International civil judicial jurisdiction due to environmental damage: Determination of the harmful event and the extent thereof. The European case

Abstract

After the rule of ubiquity that the ECJ ruled in order to Article 5.3 of the Regulation 44/2001 (Brussels I), in ruling on the case bier/Potash mines of alsace, the burden of internationality was assigned to the defendant. This interpretation was consistent with international principles of environmental protection. However, the resolution of the case bier/Potash mines of alsace, is a case of crossborder damage with easy identification of the unity of action and unity of the consequences. But, in more complex cases, the competent forums generate some problems in order to: a) the distinction between civil torts vs environmental torts, and b) distinction between direct and indirect damage. For these reasons, the ECJ established the limits of the rule of ubiquity. There are an approach from the analysis of the link between the fact that caused the damage and the fact of damage. Our work will interpret those limits and that link from the environmental perspective.