Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2006:706
Date: 2006-11-09
Language of the case: English
Court formation: Second Chamber
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Environment;Approximation of laws
Concepts: Environment;General
Procedure: Action for failure to fulfil obligations - unfounded
Origin: Ireland

Summary of the Judgment 1. Acts of the institutions – Directives – Implementation by Member States (Art. 249, third para., EC) 2. Environment – Assessment of the effects of certain projects on the environment – Directive 85/337 (Council Directive 85/337, Art. 6(2) and (3)) 1. Under the third paragraph of Article 249 EC, Member States have the obligation, when they transpose a directive, to ensure that it is fully effective, whilst retaining a broad discretion as to the choice of methods. The fact that under another directive the levying of fees is expressly permitted cannot found a general presumption that the Community legislature has wished to allow fees only when it expressly so provides. The argument that a State cannot charge the disputed fees because the directive in question does not contain any provision expressly authorising this cannot be reconciled with the freedom of choice under the third paragraph of Article 249 EC. (see paras 26-28) 2. The levying of an administrative fee is not in itself incompatible with the purpose of Directive 85/337 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment. It is apparent from that recital, as it is from Article 6(2) of that directive, that one of the directive’s objectives is to afford the members of the public concerned the opportunity to express their opinion in the course of development consent procedures for projects likely to have significant effects on the environment. In that regard, Article 6(3) allows Member States to place certain conditions on participation by members of the public concerned by the project. Thus, under that provision, the Member States may determine the detailed arrangements for public information and consultation and, in particular, determine the public concerned and specify how that public may be informed and consulted. A fee cannot, however, be fixed at a level which would be such as to prevent the directive from being fully effective, in accordance with the objective pursued by it. This would be the case if, due to its amount, a fee were liable to constitute an obstacle to the exercise of the rights of participation conferred by Article 6 of Directive 85/337. (see paras 37-38, 42-44)