LL.M./M.C.L.

, 2/3 Year Course III Term Course

[2009-10]

Paper – LM – 3020 : Environmental Law

Note : 1. The following course content should not be treated as exhaustive. The
questions may be set from any topic which the examiner feels relevant to the subject.
2. There shall be one written examination of three hours’ duration in each subject
at the end of each Term. One question paper shall be set in each of the subjects
prescribed for study and examination. Each paper shall carry 100 marks out of which 20
marks will be for valuation of term paper and 80 marks for written examination. The
minimum pass marks in each subject shall be 50%.
3. Every student of this course is required to present a paper in the class for
discussion on a topic assigned by the concerned teacher. No student shall be permitted
to appear in the examination unless a certificate is issued by the teacher that the paper
presented by the student was to his satisfaction.

1. INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW

A. INTERNATIONAL MEASURES TO PROJECT GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT
sic utere tuo ut alienum non laedas
Trail Smelter Arbitration Case, 33 AJIL (1939), 182; 35 AJIL (1941) 684
UN Conference on Human Environment (UNCHE), 1972
— Stockholm Declaration, 1972; Action Plan
World Charter for Nature, 1982
Montreal Protocol to Prevent the Depletion of Ozone Layer, 1987 as amended;
Multilateral Fund
Rotterdam Convention on Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous
Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade (1998).
UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), 1992.
- Rio Declaration, 1992
- UN Convention on Biological Diversity, 1992; Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety,
2000 – Biosafely Clearly House
- UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, 1992; Kyoto Protocol, 1997 and
beyond – Clean Development Mechanism, Emission Trading, Joint
Implementation
- Agenda 21
- Forest Principles, 1992
Convention on Access to information, Public Participation in Decision-making and
Access to Justice in Environmental Matters, 1998 (Aarhus Convention)
 2

B. INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL INSTITUTIONS

United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
United National Development Programme (UNDP)
Global Environment Facility (GEF)
World Conservation Union (IUCN)
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)

II. SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

A. CONCEPT AND SCOPE
Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED), OUR
COMMON FUTURE, (Brundtland Report), 1987.
Caring for Earth Document
World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD), 2002 (Johannesburg Summit)
- Plan of Implementation, Johannesburg Declaration
B ENVIRONMENTAL PRINCIPLES
- Precautionary Principle
- Polluter Pays Principle
- Inter-generational Equity
- Intra-generational Equity
- Common but Differentiated Responsibilities
C IMPLEMENTATION OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
International Measures
- UN Commission on Sustainable Development, 1992
- WTO Committee on Trade and Environment National Measures
- Implementation of Sustainable Development in India

III. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTITUTIONALISM

A. RIGHT TO ENVIRONMENT
Human Right to Environment v. Right to Development; World Charter for Nature,
1982.
Constitutional operationalisation of Fundamental Right to Pollution Free
Environment – Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21, 48-A and 51-A (g) of the Constitution
Environmental Law Making – Parliamentary power under Article 253 to amend law
made under Article 252.
Constitutional Status of Fundamental Environmental Principles: Precautionary
Principle, Polluter Pays Principle, Inter-generational Equity, Intra-generational
Equity, Public Trust Doctrine.
B. ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
Access to Environmental Justice
 3

Environmental remedies – Administrative, Statutory and Constitutional Remedies

Judicial activism – challenges, legitimacy and limits

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL LEGAL FRAMEWORK

A. LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974; The Air (Prevention and
Control of Pollution) Act, 1981; The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986; The Public
Liability Insurance Act, 1991; The National Environmental Tribunal Act, 1995; The
National Environmental Appellate Authority Act, 1997; The Wildlife (Protection)
Act, 1972 as amended in 2002; The Indian Forest Act, 1927; The Forest
(Conservation) Act, 1980; The Biological Diversity Act, 2002 (18 of 2003).
B. TOOLS FOR ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION:
Environmental Impact Assessment, Environmental Audit, Public Hearing
C. ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE OF ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS
Command and Control regime: Strengths and Weaknesses

V. ENVIRONMENTAL GOVERNANCE
A. Policy Instruments
Environmental Policy Instruments
- The National Forest Policy, 1988
- The National Water Policy, 2002
- The Wildlife Conservation Strategy, 2002
- The National Environment Policy, 2006
B. ENVIRONMENTAL DECISION MAKING
Access to Information, Public participation
C. ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING FOR SUSTAINABLE URBAN AND RURAL
ENVIRONMENT
- Master Plans, Zoing, Health and Sanitation
- 73rd and 74th Amendments to the Constitution
- Displacement, Resettlement and Rehabilitation

VI. ENVIRONMENTAL LIABILITY

Criminal Liability
Tortious Liability – Vicarious Liability, Absolute Liability, Deep Pocket Theory,
Multinational Corporate Liability
State Liability
Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991
National Environmental Tribunal Act, 1995
 4

Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes

and their Disposal, 1989; Basel Protocol on Liability and Compensation, 1999
Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, 2001
The Hazardous Wastes (Management and Handling) Rules, 1989 as amended in 2000
and 2003.
VII. ENVIRONMENTAL REFORMS
Environmental Courts – Law Commission 186th Report on Proposal to Constitute
Environment Courts (2003)
Eco-labelling
Incentives for compliance
Public Disclosure
Pollution Charge
Corporate Responsibility

RECOMMENDED READINGS
1. Jane Holder and Maria Lee, Environmental Protection, Law and Policy: Texts and
Materials (2nd ed., 2007) Cambridge University Press
2. Ben Richardson and Stephan Wood (Eds.), Environmental Law and Sustainability:
A Reader, (2006) Hart Publishing.
3. Gurdip Singh, Environmental Law in India (2005) Macmillan.
4. Shyam Diwan and Armin Rosencranz, Environmental Law and Policy in India –
Cases, Materials and Statutes (2nd ed., 2001) Oxford University Press.
5. P. Leelakrishnam, Environmental Law in India (2nd ed., 2005) LexisNexis
Butterworth.
6. Patricia Birnie and Alen Boyle, International Law and the Environment (2nd ed.,
2002), Oxford University Press.
7. Philippe Sands, Principles of International Environmental Law: Frameworks,
Standards and Implementation.(2nd ed., 2003) Cambridge University Press
8. Stuart Bell & Donald Me Gillivray, Environmental Law – The Law and Policy
Relating to the Protection of the Environment (6th ed., 2006) Oxford University
Press.
9. Bharat H. Desai, Institutionalizing International Environmental Law (2004)
Transnational Publishers
10. S. Colye and K. Morrow, The Philosophical Foundations of Environmental Law:
Property, Rights and Nature (2004) Hart Publishing.

Articles
1. Anthony Ogus and Carolyn Abbot, “Sanctions for Pollution: Do we have the Right
Regime?” 14 Journal of Environmental Law 283 (2002).
2. Arvind Hasrofia, “Environemtal Protection and Sustainable Development: Exploring
the Dynamics of Ethics and Law”, 49 JILI 30 (2007)
 5

3. B.C. Nirmal, “Overview of the Biosafety Protocol”, 46 JILI 373 (2003)

4. Bharat H. Desai, “UNEP: A Global Environmental Authority?”, Environment Policy
and Law, 36/3-4 137 (2006)
5. Carol Harlow, “Public Law and Popular Justice”, 65 Modern Law Review 1 (2002)
6. Christopher D. Stone, “Common but Differentiated Responsibilities in International
Law”, Vol. 98, No. 2 The American Journal of International Law 276-301 (2004)
7. Daniel C. Esty, “Bridging the Trade-Environment Divide”, Journal of Economic
Perspectives, Vol, 15, No. 3, pp. 113-130
8. Dinah Shelton, The Links between International Human Rights Guarantees and
Environmental Protection, University of Chicogo, Center for International Studies,
(2004)
9. Elisa Morgera, “An Update on the Aarhus Convention and its Continued Global
Relevance”, 14 Review of European Community & International Environmental Law
138 (2005)
10. Elisa Morgera, “From Stockholm to Johannesburg: From Corporate Responsibility to
Corporate Accountability for the Global Protection of the Environment?” 13 Review
of European Community & International Environmental Law 214 (2004)
11. Elizabeth Fisher, “Is the Precautionary Principle Sustainable?”, 13 Journal of
Environmental Law 315 (2001)
12. Francesco Sindco and Joyeeta Gupta, “Moving the Climate Change Regime Further
through a Hydrogen Protoco”, 13 Review of European Community and International
Environmental Law 175 (2004).
13. Gianluca Rubagotti, “The Clean Development Mechanism: Establishing A
Regulatory Framework to favour Climate Friendly Investments”, 46 Indian Journal
of International Law 212 (2006)
14. Gurdip Singh, “Human Rights to Sustainable Development: An Indian Perspective”,
3 (2) Soochow Law Journal 53-89 (2006)
15. Gurdip Singh, “The Role of Equity in Sustainable Development: A Conceptual
Enquiry”, X-XI NCLJ 17 (2005-2006)
16. James Cameron, The Precautionary Principle, in Gary P. Sampson, W. Bradnee
Chambers (ed.), Trade, Environment and the Millennium, United Nations University
Press (2002)
17. Javaid Talib, “Constitutionalising the Problem of Environment”, 47 JILI 522 (2005).
18. Joy Hyvarinen, “The 2005 World Summit: UN Reform, Security, Environment and
Development”, 15 Review of European Community & International Environmental
Law 1 (2006)
19. Jutta Brunnee, “Of Sense and Sensibility: Reflections on International Liability
Regimes as Tools for Environmental Protection”, 53 International Comparative Law
Quarterly 351 (2004)
20. Laurence Boisson de Chazournes, “The Global Environment Facility (GEF): A
Unique and Crucial Institution”, 14 Review of European Community & International
Environmental Law 193 (2005)
 6

