Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2014:2382
Date: 2014-11-19
Language of the case: English
Court formation: Second Chamber
Subject matter: Environment;Pollution
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: United Kingdom

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber), 19 November 2014 1. Environment — Atmospheric pollution — Ambient air quality — Directive 2008/50 — Limit values for the protection of human health — Nitrogen dioxide — Impossibility of achieving conformity with limit values in a given zone or agglomeration — Postponement of deadlines — Conditions — Establishment of an air quality plan — Submission of an application — No exception to the obligations) (European Parliament and Council Directive 2008/50, Art. 22(1) and Annex XI) 2. Environment — Atmospheric pollution — Ambient air quality — Directive 2008/50 — Limit values for the protection of human health — Nitrogen dioxide — Impossibility of achieving conformity with limit values in a given zone or agglomeration — No application by the Member State concerned to postpone the deadline fixed by the Directive — Establishment of an air quality plan — Insufficient to remedy the failure to comply with the obligations under the directive (European Parliament and Council Directive 2008/50, Arts 13, 22(1), 23 and 23(1), second para., and Annex XI) 3. Environment — Atmospheric pollution — Ambient air quality — Directive 2008/50 — Limit values for the protection of human health — Nitrogen dioxide — Impossibility of achieving conformity with limit values in a given zone or agglomeration — Air quality plans — Entitlement for directly concerned individuals to require the competent national authorities to establish an air quality plan (European Parliament and Council Directive 2008/50, Arts 13 and 22(1)) 4. Environment — Atmospheric pollution — Ambient air quality — Directive 2008/50 — Limit values for the protection of human health — Nitrogen dioxide — Failure by a Member State to comply — No application to postpone the deadline fixed by the directive — Obligation for Member States to establish an air quality plan — Requirement for the national court to take any necessary measure to ensure compliance with that obligation (European Parliament and Council Directive 2008/50, Arts 13, 22(1) and 23(1), second para.) 1. Article 22(1) of Directive 2008/50 on ambient air quality and cleaner air for Europe must be interpreted as meaning that, in order to be able to postpone by a maximum of five years the deadline specified by the directive for achieving conformity with the limit values for nitrogen dioxide specified in Annex XI thereto, a Member State is required to make an application for postponement and to establish an air quality plan when it is objectively apparent, having regard to existing data, and notwithstanding the implementation by that Member State of appropriate pollution abatement measures, that conformity with those values cannot be achieved in a given zone or agglomeration by the specified deadline. Directive 2008/50 does not contain any exception to the obligation flowing from Article 22(1). (see para. 35, operative part 1) 2. Where it is apparent that conformity with the limit values for nitrogen dioxide established in Annex XI to Directive 2008/50 on ambient air quality and cleaner air for Europe cannot be achieved in a given zone or agglomeration of a Member State by 1 January 2010, the date specified in that annex, and that Member State has not applied for postponement of that deadline under Article 22(1) of Directive 2008/50, the fact that an air quality plan which complies with the second subparagraph of Article 23(1) of the directive has been drawn up, does not, in itself, permit the view to be taken that that Member State has nevertheless met its obligations under Article 13 of the directive. A different interpretation would be liable to impair the effectiveness of Articles 13 and 22 of Directive 2008/50 because it would allow a Member State to disregard the deadline imposed by Article 13 under less stringent conditions than those imposed by Article 22. Furthermore, this interpretation is supported by the fact that Articles 22 and 23 of Directive 2008/50 are, in principle, to apply in different situations and are different in scope. (see paras 44, 46, 49, operative part 2) 3. See the text of the decision. (see paras 52-56) 4. Where a Member State has failed to comply with the requirements of the second subparagraph of Article 13(1) of Directive 2008/50 on ambient air quality and cleaner air for Europe and has not applied for a postponement of the deadline as provided for by Article 22 of the directive, it is for the national court having jurisdiction, should a case be brought before it, to take, with regard to the national authority, any necessary measure, such as an order in the appropriate terms, so that the authority establishes the plan required by the directive in accordance with the conditions laid down by the latter. As regards the content of the plan, it follows from the second subparagraph of Article 23(1) of Directive 2008/50 that, while Member States have a degree of discretion in deciding which measures to adopt, those measures must, in any event, ensure that the period during which the limit values are exceeded is as short as possible. (see paras 57, 58, operative part 3)