Opinion of the Advocate General — ECLI:EU:C:2023:595
Date: 2023-07-13
Language of the case: Latvian
Subject matter: Environment
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Latvia

Translation C-434/22 – 1 
Case C-434/22 
Request for a preliminary ruling 
Date lodged: 
30 June 2022 
Referring court: 
Administratīvā rajona tiesa (Latvia) 
Date of the decision to refer: 
30 June 2022 
Applicant: 
AS Latvijas valsts meži 
Defendants: 
Dabas aizsardzības pārvalde 
Vides pārraudzības valsts birojs 
Intervening party: 
Valsts meža dienests 
  
[…] 
 
 
 
 
 
ADMINISTRATĪVĀ RAJONA TIESA  
RĪGAS TIESU NAMS  
 
EN 
REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING OF 30. 6. 2022 – CASE C-434/22 
 
2  
(District Administrative Court, Riga Section) 
DECISION 
Riga, 30 June 2022 
The District Administrative Court […] 
[…] 
has heard, under a written procedure, the administrative-law action brought by 
means of an application lodged by the public limited company Latvijas valsts 
meži, in which it seeks the annulment of the decision […] of the Dabas 
aizsardzības pārvalde (Environmental Protection Authority) of 22 March 2021. 
Subject matter and relevant facts of the main proceedings 
1 The Nature Reserve of the ‘Ances purvi un meži’ (‘Marshes and forests of Ance’; 
‘the Nature Reserve’), which is a special area of conservation of European 
importance (Natura 2000), is situated in the municipality of Ventspils […]. The 
site has a total area of 9 822 ha. It was created to ensure the preservation and 
management of biotopes that are specially protected in Latvia and the European 
Union, sites of rare and protected animal and plant species, and the landscape of 
coastal depressions and dunes found in the area. The Nature Reserve contains 20 
specially protected biotopes of European importance, covering a total area of 
9 173 ha, 48 species of protected vascular plants, 28 species of bryophytes, 2 
species of fungi, 9 species of lichens, 11 mammal species, 61 rare bird species and 
15 invertebrate species. The area is an important nesting site for rare and 
endangered birds. In 2004 the Nature Reserve was included in the list […] of sites 
of international importance for birds ([…] area of 10 056 ha). Conservation areas 
of European importance are assigned a class (or type) of protection, based on the 
purpose for which they are created. The Nature Reserve in Latvian territory is a 
type C area which, according to the explanation of terms provided in the annex to 
the Likums ‘Par īpaši aizsargājamām dabas teritorijām’ (Law on Special Areas of 
Conservation), means that its purpose is the conservation of specially protected 
species and biotopes. 
2 On 31 July 2019 the applicant, Latvijas valsts meži, submitted an application to 
the Valsts vides dienests (National Environmental Service; ‘the Service’) 
requesting an initial environmental impact assessment and the issuance of 
technical rules on the implementation in the Nature Reserve of the activities 
envisaged in the fire prevention plan [for 2019, according to the Valsts meža 
dienests (National Forestry Service)]; those measures also included tree felling 
which, in the long term, would improve the fire protection situation in the Nature 
Reserve and also ensure the prompt and effective prevention and extinction of any 
forest fires which might occur. 
LATVIJAS VALSTS MEŽI 
 
