1.

Must Article 3(2) of Council Regulation (EU) 2022/2577 of 22 December 2022 laying down a framework to accelerate the deployment of renewable energy (1) be interpreted as meaning that Member States must ensure that the construction and operation of plants and installations for the production of energy from renewable sources and the related grid infrastructure development are given priority solely when balancing legal interests as referred to in paragraph 1 of that provision, or when balancing legal interests for the purposes of Article 6(4) and Article 16(1)(c) of Council Directive 92/43/EEC, (2) Article 4(7) of Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Article 9(1)(a) of Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, (3) or does that obligation apply to any balancing of legal interests undertaken by the competent authority responsible for granting permits, including where the competing interest falls outside the scope of the three directives referred to above (in this case, landscape and heritage protection)?

2.

Must the words ‘projects which are recognised as being of overriding public interest’ in the first sentence of Article 3(2) of that regulation be interpreted as requiring specific, general or individual recognition of the ‘overriding public interest’ of a project by the Member States, or must they be understood as referring to the fact that the presumption established by Article 3(1) of that regulation has not been rebutted, or indeed to the fact that the project is not excluded from the scope of that presumption, as permitted by Article 3(1), in fine?

3.

Must the obligation to ensure, at least for projects which are recognised as being of overriding public interest, that, in the planning and permit-granting process, the construction and operation of plants and installations for the production of energy from renewable sources and the related grid infrastructure development are given ‘priority’ when balancing legal interests in the individual case, laid down by Article 3(2) cited above, be interpreted as establishing an absolute priority in favour of such projects – subject to the environmental condition relating to species protection contained in that paragraph – or should it be understood as a priority in principle, from which Member States may depart by giving specific reasons?