PERMITS

[Monkeymandan]

Any thoughts on when we might see an announcement regarding any appeals being granted a review permit?

The appeal window closed last night, so if an appeal was lodged just before close, lets say the appeals court have 72 hours to review and determine validity, before publishing the outcome/notifying Talga. So my guess would be an ANN by mid-next week confirming either no appeal review permit granted, or case to progress to appeal stage.

Pure guesswork, just trying to work out when I can breathe a sigh of relief and expect a barrage of subsequent catalyst announcements.

Any thoughts on timelines?

 

[Semmel]

If I remember correctly, it works a bit different.
1. A party hands in an appeal to the court of Appeal
2. The court notifices Talga for comment, which needs to be made within 1 week
3. The court takes the appeal and Talgas comments and makes a decision if the appeal is valid within 2 to 3 weeks
4a. If no appeal is granted, the original court decision becomes active. The appealing party can then go to a higher court and appeal there and try to get the original decision overturned.
4b. If an appeal is granted, then a new process is started with new investigation, the whole shebang which takes 1 year (probably more as history has proven) to decide whether the original decision stands or gets overturned. In this case, the original court decision does not become active until the new process is finished.

 

[Monkeymandan]

If I remember correctly, it works a bit different.
1. A party hands in an appeal to the court of Appeal
2. The court notifices Talga for comment, which needs to be made within 1 week
3. The court takes the appeal and Talgas comments and makes a decision if the appeal is valid within 2 to 3 weeks
4a. If no appeal is granted, the original court decision becomes active. The appealing party can then go to a higher court and appeal there and try to get the original decision overturned.
4b. If an appeal is granted, then a new process is started with new investigation, the whole shebang which takes 1 year (probably more as history has proven) to decide whether the original decision stands or gets overturned. In this case, the original court decision does not become active until the new process is finished.

Ok, thanks. So more convoluted and probably slower than I thought. Shouldn’t be surprised!

 

[Semmel]

Ok, thanks. So more convoluted and probably slower than I thought. Shouldn’t be surprised!

I am not 100% sure i am correct with my list though

 

[WheresTheMonkey]

1. A party hands in an appeal to the court of Appeal
2. The court notifices Talga for comment, which needs to be made within 1 week

@Semmel does the court first rule on the validity and merit of the lodged appeal or does it simultaneously alert TLG that it has a week to defend the original permit decision ?

After all the Court may throw it out very quickly if it so pleases therefore not requiring TLG involvement at all

 

[Semmel]

1. A party hands in an appeal to the court of Appeal
2. The court notifices Talga for comment, which needs to be made within 1 week

@Semmel does the court first rule on the validity and merit of the lodged appeal or does it simultaneously alert TLG that it has a week to defend the original permit decision ?

After all the Court may throw it out very quickly if it so pleases therefore not requiring TLG involvement at all

Maybe @beserk can say for sure? I would think that the court doesn't do any quick decisions but always ask opposing parties for comments before making a decision. And any decision is always well thought through and argued, otherwise the court would make itself susceptible to allegations of being negligent.

As much as I hope for a quick resolution, simply from my naive understanding of law and their application, this doesn't look like it's going to be done in a day.

 

[WheresTheMonkey]

Maybe @beserk can say for sure? I would think that the court doesn't do any quick decisions but always ask opposing parties for comments before making a decision. And any decision is always well thought through and argued, otherwise the court would make itself susceptible to allegations of being negligent.

As much as I hope for a quick resolution, simply from my naive understanding of law and their application, this doesn't look like it's going to be done in a day.

I read somewhere that the Court always tries to come to a decision on this part of the appeal process within one month

 

[Semmel]

I read somewhere that the Court always tries to come to a decision on this part of the appeal process within one month

My understanding is, that's the decision whether an appeal is rejected or accepted for investigation

 

[cosors]

I think I have also read that. I think if there is a valid appeal at the court of Umea, so in this instance, then it will not take so long. I don't think it will take a year. If it goes one instance higher then they are also bound by the requirement from the government and the requirement from Brussels to move the process forward quickly.
I can keep my eyes open to see if I can find more details on the subject than just our assumptions. I may also find a statement from the environmental lawyer in the opponent camps. Either way we have to be patient except and contrary to expectations there are no objections.

