# C_2009297EN.01001202.xml

| 5.12.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 297/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.12.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 297/12

---

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 15 October 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Högsta domstolen — Sweden) — Djurgården-Lilla Värtans Miljöskyddsförening v Stockholms kommun genom dess marknämnd

(Case C-263/08) (1)

1

(Directive 85/337/EEC - Public participation in environmental decision-making procedures - Right of access to a review procedure to challenge decisions authorising projects likely to have significant effects on the environment)

2009/C 297/12

Language of the case: Swedish

Referring court

Referring court

Högsta domstolen

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Djurgården-Lilla Värtans Miljöskyddsförening

Applicant:

Defendant: Stockholms kommun genom dess marknämnd

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Högsta domstolen — Interpretation of Articles 1(2), 6(4) and 10a and of point 10 of Annex II to Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (OJ 1985 L 175, p. 40), as amended by Directive 2003/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 May 2003 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 Directives 85/337/EEC and 96/61/EC — Statement by the Commission (OJ 2003 L 156, p. 17) — Local non-profit-making association which participated in the preliminary planning consent proceedings for a project which may have significant effects on the environment — National legislation making the right of non-profit-making associations to appeal against planning consent decisions for such projects subject to the conditions that an association’s purpose under its statutes is environmental protection, that it has been active for at least three years and that it has at least 2 000 members

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

| 1. | A project such as that at issue in the main proceedings, concerning abstraction of water leaking into a tunnel which houses electric cables and its recharging into the ground or rock in order to compensate for any reduction in the amount of groundwater, and the construction and maintenance of facilities for the abstraction and recharging, are covered by point 10(l) in Annex II to Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, as amended by Directive 2003/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 May 2003, irrespective of the ultimate destination of the groundwater and, in particular, of whether or not it is put to a subsequent use. |
| --- | --- |

1.

A project such as that at issue in the main proceedings, concerning abstraction of water leaking into a tunnel which houses electric cables and its recharging into the ground or rock in order to compensate for any reduction in the amount of groundwater, and the construction and maintenance of facilities for the abstraction and recharging, are covered by point 10(l) in Annex II to Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, as amended by Directive 2003/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 May 2003, irrespective of the ultimate destination of the groundwater and, in particular, of whether or not it is put to a subsequent use.

| 2. | Members of the ‘public concerned’ within the meaning of Article 1(2) and 10a of Directive 85/337, as amended by Directive 2003/35, must be able to have access to a review procedure to challenge the decision by which a body attached to a court of law of a Member State has given a ruling on a request for development consent, regardless of the role they might have played in the examination of that request by taking part in the procedure before that body and by expressing their views. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Members of the ‘public concerned’ within the meaning of Article 1(2) and 10a of Directive 85/337, as amended by Directive 2003/35, must be able to have access to a review procedure to challenge the decision by which a body attached to a court of law of a Member State has given a ruling on a request for development consent, regardless of the role they might have played in the examination of that request by taking part in the procedure before that body and by expressing their views.

| 3. | Article 10a of Directive 85/337, as amended by Directive 2003/35, precludes a provision of national law which reserves the right to bring an appeal against a decision on projects which fall within the scope of that directive, as amended, solely to environmental protection associations which have at least 2 000 members. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Article 10a of Directive 85/337, as amended by Directive 2003/35, precludes a provision of national law which reserves the right to bring an appeal against a decision on projects which fall within the scope of that directive, as amended, solely to environmental protection associations which have at least 2 000 members.

---

(1)  OJ C 209,15.08.2008.

1

---