21. Lavanya Rajamani, “From Stockholm to Johannesburg: The Anatomy of Dissonance

in the International Environmental Dialogue”, 12 Review of European Community &
International Environmental Law 23 (2003)
22. Lord Justice Carnwath, “Judicial Protection of the Environment: At Home and
Abroad”, 16 Journal of Environmental Law 315 (2001)
23. M Lee and C. Abbot, “The Usual Suspects? Public Participation Under the Aarhus
Convention”, 66 Modern Law Review 80 (2003)
24. M. Pallemaerts, “International Law and Sustainable Development: Any Progress in
Johannesburg?”, 12 Review of European Community and International Environment
Law I (2003)
25. Mark Geistfeld, “Implementing the Precautionary Principle”, 31 Environmental Law
Reporter 11326 (2001).
26. Mike Fentuck, Precautionary Maybe, but What’s the Principle? The Precautionary
Principle, The Regulation of Risk, and the Public Domain Journal of Law and Society
371 (2005).
27. N.S. Khamboj, Hazardous Industries: Policy and the Law, 46 Indian Journal of
International Law 449 (2004).
28. Nils Meyer-Ohlendorf, Would a United Nations Environment Organization Help to
Achieve the Millennium Development Goals? 15 Review of European Community &
International Environmental Law 23 (2006).
29. Richard J. Ferris Jr., et al. International Environmental Law, 38 International Lawyer
477-492 (2004).
30. Sanford E. Gaines, International Trade, Environmental Projection and development
as a Sustainable development Triangle 11 Review of European Community &
International Environmental Law 259 (2002).
REPORTS/DOCUMENTS/DECLARATIONS
1. Law Commission 186th Report on Proposal to Constitute Environment Courts (2003).
2. Stockholm Declaration, available at
http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp? Document ID=97 &
Article ID = 1503
3. Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, available at
http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/documents/agenda21/index.htm
4. Agenda 21, available at http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/documents/agenda21/
index.htm
5. Johannesburg Declaration, available at http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/index.html
6. Johannesburg Plan of Implementation, available at http://www.un.org.esa/sustdev/
documents/ WSSD_POI_PD/English/POIToc.htm
7. Transnational Enforcement of Environmental Law, First Report, International Law
Association, New Delhi Conference (2002).
8. Transnational Enforcement of Environmental Law, Second Report, International Law
Association, Berlin Conference (2004).
 7

9. Caring for Climate: A Guide to Climate Change Convention and Kyoto Protocol,
Climate Change Secretariat (UNFCCC) Bonn, Germany (2005).
10. Manual on Compliance with an Enforcement of Multilateral Environmental
Agreements, UNEP, (2006)

Question Paper 2007

Attempt any FOUR questions. All questions carry EQUAL marks.

1. Critically evaluate the role of Public Interest Litigation. (PIL) in the development of
Environmental Law with particular reference to the evolution of environmental rights.

2. Discuss with the help of decided cases various facts of environmental damage and the
nature and scope of liability therefore. To What extent pollution increase
environmental damage. Bring out inadequacies of the statutory mechanism in this
regard and analyse your suggestions for remedial measures.

3. Critically examine the provisions of the Biological Diversity Act, 2002 keeping in
view its impact on the conservation of biodiversity. Also comment on the initiatives
launched by the scheduled Tribes and other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition
of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 towards strengthening of biodiversity conservation
measures.

4. Discuss various issues connected with the debate on Right to Environmental v. Right
to Development. Are these rights conflicting or a balance can be achieved between
the two? Discuss Indian law vis a vis the international scenario.

5. Discuss salient features of Kyoto Protocol, 1997. Critically examine and comment on
global efforts made towards clean development mechanism and India’s contribution
to that.

6. Write short notes on any three of the following:

(i) Precautionary Principle;

(ii) Doctrine of Public Trust;
(iii)Joint Forest Management;
(iv) Citizen’s Suit;
(v) Environmental Protection and Food Security
 8

Question Paper 2008

Attempt any FOUR questions. All questions carry EQUAL marks.

1. “It is now well settled that the courts, in exercise of their jurisdiction, will not
transgress into the field of policy decision. Whether to have an infrastructural project
or not and what is the type of project to be undertaken and how it has to be executed,
are part of policy-making process and the courts are ill-equipped to adjudicate on a
policy decision so undertaken. The court, no doubt, has a duty to see that in the
undertaking of a decision, no law is violdated and people’s fundamental rights are not
transgressed upon except to the extent permissible under the Constitution. Even then
any challenge to such a policy decision must be before the execution of the project is
undertaken.”

Critically examine the above observations pointing out as to how courts have
balanced between development and environment?

2. Critically examine the role played by the Supreme Court in protecting the
environmental of Delhi pointing out its impact.

3. Evaluate the recommendation of the Law Commission of India regarding the

establishment of environmental courts. In what way these recommendations differ
from the provisions of the National Environment Tribunal Act, 1995?

4. Discuss the salient features of the Aarhus Convention and its global relevance.

5. The Bichri village case present a dismal picture of not only the ineffectiveness of
pollution control laws but also indicates the courage of rogue industries to pay with
judicial orders. Discuss in the light of certain basic principles evolved by the court in
that case.

6. Discuss ‘deep pocket’ theory and ‘public trust’ doctrine. How have they been applied
in India in various cases?