Wild Coast perspectives on pragmatic approaches to just and equitable remedies in environmental law

Abstract

This study examines pragmatic approaches to just and equitable remedies in environmental law cases where there has been a substantial failure to comply with one or more legal requirements in obtaining oil and gas exploration licences in South Africa. The central aim of the study is to address the question of how just and equitable remedies can be formulated while striking a pragmatic balance between capital and economic opportunities and the protection of constitutional rights. This study employs doctrinal legal research and comparative legal research. This study draws on case law, the Constitution, Statutes, regulations, and academic writings. Doctrinal legal research is employed to discuss the core principles of environmental pragmatism and its underlying theory. Comparative legal research is used to compare the theory of environmental ethics with environmental pragmatism in outlining a framework for environmental pragmatism. The findings of this study suggest that environmental pragmatism has emerged as a guiding theory in the development of environmental ethics and environmental justice. Relief guided by environmental pragmatism will be fair as opposed to relief that is formulated with strict adherence to statutes and legal precedent. As reflected in the Wild Coast (SCA) case, just and equitable remedies in environmental law cases should involve a pragmatic approach. Policymakers in environmental cases must give preference to pragmatism when developing policy, and the judiciary should approach these cases from a pragmatic viewpoint when issuing relief. The conclusions drawn highlight that environmental pragmatism aligns closely with the goals of just and equitable remedies in legal practice.