Title in original language
北京市丰台区*环境研究所诉江苏*钢铁集团有限公司环境污染民事公益诉讼案
Original language

Chinese, Simplified

Country
China
Date of text
Status
Decided
Type of court
National - lower court
Court name
Intermediate People’s Court of Suzhou City, Jiangsu Province
Seat of court
Suzhou City, Jiangsu Province, China
Reference number
[2019] Jiangsu 05 Civil First Trial No. 299
Justice(s)
Pan Liang, Zhang Lei, Gu Ping, Lu Liming, Zhu Hongxin, Liu Wei, Jin Jianrong
Abstract
The Environmental Institute of Fengtai District of Beijing filed a civil public-interest lawsuit against Jiangsu Steel Group, alleging large-scale illegal storage of steel slag and excessive emissions of smoke and dust that caused environmental pollution risks. During the proceedings, the local government initiated an ecological and environmental damage compensation mechanism, negotiating an agreement with the company for restoration and compensation totaling over CNY 40 million. After the Nanjing Intermediate People’s Court judicially confirmed the compensation agreement’s legality and effectiveness, the plaintiff applied to withdraw the lawsuit. The Suzhou Intermediate People’s Court approved the withdrawal, holding that all claims relating to public environmental interests—cessation of pollution, hazard removal, and compensation—had been fully fulfilled, satisfying Article 26 of the SPC’s Interpretation on Environmental Civil Public Interest Litigation. The court clarified that a plaintiff’s withdrawal may be granted only when public-interest claims have been entirely realized.
Key environmental legal questions
How should courts determine whether the plaintiff’s public-interest claims in environmental civil litigation have been “fully fulfilled”? When can a people’s court permit withdrawal of an environmental public-interest lawsuit without harming social and ecological interests? How should courts interpret and apply Article 26 of the SPC’s Judicial Interpretation on Environmental Civil Public Interest Litigation regarding government-led ecological compensation? How do judicial confirmation of compensation agreements and administrative restoration measures interact in fulfilling public-interest litigation outcomes?