Podaje za Financial Times i innymi zrodlami.

Pierdola Hyla: to bylo na pierwszysch stronach gazet!

3 stycznia sedzina w DC oddalila pozew Puerto Rico przeciwko USA
(rzadowi federalnemu) o zamkniecie poligonu NATO na wyspie Vieques (na
wschod od glownej wyspy). Nb, przed sedzina Kessler lezey pozew
antymafijny rzadu USA przeciwko Philip Morris od wielomiliardowe
odszkodowania za koszta leczenia raka pluc.
Sedzina uznala we wstepnej fazie procesu ze terytorium (kolonia
amerykanska) nie ma podstaw prawnych powolujac sie na federalna ustawe
o kontroli halasu. Nie wiadomo czy prokurator generalny PR bedzie
apelowal oddalenie. Apelacja moze nic nie dac, bo poligon ma i tak byc
zamkniety, i przeniesiony najprawdopodobniej do Orzysza na Mazurach.
Zgadza sie prostytutka AWS Hyla. Mieszkancy Vieques zostali uraczeni
zwiekszona iloscia przpadkow raka w wyniku uzywania radiokatywnej
broni na poligonie. Opis AP ponizej.

Podobne podejscie walki z Wadza pod katem halasu zastosowala pani Ruth
Hatton mieszkajaca kolo lotniska Heathrow pod Londynem. Pozwala ona
rzad UK do Strasburga o naruszenie spokoju domowego (art 8): CASE OF
HATTON AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM. Wyrokiem z 2 pazdziernika
2001 sad w S przywalil pozwanym po 4000 funtow odszkodowania od
premiera bLiara za naruszanie spokoju domowego halasem. Tekst wyroku w
MS Word jest tutaj Pierdola Hyla:
http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/Hudoc1doc2\HEJUD\200110\ha
tton%20-%2036022jv.chb3%2002102001e.doc

Wg The Financial Times, o ktorego istnieniu Prostytutka Hyla nawet nie
wie, opublikowal tajny raport rzadu UK, ktory jest w panice. Raport
rzadowy przewiduje masowe pozwy na kwote do 2 MILIARDOW funtow!!! Taka
moze byc cena za ignorowanie spoleczenstwa. Pozywac beda wg rzadu
wszyscy chetni w calym kraju.

Teraz uwaga dla polskich ekologow. Wyroki w S sa prawnie obowiazujace
w Polandii!!! Tym wyrokiem mozna skutecznie zablokowac kazda
autostrade, czy wrecz istniejace trasy szybkiego ruchu przechodzace
przez miasta i wsie!!!
Poniewaz ta droga nie byla jeszcze testowana w PL moja sugesta jest
nastepujaca.
Wniosek do Sanepidu o zbadanie halasu z istniejacej drogi, najlepiej
kolo domu, lub wniosek przy okazji budowy autostrady o uwzglednienie
halasu.
Sanepid nie ma technicznych mozliwosci zbadania. Nie mniej nalezy
odwolywac sie, bo do S. mozna zaskarzyc tylko po wyczerpaniu krajowej
drogi odwolan. We wnioskach nalezy powolac sie na art 8 bezposrednio.
To owiera droge do S na wypadek oddalenia skarg. najlesza metoda moze
byc kpa, chociaz mozna skorzystac z sadu powszechnego.

Sprawa jak najbardziej kwalifikuje rowniez mieszkancow Orzysza do
blokowania prac poligonu NATO tamze. Kto wie, mozna tez zastosowac
fortel prawny smrodu z wysypisk smieci jako podstawe roszczenia
polskiego rzadu z art. 8. W koncy smrod przenika przez granice
wysypisk, podobnie jak halas z Heathrow.

Precedens polski musi byc dobrze opracowany, zeby nie schrzanic.
Chetnych zapraszam do wspolpracy.

Miro
n...@y...com

Zalaczniki:

#1


Thursday January 3 7:36 AM ET

US Judge Dismisses Vieques Lawsuit

By EUN-KYUNG KIM, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - A federal judge dismissed Puerto
Rico's lawsuit to
stop the Navy from resuming bombing exercises on
the territory's island of
Vieques. The Puerto Rican government said
Wednesday it would appeal.

U.S. District Court Judge Gladys Kessler said that
while the political and policy
issues surrounding the case were complex, ``the
legal issue, in contrast, is
simple and straightforward.''

President Bush (news - web sites) has said the Navy should abondon
its training on Vieques no later than
May 2003. Many in Puerto Rico, however, fear that the U.S. war in
Afghanistan (news - web sites) will
cause him to back away from the pledge.

Puerto Rico filed its lawsuit last April after Gov. Sila Calderon
signed a law banning loud noises along the
island's shores. That law cited the U.S. Noise Control Act of 1972,
which allows states - or, as in Puerto
Rico's case, U.S. territories - to set noise-control laws.

In a ruling issued Monday and released Wednesday, Kessler said she
must dismiss Puerto Rico's case
``for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.'' She said the Noise
Control Act ``does not provide plaintiff a
cause of action to sue in federal district court for the violations
alleged.''

Puerto Rican Justice Secretary Anabelle Rodriguez pledged to appeal.

``We think the decision is erroneous,'' she said at a news
conference Wednesday in San Juan, Puerto
Rico.

