Opinion of the Advocate General — ECLI:EU:C:1999:217
Date: 1999-04-29
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Environment;Approximation of laws
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Italy

Summary of the Judgment 
1. Preliminary rulings — Jurisdiction of the Court — Limits — Jurisdiction of the 
national courts — Determination and assessment of the facts of the dispute 
(EC Treaty, Art. 177 (now Art. 234 EC)) 
I - 5613 
SUMMARY — CASE C-435/97 
2. Preliminary rulings — Reference to the Court — Whether the decision to refer a matter 
has been taken in accordance with the rules of national law governing judicial 
procedure and organisation — Not for the Court to determine 
(EC Treaty, Art. 177 (now Art. 234 EC)) 
3. Environment — Assessment of the effects of certain projects on the environment — 
Directive 85/337— Projects of the classes listed in Annex II to be subject to 
assessment — Discretion of the Member States — Scope and limits — Possibility for 
individuals to rely on the relevant provisions to ensure that such discretion is exercised 
within the proper limits 
(Council Directive 85/337, Arts 2(1) and 4(2)) 
4. Environment — Assessment of the effects of certain projects on the environment — 
Directive 85/337— Assessment procedure— Open to Member States to use an 
alternative procedure — Conditions 
(Council Directive 85/337, Art. 2(1) and (2)) 
5. Environment — Assessment of the effects of certain projects on the environment — 
Directive 85/337— Scope— Projects adopted in detail by specific domestic 
legislation — Not covered 
(Council Directive 85/337, Art. 1(5)) 
6. Environment — Assessment of the effects of certain projects on the environment — 
Directive 85/337 — Scope — Airport which may serve both civil and military purposes 
but primarily for commercial use — Covered 
(Council Directive 85/337, Art. 1(4)) 
1. Under Article 177 of the Treaty (now 
Article 234 EC), which is based on a 
clear separation of functions between 
the national courts and the Court of 
Justice, the latter is empowered to rule 
only on the interpretation or validity of 
Community provisions on the basis of 
the facts which the national court puts 
before it. It is not for the Court of 
Justice, but for the national court, to 
ascertain the facts which have given 
rise to the dispute and to establish the 
consequences which they have for the 
judgment which it is required to deli­
ver. 
2. In view of the distribution of functions 
between the Court of Justice and the 
national courts, it is not for the Court 
to determine, in the procedure provi­
ded for in Article 177 of the Treaty 
(now Article 234 EC), whether the 
decision to bring a matter before it 
was taken in accordance with the rules 
of national law governing the organi­
sation and procedure of the courts. 
3. Article 4(2) of Directive 85/337 on the 
assessment of the effects of certain 
public and private projects on the 
environment provides that projects of 
the classes listed in Annex II to the 
Directive are to be made subject to an 
assessment where Member States con­
sider that their characteristics so 
I - 5614 
WWF AND OTHERS V AUTONOME PROVINZ BOZEN AND OTHERS 
require and that to that end Member 
States may specify certain types of 
project as being subject to an assess­
ment or may establish the criteria and/ 
or thresholds necessary to determine 
which of the projects of the classes 
concerned are to be so subject. The 
limits of that discretion are to be found 
in the obligation, set out in Article 2(1) 
of the Directive, under which projects 
likely, by virtue inter alia of their 
nature, size or location, to have sig­
nificant effects on the environment 
must be subject to an impact assess­
ment. 
The above provisions must be inter­
preted as not conferring on a Member 
State the power either to exclude, from 
the outset and in their entirety, from 
the environmental impact assessment 
procedure established by the Directive 
certain classes of projects falling within 
Annex II to the Directive, including 
modifications to those projects, or to 
exempt from such a procedure a spe­
cific project, either under national 
legislation or on the basis of an indivi­
dual examination of that project, 
unless the specific project, or those 
classes of project in their entirety, could 
be regarded, on the basis of a compre­
hensive assessment, as not being likely 
to have significant effects on the envi­
ronment. 
Where the discretion conferred by 
Articles 4(2) and 2(1) has been excee­
ded by the legislative or administrative 
authorities of a Member State, indivi­
duals may rely on those provisions 
before a court of that Member State 
against the national authorities and 
thus obtain from the latter the setting 
aside of the national rules or measures 
incompatible with those provisions. In 
such cases, it is for the authorities of 
the Member State to take, according to 
their relevant powers, all the general or 
particular measures necessary to ensure 
that projects are examined in order to 
determine whether they are likely to 
have significant effects on the environ­
ment and, if so, to ensure that they are 
subject to an impact assessment. 
4. In the case of a project requiring 
assessment under Directive 85/337 on 
the assessment of the effects of certain 
public and private projects on the 
environment, Article 2(1) and (2) 
thereof are to be interpreted as allow­
ing a Member State to use an assess­
ment procedure other than the proce­
dure introduced by the Directive where 
that alternative procedure is incorpo­
rated in a national procedure which 
exists or is to be established within the 
meaning of Article 2(2) of the Direc­
tive. However, an alternative procedure 
of that kind must satisfy the require­
ments of Article 3 and Articles 5 to 10 
of the Directive, including the public 
participation requirement laid down in 
Article 6. 
5. Article 1(5) of Directive 85/337 on the 
assessment of the effects of certain 
public and private projects on the 
I - 5615 
SUMMARY — CASE C-435/97 
environment, under which the Direc­
tive is not to apply to projects the 
details of which are adopted by a 
specific act of national legislation, must 
be interpreted as not applying to a 
project, which, while provided for by a 
legislative provision setting out a pro­
gramme, has received development 
consent under a separate administra­
tive procedure. The requirements 
which such a provision must satisfy, 
as must the process under which it has 
been adopted, in order that the objec­
tives of the Directive, including that of 
supplying information, can be regarded 
as achieved consist in the adoption of 
the project by a specific legislative act 
which includes all the elements which 
may be relevant to the assessment of 
the impact of the project on the envi­
ronment. 
6. Article 1(4) of Directive 85/337 on the 
assessment of the effects of certain 
public and private projects on the 
environment, under which the Direc­
tive does not cover projects serving 
national defence purposes, is to be 
interpreted as meaning that an airport 
which may simultaneously serve both 
civil and military purposes, but whose 
main use is commercial, falls within the 
scope of the Directive. 
I - 5616