Anti-oil drilling association, ASMAA, has launched deft legal moves to keep the pressure on the government which currently is challenging Loulé Court’s ruling that drilling activity off Aljezur must be suspended.
On August 14th, the same day that the Ministry of Sea contested the Loulé court decision, that agreed with a legal claim by three anti-oil associations that the TUPEM licence should be declared invalid, ASMAA lodged a further challenge in the same court.
ASMAA’s tack is not to challenge the highly controversial decision taken by the Entidade Nacional Mercados Combustiveis (ENMC) on January 9th, backed up by the Portuguese Environment Agency’s public consultation report of May 16 2018, which both recommended that an Environmental Impact Assessment was not needed for the offshore test well drilling planned by the Galp-ENI consortium off the coast of Aljezur.
Unlike the legal action lodged by three anti-oil associations, ASMAA did not contest the decision that an impact assessment was not needed, the reason being that, has it done so, ASMAA would be focusing the legal fight on the lack of an Environmental Impact Assessment, and as a result, the Environment Agency could change its mind, come up with an assessment and declare the contract valid
In ASMAA’s view, what is at stake is the validity of law 94 (DL No. 109/94) which is the basis of all concession contracts for exploration, research, development and production of oil in Portugal. This is the legal framework covering all active concession contracts and any further contracts that “undoubtedly will be signed after the legislative elections next year,” says ASMAA's Laurinda Seabra.
ASMAA’s legal challenge is to have this law declared null and void but if the court finds the law is valid, under other applicable laws, oil exploration, research, development, and production activities all will require an Environmental Impact Assessment.
On April 6, 2018, ASMAA filed a class action with the Loulé court that challenged the validity of Law #109/94, and backed this up with a 42,000 signature petition of those who opposed the Aljezur offshore drilling.
For Laurinda Searbra at ASMAA, “A luta continua!” for all 42,000 signatories.
Comments
Chill out, life to short
All we said is to not rely and base your sources of your information on just one article written by a legal firm as an opinion (whether they on top 6 of the country or not)
In no way were we derogatory to the legal firm ... as in this case OUR REPLY was to your apparently uninformed comments about a specific subject matter.
Kind regards
PLMJ is one of, if not the, most highly respected law firms operating in Portugal. If you wish to imply PLMJ are bent, unprofessional or incompetent then contact them with this message. Having offended their honour - another earner for them!
https://www.plmj.com/en/about-plmj/awards-and-rankings/awards/
The contracts signed with the ENI/Galp consortium DO NOT HAVE these clauses
(Partex/Repsol had them but contracts been cancelled and the only current contracts that has them are with Australis)
Please inform yourself first, and as a word of advice, relying less on the corporations own legal team PR/Mark exercises may be in order.
Kind regards
You refer us to an article written by ENI's/Galp legal TEAM?
Come on ... that article is just pure PR!
Susan Williams it's quite clear that you are not aware that the DL 109/94 IS THE LAW THAT GOVERN'S ALL OIL EXPLORATION CONTRACTS.
And that many of the legal changes made in past few years are ONLY alterations or additions to this law. Should law fall, so will ALL contracts, amendments to this law, etc.
Our legal team are on the right path. We have to challenge this process within the Portuguese legal framework first. While assessing if EU Directives have been transposed into PT legal system, and whether the guidelines have been followed.
(BTW some legal requirements have just been ignored by gov)
http://www.plmj.com/xms/files/2017_PDF/junho/Oil-and-Gas-Law-newsletter-Jun-2017.pdf