3 
By decision […] of 4 December 2019, the Ventspils reģionālā vides pārvalde 
(Regional Environmental Department of Ventspils), which is part of the Service, 
decided that the activity proposed by the applicant, namely the Nature Reserve 
fire prevention plan, should be subject to the environmental impact assessment 
procedure. In turn, by decision […] of 20 February 2020 of the National 
Environmental Monitoring Office (‘the Office’), the decision […] of 4 December 
2019 of the Regional Environmental Department of Ventspils was confirmed, and 
it was also ruled that the activity proposed by the applicant – the Nature Reserve 
fire prevention plan – was not subject to the environmental impact assessment 
procedure but was instead subject to the assessment procedure for special areas of 
conservation of European importance (Natura 2000). 
3 The applicant notified the Office that the (2019) fire prevention plan would not be 
implemented and that, therefore, the assessment procedure for special areas of 
conservation of European importance (Natura 2000) would not be carried out. 
4 On 7 and 14 January 2021, employees of the Kurzeme regional department of the 
Environmental Protection Authority (‘the Authority’) inspected the Nature 
Reserve and found that the applicant had felled trees in an area of the Nature 
Reserve approximately 17 km long, thereby widening the natural roadways. In so 
far as the Authority concluded that, in the present case, an activity had been 
undertaken which was not provided for in the Nature Reserve’s nature protection 
plan for 2016 to 2028 (‘the nature protection plan’) or in the Ministru kabineta 
2017. gada 16. augusta noteikumi Nr. 478,’Dabas lieguma “Ances purvi un meži” 
individuālie aizsardzības un izmantošanas noteikumi’ (Decree No 478 of the 
Council of Ministers of 16 August 2017 on specific rules for the preservation and 
use of the ‘Marshes and forests of Ance’ Nature Reserve; ‘Decree No 478’) and 
that the activity in question formed part of the proposed activities which were 
previously subject to a procedure to assess the implications for the nature 
conservation area of European importance (Natura 2000) (decision […] of the 
Office of 20 February 2020), by decision […] of the Authority of 15 January 2021 
(‘the preliminary decision’), the applicant was required to reduce the negative 
impact on nature conservation values of the activity undertaken in the territory of 
the Nature Reserve by leaving any felled pines with a diameter of more than 25 
cm at their largest part in the forest stand, as the wood would subsequently decay 
naturally and thus, over time, the felled trees would become a suitable substrate 
for the development of a series of specially protected insect species found in the 
Nature Reserve, including the coniferous longhorn beetle of the Tragosoma 
depsarium species and the great longhorn beetle of the Ergates faber species; the 
applicant was also ordered to supplement the amount of dead wood in these stands 
in the EU priority protected biotope 9010* ‘Old or natural boreal forests’, which is 
at present insufficient. 
The applicant challenged that decision. By decision […] of the director general of 
the Authority of 22 March 2021 (‘the contested decision’), the preliminary 
decision was confirmed. 
REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING OF 30. 6. 2022 – CASE C-434/22 
 
4  
The applicant has brought an action in this court seeking the annulment of the 
aforementioned decision. The application states that, in the present case, the only 
activities undertaken by the applicant are those permitted and required by law, 
namely forest fire protection measures to reduce the risk of fire; according to the 
application, those measures entail maintaining forest roads and natural roadways 
(including felling trees in accordance with permits issued by the National Forestry 
Service), the measures are not subject to the assessment procedure for areas of 
conservation of European importance (Natura 2000), and they have been 
implemented in accordance with the nature protection plan and with Decree 
No 478. The application also makes reference to the agreement reached at a 
seminar organised on 29 July 2020 by the National Forestry Service on improving 
fire protection in forests and marshes (including the Nature Reserve), which 
established that trees had to be felled in the Nature Reserve in order to maintain 
the natural roadways. The requirement imposed by the contested decision has a 
negative impact on fire protection and on combating fires in the territory of the 
Nature Reserve. This point has also been noted by the National Forestry Service. 
Applicable provisions of European Union law and national law 
European Union law 
5 Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural 
habitats and of wild fauna and flora (‘Directive 92/43/EEC’). 
Article 6(1) of Directive 92/43/EEC stipulates that, for special areas of 
conservation, Member States must establish the necessary conservation measures 
involving, if need be, appropriate management plans specifically designed for the 
sites or integrated into other development plans, and appropriate statutory, 
administrative or contractual measures which correspond to the ecological 
requirements of the natural habitat types in Annex I and the species in Annex II 
present on the sites. 
Article 6(3) of Directive 92/43/EEC provides that any plan or project not directly 
connected with or necessary to the management of the site but likely to have a 
significant effect thereon, either individually or in combination with other plans or 
projects, is to be subject to appropriate assessment of its implications for the site 
in view of the site’s conservation objectives. In the light of the conclusions of the 
assessment of the implications for the site and subject to the provisions of 
paragraph 4, the competent national authorities are to agree to the plan or project 
only after having ascertained that it will not adversely affect the integrity of the 
site concerned and, if appropriate, after having obtained the opinion of the general 
public. 
6 Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 
13 December 2011 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private 
projects on the environment (‘Directive 2011/92/EU’). Article 1(2)(a) of the 
directive establishes that ‘project’ means: the execution of construction works or 
LATVIJAS VALSTS MEŽI 
 
