Ecolex Logo
El portal del
derecho ambiental
Resultados de la búsqueda » Jurisprudencia

Friends of the Irish Environment Ltd. & Anor v. Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government & Ors.

País/Territorio
Irlanda
Tipo de la corte
Nacional - corte superior
Fecha
Apr 15, 2005
Fuente
UNEP, InforMEA
Nombre del tribunal
High Court of Ireland
Juez
Murphy.
Número de referencia
[2005] IEHC 123
Idioma
Inglés
Materia
Cuestiones jurídicas, Medio ambiente gen.
Palabra clave
Manejo de tierras
Resumen
This case concerned an application by the defendants for an order staying the proceedings between Friends of the Irish Environment Limited and Tony Lowes and the The Minister for the Environment & Ors. The stay was sought pending the resolution of matters raised in the European Commission reasoned opinion of 21st January, 2003, by the Commission, which the defendants considered to be similar to the above proceedings. The reasoned opinion, under the first paragraph of Article 22.6 of the Treaty, is that Ireland, by making the full and effective participation of the public in certain environmental impact assessments subject to prior payment of participation fees, has failed to comply with its obligation under Articles 6 and 7 of Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment The plaintiff's claim was for a declaration that s.33 (2) (c) of the Planning and Development Act, 2000 and the regulations made thereunder were null and void and invalid having regard to the provisions of the law of the European Union insofar as they purport to charge a fee in the context of planning applications or appeals to An Bord Pleanála (The Planning Board) which are accompanied by an environmental impact statement. The grounding affidavit of the principal officer of the first named defendant referred to the Commission's reasoned opinion and to correspondence between Ireland and the European Commission requesting Ireland to comment on the complaint. The State defendants argued that since the compatibility of the legislation with the directive 85/337 would be determined in the course of Article 226 reference, it was appropriate to stay the current proceedings, since it would be incompatible with Ireland's obligations under Article 10 EC Treaty for an Irish court to proceed to determine the issue of compatibility of the Irish legislation with the EIA Directive. The plaintiff submitted that, if the proceedings were not stayed, it would seek to make a reference to the Court of Justice under Article 234 EC. They argue that they were entitled to a reference and that to stay the proceedings would deprive them of this entitlement. They further argued that since no papers had been lodged with the Court of Justice and the advices referred to in the supplemental affidavit are of a hearsay nature, there was no guarantee that the Commission would refer the matter to the Court of Justice. The High Court held that the main issue was whether the possibility, or even probability, of a matter being dealt with by way of the Commission, was sufficient to justify a stay on the proceedings already initiated. It held that the purpose of the pre-litigation procedure initiated by the Commission is to give an opportunity to the Member State to comply with its obligations under Community law and, on the other hand, to avail itself of its right to defend itself against the objections formulated by the Commission. It is a necessary step in the procedure laid down in Article 169 of the EC Treaty. Accordingly, the Court granted a stay pending the resolution of the matters raised by the European Commission.