Search

Search Results

• Public Procurement Issues in the Field of Environmental Liability

  175-188

  Andrea Gyulai-Schmidt

  Views:

  175

  In public procurement, the principle of responsible management of public funds applies (Section 142 of the Public Procurement Act). This does not mean that only the techniques of fast-acting, quasi-abbreviated announcements or accelerated public procurement procedures are preferred, but on the contrary also direct tenders without general public procurement procedures are possible. The basis for efficient and transparent public expenditure at least are public procurement procedures that adhere to minimum procedural deadlines and create competition, i.e. facilitate the participation of as many bidders as possible. On the other hand, remedying environmental damage caused by third parties requires that the award of appropriate protection and remedial measures to the relevant contractors and the associated compliance with public procurement procedures do not cause delays that could contribute to extreme environmental degradation. In these cases, it is necessary to check whether there is a case of extreme urgency (imminent danger) and whether the award procedure can be omitted in whole or in part. In line with the above considerations, the present study, with reference to the Hungarian and EU regulations for public procurement, as well as comparative law with the inclusion of German and Austrian examples, examines whether the Hungarian legislator has additional leeway to prevent and quickly eliminate urgent or permanent serious environmental damage in accordance with procurement law.

• Environmental Liability Law: Environmental Civil Experts’ view

  86-112

  Sándor Fülöp

  Views:

  135

  Environmental liability legislation, both the ELD in Europe and CERCLA in US, is burdened with significant compromises, but even if so, they are too leniently implemented. Moreover, rather scarce data are available on the liability cases and on the status of polluted sites, therefore the system is unable to amend itself. There is no reason to be surprised: expenses of protection or remedy of the polluted sites are enormous, the concerned industries would get into a poor competition position in the market if faced with too stringent liability. In the exceptional cases when their deeds are revealed and enforcement actions start, they still might retreat behind the bastions of limited responsibility of their companies. In such situations public participation is a vital element of any progressive outcomes. In the present study we examine the efforts of J&E, a network of public interest environmental lawyers to contribute to moving out the European environmental liability systems from their stalemate position and enhance their effectiveness.

• Collective Redress in Certain States of Europe

  84-106

  Tamás Jagusztin

  Views:

  158

  Collective redress mechanisms can be seen in almost all of European countries (except Switzerland and Czech Republic for example). The established regulatory solutions are diverse, basically two lines are typical, and mixed systems based on these are created. One is a representative collective claim enforceable to protect the collective interests of the community (public interest). In general, such claims can only be enforced by government bodies designated by a legislator or by associations whose purpose is the protection of those interests. Another type of collective demand assists the homogeneous demands of a group of individuals by taking advantage of the merged action. In these cases, a person is usually validated by the requirements of the group members, who is himself interested in the proceedings because of his own material right.

• Disclosure of the Data of State-owned Companies in Hungary and Germany: Similarities and Differences

  83-101

  Laura De Negri

  Views:

  57

  The article analyses in a comparative manner the way the publication of data works in Hungary and Germany in the case of state-owned companies. The subject of the analysis is furthermore how the transparency of public property is compatible with the functioning of the market and the protection of trade and business secrets. The article devotes special attention to the issue of the relationship between the request for data in the public interest and trade secrets, and, whether the disclosure of such data may be refused on the basis of avoiding potential business damage. Given that the disclosure of data with public interest and its accessibility are inseparable from the freedom of information, the relevant laws in the countries subject to analysis are also presented. The article highlights the exemplary solutions of the German legal system and, finally, compares the similarities and differences in the regulatory concepts of the two legal systems.