Opinion of the Advocate General — ECLI:EU:C:2012:701
Date: 2012-11-08
Language of the case: German
Subject matter: Environment;Approximation of laws
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Austria

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber), 14 March 2013 1. European Union law — Interpretation — Provision making no express reference to the law of the Member States — Independent and uniform interpretation 2. Environment — Assessment of the effects of certain projects on the environment –Directive 85/337 — Interpretation — Evaluation of the effects of a project on the value of material assets — Exclusion — Pecuniary damage resulting directly from the effects of a project on the environment — Inclusion in the objective of protection pursued by the directive — Lack of an environmental impact assessment — Omission which does not by itself confer on an individual a right to compensation for purely pecuniary damage caused by the decrease in the value of his property as a result of environmental effects of the project at issue — Compensation subject to compliance with the requirements of European Union law in the area — Assessment of compliance with those requirements to be carried out by the national court (Council Directive 85/337, as amended by Directive 97/11 and Directive 2003/35, Art. 3) 3. Environment — Assessment of the effects of certain projects on the environment –Directive 85/337 — Obligation for the competent authorities to carry out the assessment before they issue an authorisation — Failure to carry out the assessment –Obligation for the authorities to remedy that failure — Scope — Application of national procedural rules — Limits (Art. 4(3) TEU; Council Directive 85/337, as amended by Directive 97/11 and Directive 2003/35) 4. European Union law — Rights conferred on individuals — Infringement by a Member State — Obligation to make good damage caused to individuals — Conditions — Detailed rules governing compensation — Application of national law — Limits 1. See the text of the decision. (see para. 24) 2. Article 3 of Directive 85/337 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, as amended by Directive 97/11 and by Directive 2003/35, must be interpreted as meaning that the environmental impact assessment, as provided for in that article, does not include the assessment of the effects which the project under examination has on the value of material assets. However, pecuniary damage, in so far as it is the direct economic consequence of the effects on the environment of a public or private project, is covered by the objective of protection pursued by Directive 85/337. As regards compensation for such damage, the fact that an environmental impact assessment has not been carried out, in breach of the requirements of that directive, does not, in principle, by itself, according to European Union law, and without prejudice to rules of national law which are less restrictive as regards State liability, confer on an individual a right to compensation for purely pecuniary damage caused by the decrease in the value of his property as a result of the environmental effects of that project. However, it is for the national court to determine whether the requirements of European Union law applicable to the right to compensation, including the existence of a direct causal link between the breach alleged and the damage sustained, have been satisfied. (see paras 30, 3,647, 48, operative part) 3. See the text of the decision. (see paras 37-39) 4. See the text of the decision. (see paras 40-43)