JOINT POST-HEARING SUBMISSION BY AMICI TO THE TRIBUNAL

Report an error

Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

The amici argue that the Tribunal should recognize legitimate environmental measures as non-expropriatory under the police powers rule, similar to public health measures. They contend that international law has evolved to include environmental protection within the state's regulatory authority, citing precedents from the ICJ, WTO, and other NAFTA tribunals to support the view that non-discriminatory regulations protecting the environment do not constitute a compensable taking.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • The amici argue that bona fide environmental protection measures are non-expropriatory under international law, asserting that there is "no limitation on the concept of the police powers that excludes bona fide environmental protection measures" from its scope.
  • The document contends that while older legal formulations focused on "public health, safety and morals," international law has evolved to recognize that "legitimate non-health-based environmental protection measures would also fall within a modern formulation of the police powers rule."
  • The submission cites the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the Gabcikovo/Nagymaros Case and the WTO Appellate Body in the United States – Shrimp case as evidence that international law must adjust to the "rise of environmental protection as part of the fabric of domestic and international law."
  • The amici maintain that recognizing environmental measures as police powers does not eliminate compensation for the actual transfer of property titles, noting that while regulatory measures are non-compensable, the "taking of land to create a national park" would still require compensation.

Cite the original document

APA
Center for International Environmental Law (2004). JOINT POST-HEARING SUBMISSION BY AMICI TO THE TRIBUNAL. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Methanex_PHSub_29June04.pdf
Chicago
Center for International Environmental Law. JOINT POST-HEARING SUBMISSION BY AMICI TO THE TRIBUNAL. 2004. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Methanex_PHSub_29June04.pdf.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |author=Center for International Environmental Law |title=JOINT POST-HEARING SUBMISSION BY AMICI TO THE TRIBUNAL |date=29 June 2004 |url=https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Methanex_PHSub_29June04.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{centerforinternationalenvironmentallaw2004joint, author = {{Center for International Environmental Law}}, title = {{JOINT POST-HEARING SUBMISSION BY AMICI TO THE TRIBUNAL}}, institution = {Center for International Environmental Law}, year = {2004}, month = jun, url = {https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Methanex_PHSub_29June04.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated