Abstract
The text aims to illustrate the theme of administrative tools and compensatory damage through which the Italian legal system deals with historical pollution, whether strictly environmental or with respect to the capital and non-pecuniary harms caused to third parties. In this sense, after a first overview of the heterogeneity of the means by which the administration can carry out policies of environmental governance, this work examines the conditions and procedures for imposing on the responsible persons for historical contamination remediation , safety operations, and, in some cases, compensation for the damage caused to the environment as a common good. This examination is conducted with particular attention to the problems related to the time factor and the difficulty in balancing the principles of legality and legal certainty with the necessary execution of the “polluter-pays” principle. The text, finally, examines the remedies granted to third parties harmed by historical pollution, and the hypothesis of civil and accounting responsibility which an administration and its officials may incur in case of incorrect management of environmental governance functions.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
Numerous planning instruments have immediate environmental effects: for instance, regional landscape plans, spatial plans of provincial coordination, hydrogeological plans, programs for localization of strategic infrastructure, plans for water protection, for waste management, for noise recovery; and also plans for the rehabilitation of areas with a high risk of environmental damage or for the prevention of industrial risks.
- 2.
The requirement is for verification every five years, and this is to be undertaken using a single technical standard within the European Union: the Best Available Techniques (BAT) published by the European IPPC Bureau, with a BAT Reference Report (BREF).
- 3.
These authorizations are regulated by different laws, have different natures and release processes, and, because they usually require complex pre-assessments, must be concluded by the release of an express measure (see CJEC, 28 February 1991, C-360/87 and CJEC, 6 November 2008, C-381/07; Portaluri 2014).
- 4.
The double threshold system does not apply to the air matrix, which continues to be protected notably by limiting potentially harmful emissions (Art. 268, Para. 1, Lett. (a) of the Environment Code) or the commercialization and use of polluting products (automobiles, boilers, etc.).
- 5.
According to the case, “the competent authority must have plausible evidence capable of justifying its presumption, such as the fact that the operator’s installation is located close to the pollution found and that there is a correlation between the pollutants identified and the substances used by the operator in connection with his activities. Where the competent authority has such evidence, it is thus in a position to establish a causal link between the operators’ activities and the diffuse pollution found. In accordance with Article 4(5) of Directive 2004/35, such a situation therefore falls within the scope of the directive, unless those operators are able to rebut that presumption” (CJEU, 9 March 2010, C-378/08).
- 6.
Judgment concerning the legitimacy of intervention on a site in Trieste contaminated by the operation of a refinery closed in 1965 and having maintained a deposit of products until the early 1980s.
- 7.
On the possibility of application of the remediation process also to historical pollution that occurred before the entry into force of environmental regulations, see Balloriani 2016, p. 320, according to which there is continuity between the general rules governing civil liability and those relating to remediation.
- 8.
Sites affected by asbestos mining and production activities are always treated as sites of national interest (Art. 252, Para. 2-bis TUA).
- 9.
In this regard, see the special report No. 23/2012 of the European Court of Auditors, Have EU Structural Measures Successfully Supported the Regeneration of Industrial and Military Brownfield Sites?, www.europarl.europa.eu.
- 10.
Pursuant to Art. 300 TUA, environmental damage is: (1) any significant and measurable deterioration, direct or indirect, of a natural resource or the utility provided by the latter (§ 1); (2) deterioration, in comparison with the original conditions, caused: (a) to protected species and natural habitats, as well as flora and fauna, as well as protected natural areas; (b) to inland waters, by actions that significantly adversely affect the ecological, chemical, and/or quantitative status or ecological potential of the waters concerned, as defined in Directive 2000/60/EC with the exception of adverse effects where applicable as in Art. 4, § 7 of that directive; (c) to coastal waters and those included in the territorial sea by the above acts, even if carried out in international waters; (d) to the ground, by any contamination that creates a significant risk of adverse effects, even indirectly, to human health due to the introduction into the ground, on or under the land, of substances, preparations, organisms, or microorganisms harmful to the environment (§ 2).
As clarified by Castronovo 2013, p. 1027, the two figures of environmental damage have a special relationship between them, such that the second figure specifies the first without exhausting it, but identifying its essential nucleus.
- 11.
This is a more restrictive rule that concerns any environmental damage, regardless of whether it has exceeded the threshold value, when it derives from acts that are intentional or negligent and in violation of laws or administrative measures.