 

[anbuck]

I am not 100% sure i am correct with my list though

I think you're correct but I believe if leave to appeal is granted then at that point Talga also has a few weeks where they can appeal any portions of the decision that they lost. I assume it would be things that they wouldn't want to appeal on their own and hold up the permit, but if another appeal is going to slow things down anyway, then Talga might want to appeal bits too. It seems like they won nearly everything in this decision though. The only thing I could think of for them to appeal might be the 6 month a year limitation, but I don't think they would appeal that because they agreed to that limitation long ago.

 

[WheresTheMonkey]

Appeal to the Court of Appeal

www.domstol.se

Review permit in civil cases and civil matters
In civil cases and civil matters, the Court of Appeal must first decide whether to allow the case to be heard in the Court of Appeal. If the Court of Appeal concludes that the case is to be heard in the Court of Appeal, it will grant a review permit. Decisions on review permits are normally made by three judges.

The Court of Appeal will grant a review permit in four cases:

• When the Court of Appeal has doubts as to whether the district court has ruled correctly.
• If it is necessary for the Court of Appeal to be able to assess whether the district court has ruled correctly.
• If it is important that the Court of Appeal tries the case in order to provide other courts with guidance for future assessments of similar issues.
• When there are otherwise extraordinary reasons to try the appeal, for example if the district court has made a serious mistake.

Looks like the 1 & 2 are to correct a ruling or a possible error in a ruling with bullet point 3 there for precedents for future District Court cases and bullet point 4 where a serious mistake has been made by the District Court.

Special information for civil cases​

As a rule, presenting new facts and evidence in the Court of Appeal is not permitted except in family cases and some additional cases.
If you are presenting new circumstances or new evidence, you must write why you have not already presented the circumstance or evidence in the district court.

 

[cosors]

And if a Finnish party has appealed they will be informed of the status and the process explained in detail. Then I will inform you.

 

[cosors]

I think you're correct but I believe if leave to appeal is granted then at that point Talga also has a few weeks where they can appeal any portions of the decision that they lost. I assume it would be things that they wouldn't want to appeal on their own and hold up the permit, but if another appeal is going to slow things down anyway, then Talga might want to appeal bits too. It seems like they won nearly everything in this decision though. The only thing I could think of for them to appeal might be the 6 month a year limitation, but I don't think they would appeal that because they agreed to that limitation long ago.

Have suggested themselves as far as I know.

 

[BlackBeak]

Appeal to the Court of Appeal

www.domstol.se

Review permit in civil cases and civil matters
In civil cases and civil matters, the Court of Appeal must first decide whether to allow the case to be heard in the Court of Appeal. If the Court of Appeal concludes that the case is to be heard in the Court of Appeal, it will grant a review permit. Decisions on review permits are normally made by three judges.
The Court of Appeal will grant a review permit in four cases:

• When the Court of Appeal has doubts as to whether the district court has ruled correctly.
• If it is necessary for the Court of Appeal to be able to assess whether the district court has ruled correctly.
• If it is important that the Court of Appeal tries the case in order to provide other courts with guidance for future assessments of similar issues.
• When there are otherwise extraordinary reasons to try the appeal, for example if the district court has made a serious mistake.

Special information for civil cases​

As a rule, presenting new facts and evidence in the Court of Appeal is not permitted except in family cases and some additional cases.
If you are presenting new circumstances or new evidence, you must write why you have not already presented the circumstance or evidence in the district court.

Woah, that's awesome! So basically they can't appeal the decision by trying to find some nearby disgruntled holiday home owners. And the subject of water quality and reindeer herding is off the table as appeal grounds. My feeling of an appeal has gone from a 60% chance to 20%! I still feel like there was something about Finland wanting consultation as maybe the final avenue for appeal.

 

[cosors]

Appeal to the Court of Appeal

www.domstol.se

Review permit in civil cases and civil matters
In civil cases and civil matters, the Court of Appeal must first decide whether to allow the case to be heard in the Court of Appeal. If the Court of Appeal concludes that the case is to be heard in the Court of Appeal, it will grant a review permit. Decisions on review permits are normally made by three judges.

