Cost Allocation for the Remediation of a Contaminated Site under Art. 32d EPA

Facts

This case concerned the cost allocation for the remediation of a contaminated site on a parcel in Gontenschwil. From 1965 to the mid-1970s, [B. AG] had deposited waste on the parcel with the knowledge and for a fee of the then-owner A.A. In 1981, the parcel passed to the three sons of A.A. through inheritance, and they sold it to the father of [F.] in 1992. [F.] acquired the parcel from her mother in 1997.

In 2012, it was determined that the site was contaminated, with pollutants in the subsoil and groundwater. The property owner [F.] then applied for a cost allocation decision. The competent department allocated 75% of the costs to [B. AG] as the responsible party and 25% to A.A. as the responsible party. The heirs of A.A. and [B. AG] appealed against this decision.

Considerations

The Federal Supreme Court qualified A.A. as the responsible party, as he had knowingly and for a fee made his property available for the potentially environmentally hazardous use as a landfill. The subsequent authorization of the landfill did not change this.

For the property owner [F.], the duty of care within the meaning of Art. 32d para. 2 sentence 3 EPA was affirmed, as there were no indications of contamination at the time of acquisition in 1997. Even if [F.] should derive an economic benefit from the remediation, this…