Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per la Lombardia – Sezione staccata di Brescia (Italy) lodged on 11 June 2025 – Keritaly SpA v Provincia di Mantova and Others

(Case C-383/25, Keritaly)

(C/2025/4581)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per la Lombardia

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Keritaly SpA

Defendants: Provincia di Mantova, Agenzia Regionale Protezione Ambiente (ARPA) – Lombardia, Agenzia di Tutela della Salute (ATS) Val Padana, Comune di Gonzaga

Question referred

Must Article 20(2) of Directive 2010/75/EU (1) be interpreted as precluding a national rule (such as that in force in Italy pursuant to Article 29-novies, paragraph 1, of decreto legislativo 152/2006 (Legislative Decree No 152/2006)), which provides that, following the communication by which the operator informs the competent authority of a planned change to its installation – which it classifies as non-substantial – where the competent authority has not responded after a period of 60 days has elapsed the change is, in any event, tacitly authorised, even if it subsequently appears to be a substantial change?

(1)  Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 on industrial emissions (integrated pollution prevention and control) (recast) (OJ 2010 L 334, p. 17).