5 
of other installations or schemes; other interventions in the natural surroundings 
and landscape including those involving the extraction of mineral resources. 
Latvian law 
7 Likums ‘Par īpaši aizsargājamām dabas teritorijām’ (Law on Special Areas of 
Conservation). 
The first paragraph of Article 15 of the Law on Special Areas of Conservation 
provides that rules may be introduced governing the protection and use of areas of 
conservation in order to ensure the protection of such areas and to preserve the 
natural values they contain. 
The second paragraph of Article 15 of the Law on Special Areas of Conservation 
provides for the introduction of general rules governing the protection and use of 
areas of conservation; individual rules governing protection and use; and plans for 
nature protection in areas of conservation. 
Articles 16, 17 and 18 of the Law on Special Areas of Conservation govern the 
preparation of the documents referred to in the second paragraph of Article 15 of 
the Law, and the delegation of responsibility for those documents. 
The fourth paragraph of Article 43 of the Law on Special Areas of Conservation 
establishes that an environmental impact assessment must be performed on any 
proposed activity or planning document (with the exception of nature protection 
plans for conservation areas and activities proposed in such plans which are 
necessary for the management or restoration of specially protected species 
habitats, specially protected species habitats of restricted use or specially 
protected biotopes, or for the organisation of infrastructure for research purposes 
and for nature tourism accessible to the public provided for in nature protection 
plans for conservation areas) which, individually or in combination with other 
proposed activities or planning documents, may have a substantial impact on an 
area of conservation of European importance (Natura 2000). 
8 Article 1(3) of the Likums ‘Par ietekmes uz vidi novērtējumu’ (Law on 
Environmental Impact Assessments) establishes that proposed activity means the 
introduction, addition or replacement of equipment, installations and technology; 
the implementation of a project; construction; the extraction or use of natural 
resources; the impact of human activity on intact or largely unchanged areas or 
landscapes; and other activities the performance or final outcome of which may 
have a significant impact on the environment. 
9 Meža likums (Law on Forests) 
Article 1(1)(9) of the Law on Forests establishes that a natural roadway is an 
unmetalled roadway no more than 4 metres wide used for forest management and 
protection purposes. 
REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING OF 30. 6. 2022 – CASE C-434/22 
 
