Opinion of the Advocate General — ECLI:EU:C:2009:440
Date: 2009-07-09
Language of the case: German
Subject matter: Environment
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Germany

Summary of the Judgment 1. Environment – Conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora – Directive 92/43 – Sites of Community importance (Council Directive 92/43, as amended by Directive 2006/105, Arts 2(3), 3(1) and 4(2), first para.) 2. Environment – Conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora – Directive 92/43 – Sites of Community importance (Council Directive 92/43, as amended by Directive 2006/105, Art. 6(3) and (4)) 1. The first subparagraph of Article 4(2) of Council Directive 92/43 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, as amended by Council Directive 2006/105, must be interpreted as not allowing a Member State to refuse to agree on grounds other than environmental protection to the inclusion of one or more sites in the draft list of sites of Community importance drawn up by the European Commission. If, in the phase of the classification procedure that is governed by the first subparagraph of Article 4(2) of the Directive 92/43, the Member States were permitted to refuse to give their agreement on grounds other than environmental protection, the achievement of the objective referred to in Article 3(1) of that directive, namely, the setting up of the Natura 2000 network, would be put in danger. That would, in particular, be the case were the Member States able to refuse to give their agreement on the basis of economic, social and cultural grounds and regional and local characteristics as referred to in Article 2(3) of that directive, which, moreover, does not constitute an autonomous derogation from the general system of protection put in place by that directive. (see paras 31-33, operative part 1) 2. Article 6(3) and (4) of Directive 92/43 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, as amended by Directive 2006/105, must be interpreted as meaning that ongoing maintenance works in respect of the navigable channels of estuaries, which are not connected with or necessary to the management of the site and which were already authorised under national law before the expiry of the period for transposing that directive, must, to the extent that they constitute a project and are likely to have a significant effect on the site concerned, undergo an assessment of their implications for that site pursuant to those provisions where they are continued after inclusion of the site in the list of sites of Community importance pursuant to the third subparagraph of Article 4(2) of that directive. If, having regard in particular to the regularity or nature of those works or the conditions under which they are carried out, they can be regarded as constituting a single operation, in particular where they are designed to maintain the navigable channel at a certain depth by means of regular dredging necessary for that purpose, the maintenance works can be considered to be one and the same project for the purposes of Article 6(3) of Directive 92/43. (see paras 50-51, operative part 2)