``It's sad,'' said Nellie Rodriguez, wife of the Vieques mayor,
Damaso Serrano. ``We'll have to keep
fighting another way; for example, by putting a lot of pressure on
the president.''

Despite Bush's pledge to eventually end naval training on Vieques,
Congress passed legislation last month
to bar the Navy secretary from closing the site until he and top
military leaders certify the availability of a
site or sites that would provide ``equivalent or superior'' levels
of training.

A Pentagon (news - web sites) spokesman would not comment Wednesday
because he had not seen the
ruling.

Dana Perino, a Justice Department (news - web sites) spokeswoman,
said government attorneys were
analyzing the ruling but were pleased with the decision.

Puerto Rican researchers have linked heart disease and other health
problems found among Vieques
residents to naval gunfire and pollutants released during military
exercises.

The Navy denies the allegations.

Opposition to the Navy's use of Vieques intensified after a jet
dropped two errant bombs in 1999 that
killed a civilian Puerto Rican guard.

The Navy owns about half of Vieques, and the bombing range covers
900 acres on the island's eastern
tip.
end




#2


FRONT PAGE - FIRST SECTION: Night flight noise could cost Pounds 2bn
in claims

Financial Times, Jan 7, 2002
By ANDREW PARKER

The government could have to pay up to Pounds 2bn in compensation to
people affected by night flights
out of London's Heathrow airport.

The potential cost has been calculated by the government after the
European court of human rights found
in October that the human rights of residents near Heathrow, the
world's busiest international airport, had
been violated.

Confidential documents obtained by the Financial Times show the
Treasury is backing an appeal against
the judgment because of the cost of compensating up to 500,000 people
whose sleep may have been
disturbed.

The court said the level of noise allowed by regulations on night
flights at Heathrow unfairly breached the
right to respect for private and family life. The eight residents who
brought the legal action were each
awarded Pounds 4,000 in compensation, to be paid by the government.

The Department of Transport has calculated that between 100,000 and
500,000 people living around
Heathrow might be able to claim compensation as a result of the
court's ruling, depending on the level of
noise used as qualifying criteria. It would result in a bill for
taxpayers of between Pounds 400m and
Pounds 2bn.

The bill could be even bigger if people living near other airports,
such as Gatwick and Stansted, took legal
action.

It is unusual for the government to seek leave to appeal against
judgments by the European court because
it deals with the sensitive issue of human rights.

However, Andrew Smith, chief secretary to the Treasury, would
"strongly support" an appeal, according
to a confidential letter by John Prescott, deputy prime minister.

Mr Smith believes the judgment has "significant cost implications",
says Mr Prescott in his letter to
Stephen Byers, transport secretary.

The letter also suggests Margaret Beckett, environment secretary, is
lukewarm in her support for the
appeal.

The government's chances of succeeding "on the merits of the appeal"
are 60-40 in its favour, according
to legal opinion sought by Mr Byers and obtained by the FT.

Philip Havers, a leading QC, says his assessment reflects "what we
consider to be good evidence as to
the economic benefits of night flying".

There are about 15 flights in and out of Heathrow between 11.30pm and
6am, mainly to and from
long-haul destinations such as Asia.

Mr Havers says the European court "seriously undervalued" and "plainly
ignored" some of the evidence
put before it on the economic benefits of night flights.

He highlights evidence from British Airways suggesting that night
flights at Heathrow contribute about
Pounds 1.3bn to gross domestic product and support 11,000 jobs.

Mr Byers said in November that he would consult on further controls on
night flights by the end of 2003,
as he gave the go-ahead to a fifth terminal at Heathrow. www.ft.com/uk

Copyright: The Financial Times Limited 1995-1998


#3


Compensation 'not main issue on night flights'

By John Mason - Jan 07 2002 20:36:30

London residents affected by the noise of night flights into Heathrow
airport say that the prospect of compensation from the
government is not the main issue for them.

The campaigners say their overriding objective was to stop the
services outright and get some sleep, although it seems unlikely
that many would refuse the prospect of Ł4,000 in compensation.

This follows the disclosure that the government could appeal against a
European Court of Human Rights ruling against night
flights because compensation payments could total Ł2bn.

HACAN Clearskies, the group that has led protests against the night
flights, said it would fight any appeal and argued that the
compensation issue was irrelevant to them, even though many of their
members would be eligible.

John Stewart, chairman of the group, said: "We did not go to Europe to
make ourselves rich, but to get a good night's sleep."

Last October, the court awarded Ł4,000 compensation to eight residents
who brought the case. According to confidential
Whitehall documents, ministers have been advised that up to 500,000
people living around Heathrow could be eligible to similar
awards.

The figure of Ł2bn could increase if compensation also had to be
awarded to residents affected by flights into Gatwick and
Stansted.

The Treasury is backing an appeal to overturn the decision, arguing
that the compensation bill has "significant cost implications".
However, the documents suggest that Margaret Beckett, the environment
secretary, is lukewarm over fighting the case any
further.

According to legal advice to ministers, the chances of the government
winning an appeal are 60-40 in favour because of the
economic arguments in favour of night flights. British Airways had
suggested that the 15 flights into Heathrow between
11.30pm and 6am contributed about Ł1.3bn to gross domestic product and
supported 11,000 jobs.

However Monica Robb, HACAN Clearskies' vice-chairman, said last year's
court case had shown such economic arguments to
be fundamentally flawed.

Š Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2002.

do góry