6  
Article (1)[(1)](23) of the Law on Forests establishes that forest infrastructure 
means facilities constructed or installed in forests for forest management and 
protection purposes and also for recreational purposes. 
10 Ugunsdrošības un ugunsdzēsības likums (Law on Fire Protection and Firefighting) 
The first paragraph of Article 10.1 of the Law on Fire Protection and Firefighting 
establishes that the owner (or possessor) of a forest is under a duty to ensure 
compliance with fire protection requirements in the forest. 
Article 12 of the Law on Fire Protection and Firefighting establishes that the 
Council of Ministers is to determine the requirements to be satisfied by natural or 
legal persons in order to prevent and effectively extinguish fires and mitigate their 
impact, irrespective of the form of ownership and the location of the object in 
question. 
11 Ministru kabineta 2016. gada 19. aprīļa noteikumi Nr. 238 ‘Ugunsdrošības 
noteikumi’ (Decree No 238 of the Council of Ministers of 19 April 2016 on Fire 
Protection; ‘Decree No 238’). 
Article 1 of Decree No 238 establishes that these regulations prescribe the fire 
protection requirements to be satisfied by natural or legal persons in order to 
prevent and effectively extinguish fires and to mitigate their impact, irrespective 
of the form of ownership and the location of the object. 
Article 2(7)1 of Decree No 238 establishes that the following are forest fire 
protection infrastructure installations: roads on forest land; firebreaks; mineralised 
strips; natural roadways; water supply points with access; fire lookout towers. 
Article 417(3) of Decree No 238 provides that, before 1 May of each year, the 
person responsible for an area of forest must remove from forest roads and natural 
roadways which may be used for firefighting purposes any undergrowth which 
may hinder the passage of firefighting vehicles. 
Article 417(4) of Decree No 238 stipulates that, before 1 May of each year, the 
person responsible for an area of forest must service the roads and the access 
roads to water supply points used for firefighting purposes, and must maintain 
them in a condition which enables access by firefighting vehicles. 
Article 418 of Decree No 238 establishes that, where the person responsible for an 
area of forest manages a continuous area of forest of more than 5 000 ha, that 
person must prepare and implement a forest fire prevention plan for the entire area 
of forest. The plan must be accompanied by cartographic maps of the forest area. 
12 Decree No 478 concerns the specific scheme for the preservation and use of the 
Nature Reserve. 
LATVIJAS VALSTS MEŽI 
 
7 
Article 2 of Decree No 478 establishes that the Nature Reserve is created in order 
to ensure the conservation of the landscape of coastal depressions and dunes 
characteristic of the territory, and to protect specially protected biotopes and 
species of importance to Latvia and the European Union. 
Article 11(2) of Decree No 478 establishes that in forest areas it is prohibited to 
fell dry trees and remove fallen trees, litter or parts thereof which have a diameter 
of more than 25 cm at their largest part, if the total volume thereof is less than 20 
cubic metres per hectare of forest stand, with the following exceptions: 11(2)(1) 
felling and removing dangerous trees, provided the trees are left in the stand; 
11(2)(2) carrying out the aforesaid activities in EU priority forest biotopes, 
namely bog woodland (91D0*), swamp woods (9080*), alluvial forests on 
riverbanks and floodplains (91E0*), and old or natural boreal forests (9010*), 
where it is prohibited to fell dry trees and remove fallen trees, litter or parts 
thereof which have a diameter of more than 25 cm at their largest part. 
Article 14 of Decree No 478 establishes that the territory of the Nature Reserve is 
created in order to preserve natural values: rare and protected forest, dune, swamp 
or water biotopes, plant and animal species and their habitats. 
Article 15(4)(3) of Decree No 478 provides that, in the territory of the Nature 
Reserve, it is forbidden to build hydraulic structures and install drainage systems, 
and to rebuild, renovate or maintain them (including clearing ditches and 
maintaining their banks), with the exception of the construction and renovation of 
drainage required for road maintenance purposes and of activities for which 
permission has been given in writing by the Environmental Protection Authority 
[…], in order to ensure the implementation of measures to manage and restore 
specially protected biotopes and habitats of specially protected species. 
Article 23(3)(3) of Decree No 478 provides that, from 1 February to 31 July, it is 
forbidden to carry out forestry operations in a seasonally restricted area, with the 
exception of measures to protect against and combat forest fires. 
13 The Nature Reserve has a nature protection plan which was approved by the vides 
aizsardzības un reģionālās attīstības ministra 2016. gada 28. aprīļa rīkojums Nr. 
105 (Order No 105 of the Minister for Environmental Protection and Regional 
Development of 28 April 2016). 
Reasons why the referring court has doubts over the application and 
interpretation of European Union law 
14 In the present case the point at issue is, in essence, whether there were grounds for 
requiring the applicant to leave the felled growing pine trees with a diameter of 
more than 25 cm at their largest part in the forest stand. That requirement was 
imposed on the applicant under the previous fire prevention plan (for 2019), 
which provided, among other things, for maintenance work to be carried out on 
the natural roadways and for the removal of the vegetation, in accordance with the 
impact assessment procedure for special areas of conservation of European 
REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING OF 30. 6. 2022 – CASE C-434/22 
 
