The case concerned the after-treatment of a polluted property. The court had previously given an injunction with conditions regarding the after-treatment that the appellant CEGO Konsult, then sought to have revised by the Environmental Court of Appeal.

In the main, the appellant referred to the same facts as in previous instances. The company, however, meant that the court should consider economic factors when applying chapter 10, section 4 of the Environmental Code. Since the Company’s financial assets were below the estimated costs for the treatment of the polluted area they claimed that the court should adjust the responsibility of the company.

The court concluded that when determining the responsibility of an actor it should take into account what is environmentally and economically justifiable. The cost should be weighed against the need environmental and health benefits. The financial status of the company should, however, not be taken into account if the responsibility does not represent an unfair burden.