Order — ECLI:EU:C:2014:815
Date: 2014-05-08
Language of the case: German
Court formation: Ninth Chamber
Subject matter: Environment
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Austria

Summary — Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber), 8 May 2014 1. Questions referred for a preliminary ruling — Admissibility — Conditions — Questions relating to the actual facts of the dispute or its subject-matter (Art. 267 TFEU; Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 47, second para.) 2. Environment — Freedom of access to information — Directive 2003/4 — Environmental information — Provision allowing Member States to provide for an exception to the obligation to disclose environmental information in order to ensure compliance with the right to a fair trial — Member State which did not provide for such an exception in the national legislation transposing the directive — Assessment of the validity of the directive in the light of the right to a fair trial — Validity (Art. 6 TEU; Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 47, second para.; European Parliament and Council Directive 2003/4, Art. 4(2), first para., (c)) 1. See the text of the decision. (see paras 24-27) 2. By referring to the ability of any person to benefit from the right to receive a fair trial, point (c) of the first subparagraph of Article 4(2) of Directive 2003/4 on public access to environmental information and repealing Council Directive 90/313/EEC authorises Member States to provide for an exception to the obligation to disclose environmental information in order, specifically, to allow them, if the circumstances so require, to respect the right to a fair trial laid down in the second paragraph of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Furthermore, even if a Member State does not provide for such an exception in its legislation intended to transpose that directive, although, in order to respect the second paragraph of Article 47 of the Charter, circumstances require it, it must be borne in mind that Member States are, in any event, required to use the margin of appreciation conferred on them by point (c) of the first subparagraph of Article 4(2) of that directive in a manner which is consistent with the requirements flowing from that article of the Charter. Since all authorities of the Member States, including the administrative and judicial bodies, must ensure the observance of the rules of EU law within their respective spheres of competence, they are required, if the conditions are fulfilled for application of the second paragraph of Article 47 of the Charter, to ensure compliance with the fundamental right guaranteed by that article. In those circumstances, an interpretation to the effect that Directive 2003/4 authorises Member States to adopt measures that are incompatible with the second paragraph of Article 47 of the Charter or with Article 6 TEU cannot be accepted. That directive is therefore, on the same basis, not invalid in the light of those two provisions. (see paras 33-36, operative part)