Desicion by the Ministry of Climate and Environment to permit the culling of wolves was valid
Supreme Court judgment 16 May 2023, HR-2023-936-A, (case no. 22-144944SIV-HRET), civil case, appeal against judgment.
The State represented by the Ministry of Climate and Environment (the Office of the Attorney General represented by Asgeir Nygård), USS (intervener), Norwegian Farmers Union (intervener), The Norwegian Forest Owners’ Federation (intervener), Norskog (intervener), (Counsel Steini Erik Stinessen) v. NOAH - for Animal Rights (Counsel Berit Svensli Solseth)
In December 2019, the Ministry of Climate and the Environment decided to permit the culling of up to six wolves within the wolf zone, see section 18 (c) of the Natural Diversity Act. In an action brought by NOAH - for Animal Rights, challenging the validity of the decision, the Supreme Court found unlike the previous instances that the decision was valid. The Supreme Court argued that the culling of wolves within the wolf zone must be based on a balancing between public interests indicating culling and preservation considerations indicating the opposite. The fact that the Storting's population target has been reached is central to the assessment, but does not in itself provide sufficient grounds for culling. In its individual assessment, the Supreme Court concluded that the interests in favour of culling outweighed those against it. The population target had been reached by a relatively good margin for several years. Considerations related to district policy and mitigation of conflict then outweighed the preservation interests. The Supreme Court ruled in favour of the State represented by the Ministry of Climate and Environment.
Area of law: Administrative law, wolf management, section 18 of the Natural Diversity Act.
Key paragraphs: 39–41
Dommere: Indreberg, Normann, Bull, Falch, Sæther