would have to impose custodial sentences of at least five years or financial penalties on offending companies of at least €750,000 for particularly serious crimes, such as those that have resulted in death or serious injury.

Issue: 7260 / Categories: Legal News , EU , Environment
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll