European Integration vs. State Sovereignty: The European Court of Justice and Harmonization of Germany's Environmental Law

2019 ◽  
pp. 39-52
Author(s):  
Molly E. Hall
2020 ◽  
Vol 53 (4) ◽  
pp. 535-574
Author(s):  
Boas Kümper

The report surveys in two parts the development of the law on project-related planning and thus relates in particular to the planning and approval of space-consuming infrastructure projects such as traffic routes and power lines. For this purpose, German administrative law has long provided for the specific instrument of plan approval (Planfeststellung). In this context, the Federal Administrative Court has extensive first-instance jurisdiction and uses this to shape large parts of German approval law, including beyond the actual area of plan approval law, be it in terms of legal protection and procedure, be it with regard to the requirements of substantive environmental law. On the other hand, the revision of the law on environmental protection induced by the decisions of the Aarhus Compliance Committee and the European Court of Justice has been used by the German legislator to extend procedural specifics of the plan approval to other approval decisions of environmental relevance. This firstly indicates the contours of a general law on project approval and, secondly, the nature of the plan approval as an instrument for the implementation of projects in the public interest is more strongly emphasized.


2011 ◽  
Vol 12 (8) ◽  
pp. 1637-1659 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastian Wolf

Only a few European integration experts know that Jean Monnet, one of the masterminds of the European Coal and Steel Community, strongly preferred the European Atomic Energy Community to the European Economic Community in the 1950s and 1960s. From his point of view, sectoral and technical cooperation in the field of nuclear energy seemed to be much more promising in order to foster European integration than cross-sectoral economic integration. Monnet and others believed that nuclear energy could, inter alia, solve all energy supply problems, would revolutionize research and technical development, and could contribute to unifying the peoples of Europe in a few decades. However, nuclear energy in general and Euratom in particular have belied these expectations.


2012 ◽  
Vol 106 (1) ◽  
pp. 214-223 ◽  
Author(s):  
CLIFFORD J. CARRUBA ◽  
MATTHEW GABEL ◽  
CHARLES HANKLA

In 2008 we published an article finding evidence for political constraints on European Court of Justice (ECJ) decision making. Stone Sweet and Brunell (this issue) argue that our theoretical foundations are fundamentally flawed and that our empirical evidence supports neofunctionalism over intergovernmentalism “in a landslide.” We respectfully disagree with Stone Sweet and Brunell regarding both their conclusions about our theoretical arguments and what the empirical evidence demonstrates. We use this response to clarify our argument and to draw a clearer contrast between our and their perspective on the role the ECJ plays in European integration. Finally, we reevaluate their neofunctionalist hypotheses. Ultimately, we do not find support in the data for Stone Sweet and Brunell's empirical claims.


2020 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 253-286
Author(s):  
Boas Kümper

Zusammenfassung Der Bericht informiert in zwei Teilen über den Entwicklungsstand des Rechts der vorhabenbezogenen Fachplanung und betrifft damit namentlich die Planung und Zulassung raumbeanspruchender Infrastrukturvorhaben wie Verkehrswege und Energieleitungen. Hierfür sieht das deutsche Verwaltungsrecht das spezifische Instrument der Planfeststellung vor. Das Bundesverwaltungsgericht verfügt in diesem Zusammenhang über eine weitreichende erstinstanzliche Zuständigkeit und prägt mittels dieser weite Teile des deutschen Zulassungsrechts, auch über den eigentlichen Bereich des Planfeststellungsrechts hinaus, sei es bezüglich des Rechtsschutzes und des Verfahrens, insbesondere der Umweltverträglichkeitsprüfung, sei es bezüglich der Anforderungen des materiellen Umweltrechts. Die durch Entscheidungen des Aarhus Compliance Committee und des Europäischen Gerichtshofs induzierte Überarbeitung des Rechts des Umweltrechtsschutzes hat der deutsche Gesetzgeber andererseits zum Anlass genommen, verfahrensrechtliche Spezifika der Planfeststellung auf andere umweltrelevante Zulassungsentscheidungen zu erstrecken. Hierdurch deuten sich erstens Konturen eines allgemeinen Vorhabenzulassungsrechts an und wird zweitens die Eigenart der Planfeststellung als Instrument zur Durchsetzung von Vorhaben im öffentlichen Interesse stärker akzentuiert. Abstract The report surveys in two parts the development of the law on project-related planning and thus relates in particular to the planning and approval of space-consuming infrastructure projects such as traffic routes and power lines. For this purpose, German administrative law has long provided for the specific instrument of plan approval (Planfeststellung). In this context, the Federal Administrative Court has extensive first-instance jurisdiction and uses this to shape large parts of German approval law, including beyond the actual area of plan approval law, be it in terms of legal protection and procedure, be it with regard to the requirements of substantive environmental law. On the other hand, the revision of the law on environmental protection induced by the decisions of the Aarhus Compliance Committee and the European Court of Justice has been used by the German legislator to extend procedural specifics of the plan approval to other approval decisions of environmental relevance. This firstly indicates the contours of a general law on project approval and, secondly, the nature of the plan approval as an instrument for the implementation of projects in the public interest is more strongly emphasized.


2019 ◽  
Vol 38 ◽  
pp. 153-219
Author(s):  
Amedeo Arena

Abstract ‘Purely internal situations’ are sets of facts entirely confined within a single Member State. According to the ‘purely internal rule’, introduced by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in 1979, purely internal situations lie outside the scope of the internal market fundamental freedoms and of other EU provisions having a cross-border scope. On the fortieth anniversary of the jurisprudential genesis of the purely internal rule, this article seeks to examine its origins, rationale, and evolution, by analyzing the most relevant patterns in the over 250 preliminary rulings handed down in disputes involving purely internal situations. This survey will enable an assessment of the systemic significance of the purely internal rule and of the consequences that abolishing that rule would have for the European integration process.


2010 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 135-162
Author(s):  
Roel Meeus

AbstractThe enforcement deficit in EU environmental law would stem from bad Member State governance of the autonomy they traditionally enjoy regarding the enforcement of EU law. Both the EU legislator and the European Court of Justice take steps to 'fill in the gaps' and develop sanctioning requirements to improve Member State enforcement of EU (environmental) law. These requirements are discussed in this article. The Eco Crime Directive 2008/99/EC and the Ship Source Pollution Directive 2005/35/EC, the latter as recently amended, deserve some particular attention. Also the novelties of the Lisbon Treaty are considered.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document