EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document C2007/269/62
Case C-427/07: Action brought on 14 September 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Ireland
Case C-427/07: Action brought on 14 September 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Ireland
Case C-427/07: Action brought on 14 September 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Ireland
OJ C 269, 10.11.2007, p. 36–37
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
10.11.2007 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 269/36 |
Action brought on 14 September 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Ireland
(Case C-427/07)
(2007/C 269/62)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: D. Recchia and D. Lawunmi, Agents)
Defendant: Ireland
The applicant claims that the Court should:
|
— |
declare that by failing to adopt, in conformity with Article 2(1) and Article 4 paragraphs (2), (3) and (4) of Council Directive 85/337/EEC (1) on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment as amended by Council Directive 97/11/EC, all measures to ensure that, before consent is given, projects likely to have significant effects on the environment in the road construction category covered by Class 10(e) of Annex II to Directive 85/337/EEC are made subject to a requirement for development consent and to an assessment with regard to their effects in accordance with Articles 5 to 10 of the Directive, has failed to fulfil its obligations under Council Directive 85/337/EEC |
|
— |
declare that by failing to adopt the laws, regulations or administrative provisions necessary to comply with Articles 3(1), (3), (4), (5), (6) and (7) and 4(1), (2), (3), (4), (5) and (6) of Directive 2003/35/EC (2) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 May 2003 providing for public participation in respect of the drawing up of certain plans and programmes relating to the environment and amending with regard to public participation and access to justice Council Directive 85/337/EEC and 96/61/EC or, in any event, by failing to adequately notify such provisions to the Commission, Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 6 of that Directive. |
|
— |
order Ireland to pay the costs. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
Transposition of directive 85/337/EEC
The Commission considers that Ireland has failed to fully transpose directive 85/337/EEC because it fails to make provision for measures to achieve the results of Articles 2(1) and 4 in respect of private road projects. The Commission considers that private road projects (proposed by private developers) fall within the scope of directive 85/337/EEC. Moreover, there is no basis for a presumption that such projects will not have significant effects upon the environment. The failure to include road projects proposed by private developers amounts to a breach of Ireland's obligations under the aforementioned Articles of the directive.
Transposition of directive 2003/35/EC
The Commission contends that there has been a failure on the part of Ireland, in accordance with Article 6 of directive 2003/35/EC, to adopt and inform the Commission of all the national measures necessary to comply with Articles 3 and 4 of the directive. More specifically, Article 3, paras. 1, 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the directive set out specific amendments to several Articles of directive 85/337/EEC. Ireland does not dispute that transposition needs to be effected by changes to both Irish planning legislation and legislation governing other consent systems. Ireland did not communicate any amendments to its planning legislation within the time-frame set by the additional reasoned opinion, and, in any case it has not yet communicated legislation governing all other consent systems. Articles 3(7) and 4(4) of the directive require not only systems of review of decision-making, but systems that provide specific guarantees. To the extent that Ireland claims that its existing system of judicial review meets the requirements of Articles 3(7) and 4(4), it has failed to provide enough information to satisfy the requirements of the second sentence of the first paragraph of Article 6 of the directive.
(1) OJ L 175, p. 40.
(2) OJ L 156, p. 17.