NOTES ON THE LOSS OF THE OBJECT IN THE THIRD ENVIRONMENTAL COURT.

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ARTICLES 17 N° 6 AND 17 N°8 OF LAW N° 20.600 FROM A CRITICAL PERSPECTIVE

Authors

  • Luciano González Matamala Ayudante CDA - Universidad de Chile
  • Agustín Fuentes Berríos Ayudante CDA

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.29393/RD252-9NSGF20009

Keywords:

Loss of the object, right to appeal, effective access to justice, environmental general action for judicial review, environmental permits, annulment

Abstract

The Third Environmental Court, applying the theory of improper invalidation, has understood that the closing rule of Article 17 N° 8 of Law No. 20,600 is not applicable to the appeal for invalidation. Thus, it is possible according to this court jurisprudence, that with respect to the same Environmental Qualification Resolution, different appeals for its nullity may be filed. In this paper we will specifically address the relationship between the articles 17 No. 6 and 17 No. 8 appeals, together with a critical analysis of the proposed solution that the Third Environmental Court has upheld. This solution consists in the fact that once a declaration of nullity has been obtained with respect to one of the actions, the other, initiated in a different proceeding, would superveniently lose its object, since it is pursuing a nullity that has already been declared.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Published

2022-12-30

How to Cite

González Matamala, L., & Fuentes Berríos, A. (2022). NOTES ON THE LOSS OF THE OBJECT IN THE THIRD ENVIRONMENTAL COURT. : THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ARTICLES 17 N° 6 AND 17 N°8 OF LAW N° 20.600 FROM A CRITICAL PERSPECTIVE. University of Concepción Law Review, 90(252), 229-243. https://doi.org/10.29393/RD252-9NSGF20009

Issue

Section

Comentarios de Jurisprudencia