8  
importance (Natura 2000) (decision […] of the Office of 20 February 2020). 
Given that situation, this court requires clarification of whether the activity 
undertaken by the applicant constitutes an activity which is subject to the 
assessment procedure for special areas of conservation (Natura 2000) pursuant to 
Article 6(3) of Directive 92/43/EEC. In addition, the court notes that this case also 
raises the question of whether the applicant has simply maintained existing natural 
roadways or has also created new natural roadways. The court therefore wishes to 
clarify that, in the remainder of this decision, the term ‘maintenance’ should be 
understood as referring to the maintenance of existing natural roadways and the 
creation of new natural roadways. 
15 In order to clarify whether the activity undertaken by the applicant – namely the 
maintenance of natural roadways, including tree felling, undertaken as part of fire 
protection work – constitutes an activity which is subject to the assessment 
procedure for special areas of conservation of European importance (Natura 2000) 
pursuant to Article 6(3) of Directive 92/43/EEC, this court first needs to determine 
whether the activity undertaken by the applicant falls within the concepts of ‘plan’ 
or ‘project’ referred to in Article 6(3) of Directive 92/43/EEC. 
Given that Directive 92/43/EEC does not define the concepts of ‘plan’ or 
‘project’, in order to clarify those concepts as they apply in Directive 92/43/EEC, 
we need to apply Article 1(2)(a) of Directive 2011/92/EU. 1 Various judgments of 
the Court of Justice of the European Union have already given an interpretation of 
the concepts of ‘plan’ and ‘project’ included in Article 6(3) of Directive 
92/43/EEC, ruling, for example, that mechanical cockle fishing which has been 
carried on for many years but for which a licence is granted annually for a limited 
period, with each licence entailing a new assessment both of the possibility of 
carrying on that activity and of the site where it may be carried on, falls within the 
concept of ‘plan’ or ‘project’; 2 the concept of ‘project’ established in Article 6(3) 
of Directive 92/43/EEC also applies to dredging works in respect of a navigable 
channel; 3 similarly, the Court of Justice of the European Union has clarified that 
the option of exempting certain proposed activities from the assessment procedure 
does not comply with Article 6(3) of Directive 92/43/EEC, 4 and that projects 
cannot be exempt from the assessment requirement purely because they do not 
 
1 Judgment of the Court of Justice of 7 September 2004, C-127/02, Landelijke Vereniging tot 
Behoud van de Waddenzee and Nederlandse Vereniging tot Bescherming van Vogels v 
Staatssecretaris van Landbouw, Natuurbeheer en Visserij, EU:C:2004:482, paragraphs 21 to 29. 
2 Judgment of the Court of Justice of 7 September 2004, C-127/02, Landelijke Vereniging tot 
Behoud van de Waddenzee and Nederlandse Vereniging tot Bescherming van Vogels v 
Staatssecretaris van Landbouw, Natuurbeheer en Visserij, EU:C:2004:482, paragraphs 21 to 29. 
3 Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 14 January 2010, C-226/08, Stadt 
Papenburg v Bundesrepublik Deutschland, EU:C:2010:10, paragraphs 39 to 40. 
4 See, for example, the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 4 March 2010, 
C-241/08, Commission v France, EU:C:2010:114, paragraphs 44 to 56. 
LATVIJAS VALSTS MEŽI 
 
