Search Climate Insights Directory
2 results
AMICUS CURIAE SUBMISSION
The submission by Alburnus Maior, ICDER, and Greenpeace Romania contends that Gabriel Resources Ltd. failed to conduct adequate due diligence on the feasibility of its gold mining project in Roșia Montană and ignored the rights of local communities. The authors argue the company violated the right to adequate housing through coercive land acquisition and failed to obtain necessary urban, archaeological, and environmental permits required by Romanian and EU law. They further claim the company attempted to bypass these legal requirements through a proposed 'special law' and engaged in misconduct to silence critics. Consequently, the submission argues the tribunal lacks jurisdiction under the Achmea precedent regarding EU law and that the company's unlawful conduct disqualifies its investment from protection under the Canada-Romania BIT.
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.
Document type: Legal commentary
AMICUS CURIAE SUBMISSION
The submission by Alburnus Maior, ICDER, and Greenpeace Romania contends that Gabriel Resources Ltd. failed to conduct adequate due diligence on the feasibility of its Roșia Montană gold mine and ignored the rights of local communities. The authors argue the company violated the right to adequate housing through coercive land acquisition and failed to obtain necessary urban, archaeological, and environmental permits required by Romanian and EU law. They further claim the company attempted to bypass these legal requirements via a proposed 'special law' and used intimidation and misleading media campaigns to silence opposition. Legally, the submission asserts that the tribunal lacks jurisdiction because the dispute necessitates the interpretation of EU law, citing the Achmea precedent, and that the company's unlawful conduct disqualifies its activities as a protected investment under the Canada-Romania BIT.
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.
Document type: Legal commentary