# C_2019328EN.01001502.xml

| 30.9.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 328/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.9.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 328/15

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Wien (Austria) lodged on 21 June 2019 — IE v Magistrat der Stadt Wien

(Case C-477/19)

(2019/C 328/17)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgericht Wien

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: IE

Defendant: Magistrat der Stadt Wien

Questions referred

| 1. | Is the term ‘resting place’ within the meaning of Article 12(1)(d) of the Habitats Directive (1) to be interpreted as also including former resting places that have since been abandoned?
  If the answer to that question is in the affirmative: | Is every former resting place that has since been abandoned a ‘resting place’ within the meaning of Article 12(1)(d) of the Habitats Directive? |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.

Is the term ‘resting place’ within the meaning of Article 12(1)(d) of the Habitats Directive (1) to be interpreted as also including former resting places that have since been abandoned?

If the answer to that question is in the affirmative:

Is every former resting place that has since been abandoned a ‘resting place’ within the meaning of Article 12(1)(d) of the Habitats Directive?

If the answer to that question is in the negative:

| | Which factors determine whether a former resting place that has since been abandoned is a ‘resting place’ within the meaning of Article 12(1)(d) of the Habitats Directive? |
| --- | --- |

Which factors determine whether a former resting place that has since been abandoned is a ‘resting place’ within the meaning of Article 12(1)(d) of the Habitats Directive?

| 2. | Which factors determine whether a particular act or omission constitutes interference with a ‘resting place’ within the meaning of Article 12(1)(d) of the Habitats Directive? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Which factors determine whether a particular act or omission constitutes interference with a ‘resting place’ within the meaning of Article 12(1)(d) of the Habitats Directive?

| 3. | Which factors determine whether a particular act or omission constitutes such serious interference with a ‘resting place’, within the meaning of Article 12(1)(d) of the Habitats Directive, that ‘deterioration’, within the meaning of that provision, of that ‘resting place’ is to be assumed? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Which factors determine whether a particular act or omission constitutes such serious interference with a ‘resting place’, within the meaning of Article 12(1)(d) of the Habitats Directive, that ‘deterioration’, within the meaning of that provision, of that ‘resting place’ is to be assumed?

| 4. | Which factors determine whether a particular act or omission constitutes such serious interference with a ‘resting place’, within the meaning of Article 12(1)(d) of the Habitats Directive, that ‘destruction’, within the meaning of that provision, of that ‘resting place’ is to be assumed? |
| --- | --- |

4.

Which factors determine whether a particular act or omission constitutes such serious interference with a ‘resting place’, within the meaning of Article 12(1)(d) of the Habitats Directive, that ‘destruction’, within the meaning of that provision, of that ‘resting place’ is to be assumed?

| 5. | Is the term ‘breeding site’, within the meaning of Article 12(1)(d) of the Habitats Directive, to be interpreted as covering, first, only the precise identifiable location where regular mating in the strict sense or limited acts directly connected with reproduction (such as spawning) take place, and, second, in addition, all precisely identifiable locations essential for the development of young, such as nesting sites or certain parts of plants necessary for the larval or pupal stages?
  If the answer to that question is in the negative: | How should the term ‘breeding site’ within the meaning of Article 12(1)(d) of the Habitats Directive be understood, and how is a ‘breeding site’ to be differentiated spatially from other locations? |
| --- | --- | --- |

5.

Is the term ‘breeding site’, within the meaning of Article 12(1)(d) of the Habitats Directive, to be interpreted as covering, first, only the precise identifiable location where regular mating in the strict sense or limited acts directly connected with reproduction (such as spawning) take place, and, second, in addition, all precisely identifiable locations essential for the development of young, such as nesting sites or certain parts of plants necessary for the larval or pupal stages?

If the answer to that question is in the negative:

How should the term ‘breeding site’ within the meaning of Article 12(1)(d) of the Habitats Directive be understood, and how is a ‘breeding site’ to be differentiated spatially from other locations?

| 6. | Which factors determine whether a particular act or omission constitutes interference with a ‘breeding site’ within the meaning of Article 12(1)(d) of the Habitats Directive? |
| --- | --- |

6.

Which factors determine whether a particular act or omission constitutes interference with a ‘breeding site’ within the meaning of Article 12(1)(d) of the Habitats Directive?

| 7. | Which factors determine whether a particular act or omission constitutes such serious interference with a ‘breeding site’, within the meaning of Article 12(1)(d) of the Habitats Directive, that ‘deterioration’, within the meaning of that provision, of that ‘breeding site’ is to be assumed? |
| --- | --- |

7.

Which factors determine whether a particular act or omission constitutes such serious interference with a ‘breeding site’, within the meaning of Article 12(1)(d) of the Habitats Directive, that ‘deterioration’, within the meaning of that provision, of that ‘breeding site’ is to be assumed?

| 8. | Which factors determine whether a particular act or omission constitutes such serious interference with a ‘breeding site’, within the meaning of Article 12(1)(d) of the Habitats Directive, that ‘destruction’, within the meaning of that provision, of that ‘breeding site’ is to be assumed? |
| --- | --- |

8.

Which factors determine whether a particular act or omission constitutes such serious interference with a ‘breeding site’, within the meaning of Article 12(1)(d) of the Habitats Directive, that ‘destruction’, within the meaning of that provision, of that ‘breeding site’ is to be assumed?

---

(1)  Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (OJ 1992 L 206, p. 7).

---