The rule provides that: (1) any malicious or negligent act in violation of the law or action taken based on the law that would jeopardize the environment, causing damage to it, by altering, spoiling, or destroying in whole or in part, obliges the perpetrator to pay compensation to the State; (2) for matters referred to in § 1 the jurisdiction belongs to the ordinary courts, without excluding the Court of Auditors, in Art. 22 of the Decree of the President of the Republic of 10 January 1957, no. 3; (3) action to compensate for environmental damage, although practiced in the criminal courts, is to be promoted by the state as well as by local authorities as regards the assets covered by the harmful act.
- 12.
According to Prati 2008, p. 172, in the absence of transitional arrangements, the ordinary rules of tort apply also to environmental damage which materialized after the repeal of Art. 18 of Law 349/1986, if it is the result of earlier emissions, events, or incidents.
- 13.
On the occasion of the environmental disaster caused by ICMESA in Seveso, for example, the psychological damage (stress, worry) has been compensated even in the absence of physical injury or other financial loss, on the condition of proof that a psychological disturbance had taken place. In this regard, it has been noted that the discretion in the quantifying of moral damage and the connection to the crime have given the compensation a punitive nature (Patti 2013, p. 135).
References
Balloriani, M. (2016). L’obbligo di bonifica dei siti inquinati e il risarcimento in forma specifica del danno ambientale. Alcune questioni aperte sugli inquinamenti storici. In F.G. Scoca & F. Di Sciascio (Eds.), Le proprietà pubbliche. Tutela, valorizzazione e gestione. Napoli: Editoriale Scientifica.
Bonelli, F. (2014). Il risarcimento del danno all’ambiente dopo le modifiche del 2009 e del 2013 al T.U. 152/2006. Diritto del commercio internazionale, 1, 3.
Castronovo, C. (2013). Il danno all’ambiente rivisitato. Vita Notarile, 3, 1029.
Cingano, V. (2013). Bonifica e responsabilità per danno all’ambiente nel diritto amministrativo. Padova: Cedam.
Comporti, G. D. (2011). La responsabilità per danno ambientale. Rivista quadrimestrale di Diritto dell’Ambiente, 1, 2.
Dell’Anno, P. (2014). Ambiente (Diritto Amministrativo). In P. Dell’Anno & E. Picozza (Eds.), Trattato di diritto dell’ambiente. Cedam: Padova.
Giannini, M. S. (1973). «Ambiente»: saggio sui diversi suoi aspetti giuridici. Rivista trimestrale di diritto pubblico, 1973, 15.
Giracca M.P. (2014). Danno ambientale. In R. Ferrara & M.A.Sandulli (Eds.), Trattato di diritto dell’ambiente, vol. I, Milano: Giuffrè.
Grassi, S. (2014). La bonifica dei siti contaminati. In R. Ferrara & M.A.Sandulli (Eds.), Trattato di diritto dell’ambiente, vol. II, Milano: Giuffrè.
Patti, S. (2013). Danno ambientale e risarcimento del patema d’animo. In F. Busnelli & S. Patti (Eds.), Danno e responsabilità civile. Torino: Giappichelli.
Peres, F. (2012). Il risarcimento del danno all’ambiente nella matrice terreno e la disciplina per la bonifica dei siti contaminati. In G. Perulli (Ed.), Il danno ambientale. Torino: Giappichelli.
Portaluri, P.L. (2014). Autorizzazioni ambientali: tipologie e principi. In R. Ferrara & M.A.Sandulli (Eds.), Trattato di diritto dell’ambiente, vol. II, Milano: Giuffrè.
Prati, L. (2008). Il danno ambientale e la bonifica dei siti inquinati. La nuova disciplina dopo il d.lgs. 152/2006 e la sua riforma. Assago: Ipsoa.
Renna, M. (2016). Responsabilità della Pubblica Amministrazione. Enciclopedia del Diritto. Annali (Vol. IX). Milano: Giuffrè.
Renna, M. (2012). I principi in materia di tutela dell’ambiente. Rivista quadrimestrale di Diritto dell’Ambiente, 1–2, 62.
Salanitro, U. (2009). Il danno ambientale. Roma: Aracne.
Schlitzer, E. F., & Imposimato, C. (2012). L’ambiente e la sua tutela risarcitoria. In G. Perulli (Ed.), Il danno ambientale. Torino: Giappichelli.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Miccichè, C. (2017). Italian Administrative Regulation and Responsibility for Historical Pollution. In: Centonze, F., Manacorda, S. (eds) Historical Pollution. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56937-6_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56937-6_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-56936-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-56937-6
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)