This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document C2006/143/49
Case C-179/06: Action brought on 5 April 2006 — Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic
Case C-179/06: Action brought on 5 April 2006 — Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic
Case C-179/06: Action brought on 5 April 2006 — Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic
ĠU C 143, 17.6.2006, pp. 26–27
(ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, NL, PL, PT, SK, SL, FI, SV)
- Date of document:
- 17/06/2006; Data tal-pubblikazzjoni
- Author:
- Il-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja
- Form:
- Informazzjoni ġudizzjarja
- Link
- Link
- Link
- Select all documents mentioning this document
- Link
|
17.6.2006 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 143/26 |
Action brought on 5 April 2006 — Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic
(Case C-179/06)
(2006/C 143/49)
Language of the case: Italian
Parties
Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: D. Recchia, Agent)
Defendant: Italian Republic
Form of order sought
|
— |
Declare that, as the municipality of Altamura and the region of Apulia approved, with effect from December 2000, an alteration to a development plan comprising a series of industrial construction operations liable to have a significant impact on SPA and SCIp IT 9120007 Murgia Alta without having first carried out an impact assessment procedure at least in respect of the impact on the SPA, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 6(3) and 7 of Directive 92/43/EEC; (1) |
|
— |
Order the Italian Republic to pay the costs. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
The alteration to the development plan concerning the construction operations falling within SPA and SCIp IT 912007 Murgia Alta was not the subject of an appropriate assessment of the impact on the area, as provided for in Article 6(3) of Directive 92/43/EEC.
The resolution of the municipality of Altamura and the Regional Executive, which approved the said alteration to the development plan, is in contravention of the abovementioned Community provisions, in that, although the said alteration was liable to have a significant impact on SPA and SCIp IT 9120007 Murgia Alta, an impact assessment procedure was not carried out.
The reason stated for the absence of an assessment clearly does not comply with Community law. The reason given is that the size of the construction operations fell below the thresholds set by the domestic law implementing Directives 85/337/EEC, as amended, (2) and 92/43/EEC. However, under Article 6(3) of Directive 92/43/EEC ‘any plan or project’ likely to have a significant impact on the site must be subject to an impact assessment, and this obligation is not limited to a list of projects the size of which exceeds the threshold set.
(1) OJ L 206, p. 7.
(2) OJ L 175, p. 40.
