男女羞羞视频在线观看,国产精品黄色免费,麻豆91在线视频,美女被羞羞免费软件下载,国产的一级片,亚洲熟色妇,天天操夜夜摸,一区二区三区在线电影
US EUROPE AFRICA ASIA 中文
China / Government

Top court upholds record penalty of $26m for water pollution

By CAO YIN (China Daily) Updated: 2016-01-22 08:24

Top court upholds record penalty of $26m for water pollution

The Supreme People's Court holds a public hearing over the environmental public interest case on the afternoon of Jan 21, 2016.?[Photo provided by the Supreme People's Court]

China's top court rejected on Thursday an application for a new hearing of an environmental public interest case, upholding the original ruling.

The applicant, the Jinhui company in Taizhou, Jiangsu province, appealed the initial ruling that ordered the company and five others to pay more than 160 million yuan ($26 million) in compensation for discharging waste acids into two rivers.

It was the biggest environmental penalty imposed in China arising from a public interest case concerning polluters. It was also the first time that the Supreme People's Court had heard such litigation.

In August 2014, the Taizhou City Environmental Protection Association, a public interest group, sued the six companies in the local intermediate people's court.

The association said the companies sold 25,000 metric tons of waste acids to a firm that did not have the authority to discharge the acids into the rivers. The discharge resulted in serious environmental pollution.

A month later, the intermediate people's court ordered the six defendants to pay more than 160 million yuan to restore the environment.

In December 2014, Jiangsu Provincial High People's Court upheld the verdict.

The Jinhui company's lawyer, Zhao Bing, said during Thursday's application hearing that the rivers were able to purify the pollutants naturally, and that such a large amount of money was not needed to restore the environment.

"My client just sold the acids under a contract signed with the Jiangzhong company that was in charge of dealing with the waste, and did not discharge the acids itself," Zhao said.

But the association said that the Jiangzhong company was not qualified to handle the acids under national discharge regulations, adding that the acids were still dangerous to the environment.

The top court said after hearing arguments from the two sides that the Jinhui company "should be obligated to pay attention to such a contract involving dangerous acids and also has responsibility for the discharge".

Lin Wenxue, the judge responsible for the case, said, "Although the rivers can self-purify such a discharge, it still damaged the surrounding environment."

Zhou Ke, a law professor at Renmin University of China, said, "The case heard by the top court will guide grassroots courts on how to deal with such litigation."

Wang Shuyi, an environmental law professor at Wuhan University, said the public hearing also showed that Chinese judicial bodies have played their role in environmental protection.

Highlights
Hot Topics
...
主站蜘蛛池模板: 永春县| 丰宁| 壤塘县| 依兰县| 瑞金市| 阿坝县| 湖北省| 库车县| 临潭县| 中牟县| 杭锦后旗| 罗定市| 玛曲县| 阳泉市| 河津市| 阳高县| 公主岭市| 恩施市| 兴和县| 边坝县| 垫江县| 即墨市| 勃利县| 光泽县| 子长县| 正蓝旗| 杂多县| 海淀区| 广平县| 景洪市| 天津市| 陈巴尔虎旗| 嘉荫县| 舒城县| 宁远县| 古丈县| 西峡县| 夏邑县| 大安市| 镇雄县| 博野县| 南充市| 舒兰市| 聂拉木县| 张家口市| 天门市| 松潘县| 信宜市| 朝阳市| 常州市| 东阿县| 四会市| 攀枝花市| 宁都县| 滨海县| 陇西县| 淮阳县| 翁牛特旗| 突泉县| 江门市| 广河县| 南城县| 探索| 林周县| 昂仁县| 北川| 镇沅| 曲周县| 桃园县| 施甸县| 平果县| 叶城县| 红原县| 中牟县| 昔阳县| 泾阳县| 桓台县| 巴青县| 新乐市| 乌鲁木齐县| 遂平县| 宜春市|