9 
require authorisation. 5 However, by contrast with the previous cases, in the 
present case the proposed activity is not connected with the carrying on of an 
economic activity, and the requirement to carry out the proposed activity as part of 
fire protection work is imposed on the applicant by national legislation. At the 
same time, in the light of the clarification published by the European Commission 
concerning the provisions of Article 6 of Directive 92/43/EEC, which states that 
the terms ‘project’ and ‘plan’ must be interpreted broadly, 6 this court has doubts 
over whether, for the purposes of Article 1(2)(a) of Directive 2011/92/EU, the 
concept of ‘project’ also includes activities undertaken in a forest area to maintain 
forest fire protection infrastructure installations at that site, in accordance with the 
requirements established by the legislation on forest fire protection. 
16 If the question posed in paragraph 15 of this decision, over which this court has 
doubts – namely whether the activity undertaken by the applicant (the 
maintenance of natural roadways, including tree felling, undertaken as part of fire 
protection work) constitutes an activity which is subject to the assessment 
procedure for special areas of conservation of European importance (Natura 2000) 
pursuant to Article 6(3) of Directive 92/43/EEC – is answered in the affirmative, 
then it is also necessary to determine whether the activity undertaken by the 
applicant constitutes an activity which is directly connected with or necessary to 
the management of the site within the meaning of Article 6(3) of Directive 
92/43/EEC. Exempt activities, for which it is not necessary to carry out an 
appropriate assessment in accordance with Article 6(3) of Directive 92/43/EEC, 
are set out in the fourth paragraph of Article 43 of the Law on Special Areas of 
Conservation; that provision establishes that an environmental impact assessment 
will not be required for nature protection plans for conservation areas or for 
activities proposed in such plans which are necessary for the management or 
restoration of specially protected species habitats, specially protected species 
habitats of restricted use or specially protected biotopes, or for the organisation of 
infrastructure for research purposes and for nature tourism accessible to the public 
provided for in nature protection plans for conservation areas. 
This court recognises that maintenance of natural roadways, including tree felling, 
undertaken as part of fire protection work, does not constitute an activity whose 
primary purpose is the management or restoration of specially protected species 
habitats, specially protected species habitats of restricted use or specially 
protected biotopes, given that those activities are necessary primarily in order to 
satisfy statutory forest fire protection requirements (thereby ensuring that 
firefighting vehicles are able to use the natural roadways) and that they may have 
a negative impact on the habitats of various protected species found in the Nature 
 
5 Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 10 January 2006, C-98/03, 
Commission v Germany, EU:C:2006:3, paragraphs 43 to 52. 
6 Commission Notice of 21.11.2018. ‘Managing Natura 2000 sites: The provisions of Article 6 of 
the “Habitats” Directive 92/43/EEC’. Available at: 
https://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/management/docs/art6/Provisions_Art_._no
v_2018_endocx.pdf [accessed on 30.06.2022]. 
REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING OF 30. 6. 2022 – CASE C-434/22 
 
