# C_2009267EN.01002802.xml

| 7.11.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 267/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.11.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 267/28

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Belgium) lodged on 21 July 2009 — Brussels Hoofdstedelijk Gewest and Others v Vlaamse Gewest. Other party: Brussels International Airport Company NV, now The Brussels Airport Company NV

(Case C-275/09)

2009/C 267/51

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Referring court

Raad van State

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Brussels Hoofdstedelijk Gewest and Others

Applicant:

Defendant: Vlaamse Gewest

Defendant:

Intervening party: Brussels International Airport Company NV (Now: The Brussels Airport Company NV)

Intervening party:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | When separate development consents are required for, on the one hand, the infrastructure works for an airport with a basic runway length of 2 100 m or more and, on the other hand, for the operation of that airport, and the latter development consent — the environmental permit — is only granted for a fixed period, should the term ‘construction’, referred to in paragraph 7(a) of Annex I to Council Directive 85/337/EEC (1) of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, as amended by Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997, be interpreted as meaning that an environmental impact report should be compiled not only for the execution of the infrastructure works but also for the operation of the airport? |
| --- | --- |

1.

When separate development consents are required for, on the one hand, the infrastructure works for an airport with a basic runway length of 2 100 m or more and, on the other hand, for the operation of that airport, and the latter development consent — the environmental permit — is only granted for a fixed period, should the term ‘construction’, referred to in paragraph 7(a) of Annex I to Council Directive 85/337/EEC (1) of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, as amended by Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997, be interpreted as meaning that an environmental impact report should be compiled not only for the execution of the infrastructure works but also for the operation of the airport?

1

| 2. | Is that mandatory environmental impact assessment also required for the renewal of the environmental permit for the airport, both in the case where that renewal is not accompanied by any change or extension to the operation, and in the case where such a change or extension is indeed intended? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Is that mandatory environmental impact assessment also required for the renewal of the environmental permit for the airport, both in the case where that renewal is not accompanied by any change or extension to the operation, and in the case where such a change or extension is indeed intended?

| 3. | Does it make a difference to the mandatory environmental impact reporting in the context of the renewal of an environmental permit for an airport whether an environmental impact report was compiled earlier, in relation to a previous operational consent, and whether the airport was already in operation at the time that environmental impact reporting was introduced by the European or the national legislator? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Does it make a difference to the mandatory environmental impact reporting in the context of the renewal of an environmental permit for an airport whether an environmental impact report was compiled earlier, in relation to a previous operational consent, and whether the airport was already in operation at the time that environmental impact reporting was introduced by the European or the national legislator?

---

(1)  OJ L 175, p. 40.

1

---