The precautionary principle and the burden and standard of proof in European and Dutch environmental law

R. Kegge
{"title":"The precautionary principle and the burden and standard of proof in European and Dutch environmental law","authors":"R. Kegge","doi":"10.7590/187479820X15930701852274","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article offers an analysis of the application of the precautionary principle by European courts and the highest Dutch administrative courts in environmental cases. The precautionary principle is one of the leading principles in EU environmental law, but it has no unequivocal meaning.\n This makes the principle difficult to apply and the allocation of the burden of proof and the level of standard of proof complex matters. In the context of the allocation of the burden of proof, it is essential to make the distinction between the precautionary principle invoked as an obligation\n or a justification for protective measures. A realistic level of standard of proof is also essential. Without a fair allocation of the burden of proof and a realistic level of standard of proof, either the authorities or the appellants may be exposed to unequal procedural positions and unsolvable\n evidentiary problems. Analysis of the case law leads to the conclusion that the principle sometimes is misapplied by the Dutch administrative courts.","PeriodicalId":294114,"journal":{"name":"Review of European Administrative Law","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of European Administrative Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7590/187479820X15930701852274","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This article offers an analysis of the application of the precautionary principle by European courts and the highest Dutch administrative courts in environmental cases. The precautionary principle is one of the leading principles in EU environmental law, but it has no unequivocal meaning. This makes the principle difficult to apply and the allocation of the burden of proof and the level of standard of proof complex matters. In the context of the allocation of the burden of proof, it is essential to make the distinction between the precautionary principle invoked as an obligation or a justification for protective measures. A realistic level of standard of proof is also essential. Without a fair allocation of the burden of proof and a realistic level of standard of proof, either the authorities or the appellants may be exposed to unequal procedural positions and unsolvable evidentiary problems. Analysis of the case law leads to the conclusion that the principle sometimes is misapplied by the Dutch administrative courts.
欧洲和荷兰环境法中的预防原则与举证责任和标准
本文分析了欧洲法院和荷兰最高行政法院在环境案件中对预防原则的适用情况。预防原则是欧盟环境法的主要原则之一,但它没有明确的含义。这使得该原则难以适用,举证责任的分配和举证标准的高低成为复杂的问题。在分配举证责任方面,必须区分援引的预防原则是作为一项义务还是作为保护措施的理由。一个现实水平的证明标准也是必不可少的。没有公平的举证责任分配和现实水平的举证标准,无论是当局还是上诉人都可能面临不平等的程序立场和无法解决的证据问题。通过对判例法的分析,可以发现荷兰行政法院有时会误用这一原则。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信