Střety zájmů při ochraně biodiverzity a klimatu

From private law, the concept of due diligence found its way (much later) into pub lic international law. There, it was originally associated primarily with the treatment of foreigners (minimum protection of foreigners) or with the legal regime of neutral ity, but later became much more significant in areas such as international environmental law. 10 In international environmental law, it gained momentum in connection with the decision of the International Court of Justice in the Pulp Mills case (2010), 11 but its origins can be seen already, for example, in the arbitration award in the Trail Smelter case (1941). 12 The concept of due care here is linked to the principle of no harm. 13 Due diligence is also of considerable importance within regional human rights protection systems (the State’s obligation to exercise due diligence to protect individual human rights). 14 During the 20th century, the concept of due diligence gradually penetrated other areas of law. The term “due diligence” itself was introduced, for example, into the U.S. Securities Act (1933). 15 There, it serves as a defence to avoid liability for material mis statements or omissions in securities registration statements. 16 In addition, the term “due diligence” began to be used to refer to legal and other checks carried out when conducting various commercial, real estate, and other transactions, particularly for the purpose of greater protection of the buyer. 17 Finally, in the 21st century, due diligence has made its way into human rights protec tion. This was mainly thanks to Professor John G. Ruggie, an excellent and pragmatic expert in political science, international relations and law. 18 He played a significant nability due diligence. New Journal of European Criminal Law . 2024, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 209224. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/20322844241253182. 10 ŠTURMA, Pavel. „Náležitá péče“ v mezinárodním právu: obecný pojem s variabilním obsahem. Právník . 2021, Vol. 160, No. 6, pp. 401415. 11 Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v. Uruguay), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2010, p. 14. 12 Trail Smelter Case (Decision of 11 March 1941) (United States v Canada) (1941) 3 RIAA 1938. 13 MCINTYRE, Owen. The current state of development of the no significant harm principle: How far have we come? International environmental agreements: politics, law and economics . 2020, Vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 601-618. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-020-09501-8. 14 MALAIHOLLO, Medes – LANE, Lottie. Mapping out due diligence in regional human rights law: Comparing case law of the European Court of Human Rights and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Leiden Journal of International Law. 2024, Vol. 37, No. 2, pp. 462-483. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1017/S0922156524000050. 15 United States Code: Securities Act of 1933, 15 U.S.C. §§ 77a-77mm (1934). 16 Ibidem , Section 11. 17 SUNDAR, Ram – GROSSMAN, Bea. The Importance of Due Diligence in Commercial Transactions: Avoiding CERCLA Liability. Fordham Environmental Law Journal . 1996, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 351-386. 18 BONNITCHA, Jonathan – MCCORQUODALE, Robert. The Concept of ‘Due Diligence’ in the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: A Rejoinder to John Gerard Ruggie and John F. Sherman, III. European Journal of International Law . 2017, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp. 929-933. DOI: https:// doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chx048.

57