The Court of Appeal will grant a review permit in four cases:

• When the Court of Appeal has doubts as to whether the district court has ruled correctly.
• If it is necessary for the Court of Appeal to be able to assess whether the district court has ruled correctly.
• If it is important that the Court of Appeal tries the case in order to provide other courts with guidance for future assessments of similar issues.
• When there are otherwise extraordinary reasons to try the appeal, for example if the district court has made a serious mistake.

Looks like the 1 & 2 are to correct a ruling or a possible error in a ruling with bullet point 3 there for precedents for future District Court cases and bullet point 4 where a serious mistake has been made by the District Court.

Special information for civil cases​

As a rule, presenting new facts and evidence in the Court of Appeal is not permitted except in family cases and some additional cases.
If you are presenting new circumstances or new evidence, you must write why you have not already presented the circumstance or evidence in the district court.

That's great info. Thank you! I'm thinking about my riddle.)

 

[Semmel]

Appeal to the Court of Appeal

www.domstol.se

Review permit in civil cases and civil matters
In civil cases and civil matters, the Court of Appeal must first decide whether to allow the case to be heard in the Court of Appeal. If the Court of Appeal concludes that the case is to be heard in the Court of Appeal, it will grant a review permit. Decisions on review permits are normally made by three judges.
The Court of Appeal will grant a review permit in four cases:

• When the Court of Appeal has doubts as to whether the district court has ruled correctly.
• If it is necessary for the Court of Appeal to be able to assess whether the district court has ruled correctly.
• If it is important that the Court of Appeal tries the case in order to provide other courts with guidance for future assessments of similar issues.
• When there are otherwise extraordinary reasons to try the appeal, for example if the district court has made a serious mistake.

Special information for civil cases​

As a rule, presenting new facts and evidence in the Court of Appeal is not permitted except in family cases and some additional cases.
If you are presenting new circumstances or new evidence, you must write why you have not already presented the circumstance or evidence in the district court.

As thurough and competent the court was in handling our case, and with new evidence being denied as there was no reason to hold back any arguments in the primary case, it seems very unlikely to me that there is any ground for an appeal. People might still hand in stuff but I dont see a viable avenue to challenge the court decision.

 

[cosors]

"Gabna and Talma appeal against graphite mine​

Published today at 09:25

• Both Gabna and Talma Sámi villages are appealing the Land and Environment Court's ruling granting permission for Talga AB to start a graphite mine in Njunisvárri in Kiruna municipality.
• The Nature Conservation Association in Norrbotten and its sister association on the Finnish side are also appealing and want to revoke the permit - in addition, a couple of private individuals have appealed.
• But the company Talga AB has also requested a review of the judgment - they want the permit to apply immediately, even before the issue has been finally examined by the courts."

https://sverigesradio.se/artikel/gabna-och-talma-overklagar-grafitgruva

 

[Semmel]

if another appeal is going to slow things down anyway, then Talga might want to appeal bits too. It seems like they won nearly everything in this decision though. The only thing I could think of for them to appeal might be the 6 month a year limitation,

No, they would not as they suggested that limitation them selfs. The only thing they might appeal for is the fact that the court said the original decision does not come into force until the appeal process is finished. Talga should be allowed to go forwards with the mine on their own risk while the appeal process is running. At least in my opinion. So if there is a lengthy ... 1 year appeal process, Talga should just go ahead while a decision is being fabricated. The mine will not be in operation anyway within 1 year.

 

[Semmel]

View attachment 35123​

"Gabna and Talma appeal against graphite mine​

Published today at 09:25

• Both Gabna and Talma Sámi villages are appealing the Land and Environment Court's ruling granting permission for Talga AB to start a graphite mine in Njunisvárri in Kiruna municipality.
• The Nature Conservation Association in Norrbotten and its sister association on the Finnish side are also appealing and want to revoke the permit - in addition, a couple of private individuals have appealed.
• But the company Talga AB has also requested a review of the judgment - they want the permit to apply immediately, even before the issue has been finally examined by the courts."

https://sverigesradio.se/artikel/gabna-och-talma-overklagar-grafitgruva

Ahh here we go. In line with my previous statement.

 

[Stares_into_Space]

Are details of submitted appeals public information?