Resources 'Article 9: Access to Justice'
Costs – The Court of Appeal established guidelines for the level of“reciprocal costs caps” for claimants in relation to the granting of Protective Cost Order (PCO). The Court rejected the notion that…
The High Court accepted that the criterion established for the granting of Protective Costs Orders (PCOs) in the Corner House case must in environmental cases be applied flexibly and in the light of…
Costs - The Court of Appeal upheld a High Court costs order for the unsuccessful claimant (Mr Littlewood) to reimburse the defendant up to a maximum of £50,000 on the basis that the figure did not…
Standing for a non-governmental organization – The Cassation Court of Armenia in 2009 stated that Ecoera, an environmental non-governmental organization, has access to justice before the court in…
Individuals and groups of individuals did not have the right to defend public interests in a case concerning illegal lumbering.
Residents of the Kapan city in Armenia brought a collective lawsuit before the court of first instance against Armenian Sewerage Company, requiring the company to provide for wastewater treatment and…
NGO standing - The Administrative Court of Armenia referring to the previous judgments by the Cassation Court and the Constitutional Court stated that environmental NGOs did not have standing before…
The Aarhus Convention includes a broad scope right to actio negatoria of the public concerned. Even if it is not directly enshrined in every specific national legal act, it derives from the…
Individuals cannot challenge the legality of Governmental decisions by a separate action for annulment in administrative court. However, individuals can challenge the legality of Government’s…
Costs – The Court of Appeal held that the “criteria” established in the Corner House case regarding the granting of Protective Costs Orders (PCOs) have general applicability, but must not be dealt…
