纏訟42年水泥廠污染案 遭判「不適用集體訴訟」
加拿大兩大環境團體的律師指出，魁北克上訴法庭27日做出的一項判決，可能損及日後公民針對環境滋擾事件提出集體訴訟的權利，因此他們決定向加國最高法院提出介入訴訟。
隸屬於環境正義（Ecojustice）與柏藍格（Lauzon Bélanger）律師事務所的代理諮詢律師，代表魁北克環境法律中心及加拿大地球之友兩個團體，介入聖羅倫斯水泥公司（St. Lawrence Inc. v. Barrette）的環境案件。這場由魁北克包泊區（Beauport)水泥工廠周圍居民所發起的集體訴訟，纏訟至今已達42年。
周遭居民決定對聖羅倫斯公司提告，是因為水泥工廠對他們造成許多困擾。水泥廠數十年來排放粉塵，覆蓋累積在房舍、土地與車輛上，塵埃、氣味與噪音等許多問題，讓民眾苦不堪言。
水泥粉塵含有微小的矽晶體，可進入人體呼吸道。衛生單位表示，這些石英、或類似玻璃的礦物一旦被吸進肺部，會劃出許多細微的傷口，讓組織結痂，逐漸影響肺部吸收氧氣的功能。即使停止吸入粉塵，損害仍會持續，甚至長達數年，而且無法改善。
魁北克最高法院原本支持居民的主張，裁定聖羅倫斯水泥應支付1500萬美元的賠償。但上訴法庭卻推翻這項判決，認為環境滋擾主張不應提起集體訴訟程序，有權提告者僅限於房屋所有權人，不包括承租者或屋主的配偶與子女。不過上訴法庭仍然判定水泥公司有過失，必須保持污染控管設備在最佳狀態之下運作。
許多法律觀察人士對上訴法庭的判決感到訝異，環境正義律師事務所認為，這與鼓勵追求公義的原則背道而馳。負責此案的事務所律師艾莫斯（Will Amos）表示，「環境滋擾事件循集體訴訟途徑解決的機會，一但受到限制，加拿大的普羅公民就失去一項保護環境的重要工具。」
艾莫斯指出，在工業排放法規無法為居民提供適當保護，或執法單位無法有效落實法律規範的時候，公民如何使用自身權利，對環境滋擾提起訴訟以保護環境，牽涉到各種廣泛議題，而本案正是非常好的例子。
加拿大地球之友總裁奧立瓦斯奇（Beatrice Olivastri）則指出，「讓公民能透過集體訴訟來解決環境問題，對國家非常重要，這也是我們決定介入本次訴訟的原因。」
Lawyers for two environmental groups intervened at the Supreme Court of Canada Thursday, challenging a Quebec Court of Appeal decision that could impair the rights of citizens to launch class action lawsuits over environmental nuisances.
Represented by pro bono counsel from the law firm Ecojustice and the firm of Lauzon Bélanger, the Quebec Environmental Law Centre and Friends of the Earth Canada intervened in the case of St. Lawrence Cement Inc. v. Barrette.
The lawsuit began as a class action brought by neighbors of a Quebec City cement factory in the Beauport district, which operated for 42 years.
The neighbors instituted a class action against St. Lawrence Cement for neighborhood disturbances resulting from the operation of the cement plant. The evidence showed that for decades the residents had suffered considerable annoyances, such as the deposit of cement residues on houses, land and cars as well as many problems involving dust, odors and noise.
Concrete dust contains respirable crystalline silica, microscopic shards of quartz and similar glass-like minerals that lacerate the lungs at the molecular level, forming scar tissue that progressively reduces the lungs' ability to absorb oxygen, health officials say. The process continues to develop after exposure has stopped, even appearing years later, and is irreversible.
The Quebec Superior Court upheld the neighbors' claim and ordered St. Lawrence Cement to pay $15 million in damages.
But the Quebec Court of Appeal reversed this decision, concluding that nuisance claims could not be brought as a class action proceeding, and that the right to bring such claims was limited to property owners, as opposed to tenants or the spouses and children of owners.
Still, the appellate court found the company was at fault since it was obligated to keep its pollution control equipment in "optimal" working order.
The Court of Appeal's decision surprised many legal observers, as it runs counter to the principle of enhanced access to justice, according to Ecojustice.
"By limiting the availability of the class action procedure in environmental nuisance cases, an important environmental protection tool for ordinary Canadians was undermined," said Will Amos, Ecojustice staff lawyer who argued the case.
Amos says the case highlights the broader issue of how and when individual citizens can bring private nuisance lawsuits to protect their environment, in particular when industrial emission regulations provide inadequate protection for neighboring homes, or when government regulators do not effectively enforce the law.
Beatrice Olivastri, CEO of Friends of the Earth Canada, said, "The reason we have intervened in this, we think its of national importance for citizens to be able to address nuisance issues thru class action suits.”
全文及圖片詳見：ENS
作者
In my healing journey and learning to attain the breath awareness, I become aware of the reality that all the creatures of the world are breathing the same breath. Take action, here and now. From my physical being to the every corner of this out of balance's planet.
