Several news articles passed through my Google reader recently covering the Canadian lawsuit vs. American DTE plants.  This is a new legal tactic that could greatly impact development in Michigan.  Conversely, it could also improve our state’s environment.

Excerpts and links:

Port Huron Times Herald:

Edwards filed the lawsuit against DTE in March. He claims releases from DTE’s St. Clair and Belle River power plants have poisoned “the St. Clair River with dangerous amounts of mercury.” The levels violate Canada’s Fisheries Act, a law more stringent than U.S. environmental laws, Edwards claims in his lawsuit.

This is the first case of a foreign company being charged with violating a Canadian environmental law.

Simons said DTE hasn’t been officially notified of the court hearing.

“We haven’t been served legally,” he said. “They have to serve us in Canada, and we don’t have any operations in Canada.”

Asked if DTE won’t be present at the hearing if they aren’t served, Simons said “pretty much.”

“We’ll see what happens, but right now we haven’t been served,” he said Friday.

Edwards said if DTE representatives don’t show up for the court date, he will ask the court to move ahead with setting a trial date.

“They’re pretty much closing their eyes and pretending it will go away, and that’s just not going to happen,” he said.

http://www.thetimesherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080629/NEWS01/806290303/1002/rss

Detroit News:

After decades of relative cooperation between the nations on either side of the river, border battles over environmental issues are becoming increasingly contentious. DTE officials will appear in a Canadian court July 7 to answer charges concerning how its plants’ mercury emissions have affected Canada’s waters and soils downstream.

DTE’s court date next month will be a rare sight — an American company being tried in Canada — but one that may become more common as both nations move away from traditional bilateral negotiation that was once hailed as a model for the rest of the world.

Some legal experts trace these changes to the Bush White House and what they see as the government’s go-it-alone approach to dealing with the environment. And there are varying ideas about whether the trend is a good thing.

“The Bush administration has been less interested in solving trans-boundary issues through diplomacy and bilateral cooperation than previous administrations,” said Noah Hall, an international law expert at Wayne State University. “They haven’t taken the diplomatic bilateral approach, and people have been left with no other option than to go to court.”

Previously, disputes have been resolved through groups like the International Joint Commission or the Center for Environmental Cooperation, which was established as part of the North American Free Trade Agreement.

“Courts are fairly limited in what they are able to do,” said Marcia Valiante, a professor of environmental law at the University of Windsor. “They play a certain role and have certain remedies they can offer. But not all are going to be at the table to offer their point of view.

“When you negotiate and work out a resolution, there is more balance in terms of meeting everyone’s interests.”

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080627/METRO/806270382/1409/METRO

Trackback URI | Comments RSS