Natura 2000: deterioro, desclasificación de lugares de importancia comunitaria y derecho de propiedad

2014 ◽  
pp. 1543-1561
Author(s):  
Agustín GARCÍA URETA
Keyword(s):  
Natura 2000 ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Habitats Directive ◽  
Private Ownership ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Conservation Areas ◽  
Locus Standi ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court

LABURPENA: Lan honek, Europar Batasuneko habitatei buruzko Zuzentarauaren eta Justizia Auzitegiaren gaiari buruzko doktrinaren pean, garrantzi erkideko lekuei ken dakiekeen sailkapena aztertzen du. Iruzkinak Auzitegiak onartutako fokatzeari kritikak egiten dizkio, bereziki, Cascina uzian, balizkotasun hura onartzen baitu, Zuzentarauaren hitzez hitzekoak kontserbazio bereziko guneak bakarrik aipatu arren. Agerian jartzen dira baita ere beste alderdi batzuekiko Auzitegiaren jarrerak dakarren sendotasunik eza, besteak beste, kontserbazio bereziko gune izendatu aurretik garrantzi erkideko lekuen babesarekiko eta garrantzi erkideko lekuen behin betiko zerrenda onartzen duen Batzordearen erabakia aurkaratzeko legitimazioarekiko. Azkenik, garrantzi erkideko leku bati sailkapena kentzen zaionean jabetza-eskubideak duen papera ere aztertzen da. RESUMEN: Este trabajo examina la posible desclasificación de los lugares de importancia comunitaria (LIC) bajo la Directiva de hábitats de la Unión Europea y la doctrina del Tribunal de Justicia a este respecto. El comentario plantea una serie de críticas al enfoque adoptado por el Tribunal, en particular en el asunto Cascina, en el que se acepta tal eventualidad a pesar del tenor literal de la Directiva, que solo se refiere a las zonas de especial conservación (ZEC). También se ponen en evidencia las inconsistencias que plantea la postura del Tribunal con otros aspectos, tales como la protección de los LIC antes de designarse como ZEC y la legitimación para recurrir la decisión de la Comisión que aprueba la lista definitiva de LIC. Finalmente, se examina el papel del derecho de propiedad en el caso de la desclasificación de un LIC. ABSTRACT: This contribution examines the declassification of sites of community importance (SCIs) under the European Union Habitats Directive and the case law of the European Court of Justice. The comment criticizes the approach adopted by the Court, in particular in the Cascina case, which admits that possibility despite the Directive’s express wording that only refers to special conservation areas (SCAs). The comment also highlights other inconsistencies derived from the case law such as the provisional protection of SCIs before being designated as SCAs and the locus standi to challenge the Commission’s decision adopting the definitive list of SCIs so far rejected by the Court. The comment also examines the role of private ownership in the declassification procedure.

scholarly journals The Euro Group’s Informality and locus standi before the European Court of Justice: Council v. K. Chrysostomides & Co. and Others

2021 ◽  
Vol 81 (4) ◽  
pp. 917-936
Author(s):  
Giacomo Rugge
Keyword(s):  
Legal Protection ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Economic ◽  
Locus Standi ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Economic Constitution ◽  
Judicial Proceedings

This article provides an analysis of the recent European Court of Justice’s (ECJ) judgment in Council v. K. Chrysostomides & Co. and Others. After the Cypriot financial and banking crisis of 2012-13, the case raised the issue as to whether the Euro Group could be considered as an ‘institution’ for the purposes of non-contractual liability under Art. 340 para. 2 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). The Court replied in the negative, offering a set of arguments on the nature and role of the Euro Group within the European economic constitution and on the legal protection of individuals vis-à-vis austerity measures. The article summarises and criticises those arguments, showing how this judgment of the Court has made the Euro Group essentially immune against judicial proceedings, despite its pivotal role in the management of European economic and monetary issues.

El acceso a la justicia en materia ambiental en la jurisprudencia del Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea

2014 ◽  
pp. 1245-1267
Author(s):  
Antonio EMBID IRUJO
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Locus Standi ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Relevant Role ◽  
Judicial Procedures ◽  
The Right

LABURPENA: Justizia eskuratzeko aukera ingurumenerako eskubidearen funtsezko alderdia da, eta, oro har, ingurumen-babesarena. Europar Batasuneko Justizia Auzitegiak paper oso garrantzitsua du ingurumenaren zaintzan, eta berdin gertatzen da justizia eskuratzeko aukeraren gaineko jurisprudentziarekin ere. Bereziki, legitimazioa zabaltzeko lan egiten du, hori Europako araudiarentzat eta Europak ere berretsi duen Aarhus Hitzarmenarentzat mesedegarri den moduan interpretatuz. Era berean, prozedura administratiboek eta judizialek gehiegizko gasturik ez eragiteko erabaki garrantzitsuak ere badaude. RESUMEN: El acceso a la justicia es parte esencial del derecho al medio ambiente y, en general, de la protección ambiental. El Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea juega un papel relevante en la protección ambiental y lo mismo sucede en la jurisprudencia sobre el acceso a la justicia. En particular su labor se desarrolla para ampliar la legitimación, interpretando de forma favorable a la misma normativa europea y el Convenio de Aarhus también ratificado por Europa. Igualmente existen decisiones relevantes para impedir un coste excesivo de los procedimientos administrativos y judiciales. ABSTRACT: Access to justice is a key element of the right to environment and in general of the enviromental protection. The European Court of Justice of the European Union plays a relevant role in the enviromental protection and the same applies to its case law regarding access to justice. Particularly, its work is carried out in order to broaden the locus standi by interpreting the same European normative and the Aahrus convention also ratified by Europe more favaourably. Likewise, there exist relevant rulings to prevent an excesive cost of administrative and judicial procedures.

