Interaction Between EIA Directive and Nature Directives
The EIA Directive, as illustrated in the case law of CJEU, explores the transposition, approach, and key principles related to environmental impact assessment. It delves into the definition of projects, public participation, and the screening process. The content also discusses the need for assessment, consent procedures, and the broad scope of the EIA Directive. Additionally, it highlights leading cases and the concept of projects under the directive.
Download Presentation
Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.
You are allowed to download the files provided on this website for personal or commercial use, subject to the condition that they are used lawfully. All files are the property of their respective owners.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.
E N D
Presentation Transcript
Jerzy Jendroka The EIA Directive in the case law of CJEU INTERACTION BETWEEN THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND THE NATURE DIRECTIVES ACADEMY OF EUROPEAN LAW (ERA) ON BEHALF OF THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION (CONTRACTING AUTHORITY) Bucharest, 22-24 January 2014
Content Transposition of the Directive Approach to applying the Directive and need for assessment Definition of a project and screening Place in development control and concept of development consent Public participation and access to justice Transboundary procedure
Publication ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF PROJECTS RULINGS OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE European Commission 2013
Transposition of the Directive Main principles transposition must Assure full application of the directive in a sufficiently clear and precise manner Be in the act with unquestionable binding force Leading cases C-332/04, Commission v. Spain, C-427/07, Commission v. Ireland
Approach to applying the Directive and need for assessment EIA Directive has a wide scope and a broad purpose (C-72/95, Kraaijeveld and Others, 39; C-435/97, WWF and Others; C-2/07, Abraham and Others Li ge airport, C- 275/09, Brussels Hoofdstedelijk Gewest and Others) Procedural nature of EIA ((C-420/11, Leth) Consent granted in breach of EIA Directive EIA must be carried out before consent! - C-215/06 (EC vs Ireland) In case of breach the national court shall consider if the consent should be be revoked or suspended or alternatively the harm compensated - (C-201/02, Wells, C-215/06 EC vs Ireland)
Concept of project Broad definition of construction modernisation of existing road i C-142/07 (CODA) Modernisation of existing runway (Abraham and Others,) Demolition works (C-50/09, Commission v. Ireland,) Current tendency to restrictive interpretation of the concept of project Extension of consent for operation of the landfill ((C-121/11, Pro-Braine and Others) Extension of consent for operation of the airport ((C-275/09, Brussels Hoofdstedelijk Gewest and Others,)
Screening need for cumulative assesment and no for salami- slicing - C-392/96 (EC vs Ireland) or C-227/01 (EC vs Spain) Not whole class to be excluded (Case C-133/94 Com. v.Belgium and Grosskrotzenburg Case C- 301/95 Com. V.Germany)
Screening cd all Annex III criteria to be used not only size of project C-392/96 (EC vs Ireland) and Crystal Palace/White City (C- 508/03) in all screening methods - C-156/07 (Aiello) negative screening require justification C- 87/02 (EC vs Italy) but only upon request (C-75/08 Mellor)
Place in development control and concept of development consent Place in development control Multiple decison-making (C-416/10, Kri an) main and implementing decision - C-201/02 (Delena Wells) need for repeating EIA - Crystal Palace/White City (C- 508/03), Barker (C-290/03) Concept of development control Binding (Case 96/81 Commission v. Netherlands) no tacit agreement -C-360/87 and C-230/00 (EC vs Belgium)
Public participation and access to justice Right to have the consequences assessed (C-420/11, Leth Right of individuals to rely on a directive and of the national court to take it into consideration ((C-72/95, Kraaijeveld and Others, C-435/97, WWF and Others; C-287/98, Linster, C- 201/02, Wells) Aarhus Convention is part of acquis (C-240/09, Lesoochran rske zoskupenie Slovak bear Case) Access to justice Not confined only to participation in administrative procedure ((C-263/08, Djurg rden) Vide acces to justice required ((C-263/08, Djurg rden) Fee for public participation in line with EIA Directive verdict controversial in light of Aarhus Convention
Access to justice cd Rights of Ngos (C-263/08, Djurg rden and C-115/09, Trianel Kohlekraftwerk L nen Subjective rights and protection of public intersest C- 115/09, Trianel Kohlekraftwerk L nen) Interests capable of being impaired under EU law and domestic law (C-115/09, Trianel Kohlekraftwerk L nen Injunctive relief opinion AG Kokott in C-416/10 Kri an Information on access to justice C-427/07, Commission v. Ireland,
Decision on development consent Assessment under art.3 and consideration under art.8 (C-50/09, Commission v. Ireland,) Statement of reasons must be prepared only if the interested party so requests (C-182/10, Solvay and Others) verdict controversial in light of art.6.9 of the Aarhus Convention The public must be informed ((C-332/04, Commission v. Spain)
