Posts Tagged ECLI:NL:RBROT:2018:210
Rechtbank Rotterdam held on 15 March last that 4 ships owned and operated by the Sea Trade concern had to be regarded as waste when they left the port at Rotterdam cq Hamburg (they were eventually beached in a variety of destinations). Not having been notified as waste, their shipment was considered illegal and the concern as well as some of its employees consequently convicted. (Illegal waste shipments being a criminal offense).
The court decided not to refer to the CJEU on the application of the waste definition to ships, as it considered the issue to be acte clair. The court’s review of the legal framework is included in Heading 4.3.4. As such, the analysis does not teach us much about the difficulty of applying the waste definition to international maritime logistics, in particular ship disposal. The court found at a factual level that the owners’ intention to dispose of the ships was clearly established when the ships left the EU, with, it suggested, the facts proving that the intention to dispose was at that moment of such an intensity as to trigger the waste definition.
The court does flag its appreciation for the difficulties. Not only is eventual disposal of hardware such as ships a possibility from the moment of their purchase. Such intention may also be withdrawn, reinstated, modified, at various moments of the ships’ life, fluctuating with market circumstances. Particularly given the criminal nature of the legal discipline here, I find that a very important driver to tread very cautiously and to look for firmer objective factors to establish intent.
Most probably to be continued on appeal.
(Handbook of ) EU Waste law, 2nd ed. 2017, para 1.20 ff. Disclosure: I acted as court expert.
Basel, definition, ECLI:NL:RBROT:2018:210, EVOA, Hong Kong, Hong Kong Convention, https://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/inziendocument?id=ECLI:NL:RBROT:2018:2108&showbutton=true, Rotterdam, Seatrade, ships, Trade, Waste, Waste shipments, Waste shipments Regulation, Zoekresultaat - inzien document ECLI:NL:RBROT:2018:210
- Dutch Supreme Court advisors suggest Court of Appeal judgment upholding State duty of care in climate litigation should stand. 20/09/2019
- Saugmandsgaard ØE on Rome I’s lex societatis exception applied to trusts /’Treuhand’ in Verein für Konsumenteninformation v TVP Treuhand. 19/09/2019
- Weco Projects ASP v Zea Marine Carier GmbH: Court-appointed surveyor’s powers in the light of arbitration. 16/09/2019
- Principles, principles everywhere. First test of the ‘energy solidarity’ principle in Poland v EC (Nordstream /Gazprom). 11/09/2019
- Salvoni v Fiermonte. CJEU confirms quasi-notarial nature of Brussels Ia’s Article 53 certificate, other than for provisional measures. Consumer protection cannot be raised at that stage. Also rejects interpretative force of substantive consumer law rules for jurisdictional issues. 06/09/2019
Also of noteMy Tweets