Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Requirements of habitats Directive require clarification by European Court
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court, in judicial review proceedings concerning planning board's decision to give development approval for a road extension, refers various questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union on how the court is to interpret the requirements of an applicable Directive on the conservation of natural habitats and wild fauna in the context of environmental assessments conducted during the planning permission phase, on the grounds that the precise requirements of the Directive regarding such assessments are not sufficiently clear.
Judicial review - certiorari - planning board's decision to approve road development - whether respondent failed to consider environmental effects of development, failed to conduct an appropriate assessment and erred in endorsing a natura impact statement - whether derogation licenses required under applicable EC Directive on conservation of natural habitats - findings of fact - inspector's report - ecological report - conservation objectives - inspector's approach was thorough and diligent - what exactly constitutes a 'main alternative to the development' - significance of developer's consideration of alternative - whether court can review the correctness of a board's finding on the content of an EIS or AA in the case of a 'manifest error' - deficient information on scientific studies presented - question of EU law - more appropriate for a question to be referred from High Court rather than an appellate court - issues not 'acte clair' - questions to be referred to Court of Justice of European Union - whether directive on conservation of natural habitats requires a natura impact statement to identify the entire extent of the habitats and species for which site is listed - precise way in which such statement should identify potential environmental ill-effects of development - what an E.I.S must specifically address in relation to any species identified - whether developer's choice of development applies to the chosen option or also the main alternatives studied - whether details of the construction phase of development can be left to post-consent decision.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
