Chapters

• Ex post assessment of an EIA project; Scope of the Judicial Control; Quality control
• Ex -post assessment
• C 196/16 and C-197/16 Comune di Corridonia
• Two municipalities, Comune di Corridonia and Comune di Loro Piceno, considered this procedure incompatible with EU law
• C 196/16 and C-197/16 Comune di Corridonia
• Considerations of the EUCJ
• However
• ‘the principle of cooperation in good faith’
• The Member State concerned
• Conditions for regularisation
• Furthermore
• Scope of the Judicial Control
• Some short notes on national procedural law versus EU law
• The principle of equivalence
• The Slovak Brown Bear (1/3)
• The Slovak Brown Bear (2/3)
• The Slovak Brown Bear (3/3)
• And so… let’s have a look at the Aarhus Convention
• The Aarhus Convention
• A 9(3) the Aarhus Convention Access to court
• The Slovak Brown Bear again (1/4)
• The Slovak Brown Bear again (2/4)
• The Slovak Brown Bear again (3/4)
• The Slovak Brown Bear again (4/4)
• Article 11 in the EIA-directive
• Substantive or procedural legality
• Who? What?
• ”public” or ”public concerned”?
• There is no unrestricted right for everybody!
• Who? What?
• What constitutes a sufficient interest and...
• How?
• When?
• Price?
• How will the public concerned know they have this right??
• Information!
• Some questions in the light of A 11…
• C-263/08
  Djurgården - Lilla Värtans Miljöskyddsförening (1/2)
• C-263/08
  Djurgården - Lilla Värtans Miljöskyddsförening (2/2)
• But then...
• Djurgården‑Lilla Värtans Miljöskyddsförening (Djurgården-Lilla Värtans association for environmental protection, the NGO) enters the scene…
• The NGO appeals
• Question to the EUCJ
• First
• Second - …a decision adopted at the end of the decision-making procedure
• Second - participation in the decision-making procedure has no effect on the conditions for access to the review procedure
• May Member States provide that small environmental protection associations have no right of access to a review procedure?
• However!
• The EUCJ
• Third question
• Accordingly
• How much may a review procedure cost?
• C-260/11, Edwards and Pallikaropoulos
• Assessment of costs
• In that assessment, the national court:
• The fact that the claimant is seeking review...
• No different criteria in the assessment depending on…
• What can be challenged?
• C-72/12, Altrip (1/2)
• C-72/12, Altrip (2/2)
• Expiry of the implementation time
• Bundesverwaltungs-gericht (Federal Administrative Court)
• Expiry of the implementation time
• The court stated that...
• Next question
• Article 10a (11) of the Directive
• Principle
• Excluding in such a way would run counter to...
• Thus: Article 11
• Next question
• The court held that...
• When deciding this, Member States must...
• Principle of equivalence and principle of effectiveness!
• ‘impairment of a right’
• ‘the condition of causality’
• Nevertheless
• ‘the condition of causality’ - burden of proof
• In the end the court came to the conclusion that… (1/2)
• In the end the court came to the conclusion that… (2/2)
• C-137/14, Commission v Germany
• None the less
• Article 11 and the principle of effectivness
• What about the SEA Directive? (1/2)
• What about the SEA Directive? (2/2)
• Quality control of the EIA information (1/2)
• Quality control of the EIA information (2/2)
• Annex IV
• Quality control of the EIA information - summary (1/2)
• Quality control of the EIA information - summary (2/2)
• Which expert does the court believe in? (1/2)
• Which expert does the court believe in? (2/2)
• Some questions in the light of A 11…
  Is there still a right to challenge the decision?
• May national legislation prescribe a minimum number of members in ENGO:s?
• May national legislation exclude consent processes initiated before the enter into force of A 10 a ( A 11) from the scope of judicial review?
• Is it only possible to challenge cases where no EIA has been carried out? (1/4)
• Is it only possible to challenge cases where no EIA has been carried out? (2/4)
• Is it only possible to challenge cases where no EIA has been carried out? (3/4)
• Is it only possible to challenge cases where no EIA has been carried out? (4/4)
• Might the principle of legal certainty be used as a restriction to the posibility to challenge a decision?
• How much may a review procedure cost? (1/2)
• How much may a review procedure cost? (2/2)
• What is a ’sufficient interest’? And what is an ’impairment of a right’? (1/2)
• What is a ’sufficient interest’? And what is an ’impairment of a right’? (2/2)
• Does it need to be a link between the procedural defect and the actual desicion?
• Summary of case law (1/3)
• Summary of case law (2/3)
• Summary of case law (3/3)