Skip to main content
Article
Stop the Beach Renourishment, Inc. v. Florida Department of Environmental Protection in a Comparative Law Context
46 New Eng. L. Rev. 7 (2011)
  • Carla Spivack, Oklahoma City University School of Law
Abstract
This article examines the Supreme Court's decision in Stop the Beach Renourishment, Inc. v. Florida Department of Environmental Protection from a comparative law perspective. It first reviews the Stop the Beach Renourishment decision and provides a brief summary of American takings jurisprudence. The article then examines Article One of the European Convention on Human Rights and the corresponding "expropriation" jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights ("ECHR"). Ultimately, the article highlights three major points of comparison between American takings law and the ECHR's approach to expropriation: (1) the differences between positive and negative rights and the natural law notions of the right to property that animate the European system; (2) the definition of a taking; and (3) the role of compensation. The article concludes that the flexibility exhibited by the EHCR's approach to expropriation is instructive to common law countries in the coming age of climate change and environmental regulation.
Keywords
  • Takings,
  • European Court of Human Rights,
  • Beach Erosion,
  • Environmental Law,
  • expropriation,
  • Comparative Law
Disciplines
Publication Date
February 1, 2011
Citation Information
Carla Spivack, Stop the Beach Renourishment, Inc. v. Florida Department of Environmental Protection in Comparative Law, 46 New Eng. L. Rev. 7 (2011).