10  
Reserve, even though, by ensuring compliance with fire protection requirements, 
at the same time they also preserve the natural values found in the Nature Reserve, 
which may be at risk if a fire breaks out. Moreover, the nature protection plan 
establishes that road maintenance is of crucial importance in preserving natural 
values and must provide for comprehensive monitoring and protection of the area, 
protection of the area against forest fires, management of forestry and agricultural 
land, and maintenance of the infrastructure installations. From a nature protection 
perspective, the fact that the land covered by the Nature Reserve has a dense road 
network largely comprising forest tracks accessible only to off-road vehicles 
protects the land in the reserve from external influences but also hampers 
responses to critical incidents (such as firefighting or human rescue), which is 
why road maintenance or repair requires very careful planning, both from a 
strategic standpoint and also as regards the particular conditions presented by 
specific stretches of road (such as swamp and stream crossings, depressions and 
sandy areas). 
Table 18 in Chapter III of the nature protection plan, entitled ‘Land management’, 
sets out the land management measures proposed for the Nature Reserve. It is 
clear from that table that, in preparing the plan, work was undertaken to analyse 
and identify the specific areas where transport infrastructure has to be maintained 
but which also require the installation of seasonal barriers. Annex 16 of the nature 
protection plan, entitled ‘Transport infrastructure’, includes cartographic material 
showing the layout of the roads which are important from a management 
perspective (‘roads which must be maintained’), and a plan showing the 
placement of seasonal barriers. Table 18 in Chapter III of the nature protection 
plan, entitled ‘Land management’, includes the management measure ‘B.10.2 
Surface reinforcement and maintenance in operating condition of forest roads of 
importance for management purposes’. The nature protection plan emphasises that 
strengthening and improving road surfaces involves reinforcing the carriageway 
used by vehicles, by covering it with gravel; it does not involve digging ditches or 
widening the verges, but does include creating the necessary exits at the points 
where they have historically existed. In the light of the above, this court takes the 
view that maintaining natural roadways by felling trees is not expressly included 
and assessed as a management measure in the nature protection plan. At the same 
time, both the nature protection plan and Decree No 478 7 contain indirect 
references to the need to adopt fire protection and firefighting measures, without 
identifying the specific fire protection and firefighting measures to be adopted. 
This court therefore has doubts over whether the activities undertaken are 
necessary to the management of the Nature Reserve within the meaning of 
Article 6(3) of Directive 92/43/EEC (in conjunction with Article 6(1) of Directive 
92/43/EEC). Given that the requirement to implement fire protection and 
firefighting measures is imposed on the applicant by national legislation (thus 
placing the interests of preserving natural values in conflict with the interests of 
 
7 See, for example, Articles 15(14)(3) and 23(3)(3) of Decree No 478. 
LATVIJAS VALSTS MEŽI 
 
11 
protecting against and combating forest fires), this court also has doubts over 
whether an assessment is required even where the measures to protect against and 
combat forest fires are not necessary to the management of the Nature Reserve 
within the meaning of Article 6(3) of Directive 92/43/EEC. 
Pursuant to Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, 
[…] the District Administrative Court 
orders 
that the following questions be referred to the Court of Justice for a 
preliminary ruling: 
1) Does the concept of ‘project’ within the meaning of Article 1(2)(a) of 
Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council 
of 13 December 2011 on the assessment of the effects of certain public 
and private projects on the environment also include activities 
undertaken in a forest area to ensure maintenance of the area’s forest 
fire protection infrastructure installations in accordance with the fire 
protection requirements established in the applicable legislation? 
2) If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, must the 
activities undertaken in a forest area to ensure maintenance of the 
area’s forest fire protection infrastructure installations in accordance 
with the fire protection requirements established in the applicable 
legislation be deemed, for the purposes of Article 6(3) of Council 
Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural 
habitats and of wild fauna and flora, to constitute a project which is 
directly connected with or necessary to that management, meaning that 
an assessment procedure for special areas of conservation of European 
importance (Natura 2000) is not required for the activities in question? 
3) If the answer to the second question is in the negative, does 
Article 6(3) of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the 
conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora also 
require an assessment to be carried out for plans and projects 
(activities) which are not directly connected with or necessary to the 
management of the special area of conservation but which are likely to 
have a significant effect on conservation areas of European importance 
(Natura 2000), but which are nevertheless undertaken in accordance 
with national legislation in order to satisfy forest fire protection and 
firefighting requirements? 
4) If the answer to the third question is in the affirmative, is it possible to 
continue and complete the activity in question before carrying out an 
assessment procedure for special areas of conservation of European 
importance (Natural 2000) ex post facto? 
REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING OF 30. 6. 2022 – CASE C-434/22 
 
12  
5) If the answer to the third question is in the affirmative, in order to 
avoid a possibly significant impact, are the competent authorities under 
a duty to require the damage to be made good and to adopt measures if 
the significance of the impact was not assessed during the assessment 
procedure for special areas of conservation of European importance 
(Natural 2000)? 
Proceedings are stayed until the Court of Justice of the European 
Union gives judgment. 
[…]