Habitats Directive and Environmental Assessment of Plans and Projects

2007 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 84-96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Agustin Garcia Ureta
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Assessment ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Habitats Directive ◽  
Negative Effects ◽  
Conservation Areas ◽  
Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Special Protection

AbstractThe article analyses the mechanism for the assessment of the effects of plans and projects on special protection and conservation areas, as required by the Habitats Directive. It examines the case-law of the European Court of Justice concerning the criteria that require the carrying out of the assessment. It also examines the generous and in certain cases open-ended exceptions that may be invoked by the Member States in order to execute a plan or project despite its negative effects on the areas concerned, and the different opinions delivered by the European Commission when considering whether those exceptions have been correctly adopted by the Member States in the case of sites containing priority habitats or species.

scholarly journals Characteristics of Precedent: The Case Law of the European Court of Justice in Three Dimensions

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 1073-1098 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mattias Derlén ◽  
Johan Lindholm
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Three Dimensions ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Number Of Factors ◽  
The One

AbstractThe case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) is one of the most important sources of European Union law. However, case law's role in EU law is not uniform. By empirically studying how the Court uses its own case law as a source of law, we explore the correlation between, on the one hand, the characteristics of a CJEU case—type of action, actors involved, and area of law—and, on the other hand, the judgment's “embeddedness” in previous case law and value as a precedent in subsequent cases. Using this approach, we test, confirm, and debunk existing scholarship concerning the role of CJEU case law as a source of EU law. We offer the following conclusions: that CJEU case law cannot be treated as a single entity; that only a limited number of factors reliably affect a judgment's persuasive or precedential power; that the Court's use of its own case law as a source of law is particularly limited in successful infringement proceedings; that case law is particularly important in preliminary references—especially those concerning fundamental freedoms and competition law; and that initiating Member State and the number of observations affects the behavior of the Court.

Obligaciones de los Estados miembros en materia de gestión de los Espacios Natura 2000 derivadas de los apartados 1 y 2 del artículo 6 de la Directiva Hábitats

2014 ◽  
pp. 2455-2494
Author(s):  
Juan José PÉREZ PÉREZ
Keyword(s):  
Natura 2000 ◽  
Habitats Directive ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Natural Habitats ◽  
Natura 2000 Network ◽  
Ecological Requirements ◽  
Wild Fauna ◽  
Community Interest ◽  
European Court ◽  
La Red

LABURPENA: Habitaten Zuzentarauaren bidez, Natura 2000 Sarea sortu zen. Europar Batasuneko kontserbazio-eremu berezien sare ekologiko koherentea da, fauna- eta flora-espezie basatien zein Europar Batasunerako garrantzitsuak diren habitat naturalen kontserbaziorako. Estatu kideek zuzentarauaren 6. artikuluan xedatutako lan batzuk egin behar dituzte. Arau hori funtsezkoa da, Natura 2000 Sareko eremuen kudeaketari dagokionez. Lan honetan, ez zaio heltzen eremu horietan eragina izan dezaketen planen eta proiektuen ebaluazioa egiteko betebeharra aztertzeari, oso espezifikoa baita. Hain zuzen ere, Batzordeko erreferentziazko dokumentazioaren eta Europar Batasuneko Justizia Auzitegiaren jurisprudentziaren azterketa oinarri hartuta, honako hauek azaltzen saiatuko da lan honetan: zer jasotzen den babestu beharreko habitaten eta espezieen eskakizun ekologikoak betetzeko neurrietan, eta zein diren hartu beharreko neurri egokiak habitat eta espezie horiek hondamendi edo aldaketa nabarmenik ez izateko, eta zuzentarauaren helburuak betetzeko. RESUMEN: La Directiva Hábitats crea la Red Natura 2000, una red ecológica europea coherente de Zonas Especiales de Conservación existente en la Unión para la conservación de especies de fauna y flora silvestres y de hábitats naturales de importancia comunitaria. Los Estados miembros tienen que acometer unas tareas contempladas en el artículo 6 de la Directiva, precepto fundamental en cuanto a la gestión de los lugares Natura 2000 concierne. En este trabajo, sin abordar, por su especifidad, la obligación de evaluar planes y proyectos que puedan afectar a estos lugares, y analizando documentación de referencia de la Comisión y la jurisprudencia del TJUE, se intenta explicar en qué consisten esas medidas de conservación necesarias que respondan a las exigencias ecológicas de los hábitats y especies a proteger, así como las medidas apropiadas para evitar, en esos hábitats y especies, deterioros y alteraciones con efectos apreciables en los objetivos de la Directiva. ABSTRACT: The Habitats Directive established the Natura 2000 network, a coherent European ecological network of special areas of conservation that exists in the European Union for the conservation of species of wild fauna and flora and natural habitats of Community interest. Member states have to undertake some tasks contemplated in article 6 of the Directive, an essential provision as far as the management of Natura 2000 sites is concerned. This work, without tackling the duty to assess plans and projects that might affect these sites because of their specifity, and analyzing the documentation of reference of Commission and the caselaw of the European Court of Justice, tries to explain those necessary measures of conservation that meet the ecological requirements of habitats and species to protect together with the appropriate measures to avoid in those habitats and species, deteriorations and alterations in so far as such disturbance could be significant in relation to the objectives of the Directive.

Between Informal Dialogue and Official Criticism

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 409-420
Author(s):  
Anna Podolska
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Mutual Recognition ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Judicial Proceedings

Abstract There are various forms of jurisdictional dialogue. In addition to drawing from the case law of another court or seeking direct assistance of such another court in passing the judgment, we can notice in practice situations when by issuing a verdict the courts are communicating with each other. The rulings of the Bundesverfassungsgericht, the Court of Justice of the European Union, and the European Court of Human Rights regarding the free movement of judgments in the European Union and protection of fundamental rights are the example of such activities. Each of these bodies was interpreting separately the extent to which the mechanisms of recognising and executing the judgments may interfere with the level of protection of fundamental rights. A common conclusion concerns assigning the priority to protection of fundamental rights, while individual bodies were determining differently the standards of such protection. The analysed judgments can be construed as a communication between these bodies. Although no direct discussion takes place between these courts, this is still a form of interaction which affects the development of the case law and understanding of the boundaries of mutual recognition of judgments and protection of human rights within judicial proceedings.

scholarly journals La posición de las sentencias del tribunal de justicia de la Unión Europea en el sistema constitucional de fuentes

2017 ◽  
pp. 483 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miryam Rodríguez-Izquierdo Serrano
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Law System ◽  
Spanish Law ◽  
Spanish Constitution ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
El Sistema

Este artículo propone un análisis sistemático de la posición de las sentencias del Tribunal de Justicia en el sistema constitucional de fuentes. El análisis parte de dos premisas: la primera es la de que los órdenes normativos supranacional y estatal tienen autonomía formal, pero no material; la segunda es que la integración del Derecho de la Unión en el ordenamiento estatal no puede explicarse sin la jurisprudencia del Tribunal de Justicia. Se describen los efectos de las sentencias del juez europeo en el orden supranacional, para luego ver cómo se transfieren al sistema de fuentes estatal, teniendo en cuenta la función integradora de la Constitución tanto en el plano interior como en el exterior.This article is a review of the different kind of rulings made by the European Court of Justice, in order to find their function and position in the Spanish Law system. The analysis is made under two assumptions: the first one about the formal autonomy but material dependency between EU and Spanish law systems; the second one is that the European Court of Justice case law rules over the interaction between both systems. Formal and substantive effects of ECJ rulings over both systems are described and analysed, considering the integrating role of the Spanish Constitution.

Ne Bis Interpretatio In Idem?The Two Faces of theNe Bis In IdemPrinciple in the Case Law of the European Court of Justice

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandro Rosanò
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Antitrust Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Ne Bis In Idem ◽  
Regional Custom

The meaning ofidemin thene bis in idemprinciple is controversial in the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union. In interpreting the provision of Article 54 of the Convention Implementing the Schengen Agreement, the court has emphasized the necessary requirement in the identity of the material acts while in antitrust law three requirements have been deemed necessary: (1) Identity of the facts, (2) unity of offender, and (3) unity of the legal interest protected. Despite the opinions of some Advocates General, the court has confirmed different interpretations of the same principle, depending on differences of the legal scope in question. A few years ago, however, the European Court of Human Rights proclaimed the criterion based on the identity of the material acts as the most suitable. This might push the Court of Justice of the European Union to correct its position in the antitrust field. Should this happen, this adjustment might serve as grounds to recognize the existence of a regional custom concerning thene bis in idemprinciple.

Comparative Law and the Europeanization of Private Law

2006 ◽  
pp. 538-578 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reinhard Zimmermann
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Law ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Private Law ◽  
Future Trends ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Third ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Do So

The gradual emergence of a European private law is one of the most significant contemporary legal developments. Comparative law scholarship has played an important role in this process and will continue to do so. This article discusses the Europeanization of private law as a new and challenging task for comparative law. The second section considers the Europeanization of private law, describing the creation of the European Union and the role of the European Court of Justice. The third section discusses European legal scholarship. The fourth section cites the contributions of comparative law. The last two sections discuss current and future trends for the European private law.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document