15.5.2023
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 173/19
Parties to the main proceedings Applicants: Elliniki Ornithologiki Etaireia Syllogos Diktyo Oikologikon Organoseon Aigaiou Perivallontikos Syllogos Rethymnou Politistikos Syllogos Thronos Kleisidiou KX and Others Defendants: Ypourgos Esoterikon Ypourgos Oikonomikon Ypourgos Anaptyxis kai Ependyseon Ypourgos Perivallontos kai Energeias Ypourgos Agrotikis Anaptyxis kai Trofimon Questions referred (1) Must Article 4(1) and (2) of Directive 2009/147/EC, (1) read in combination with Article 6(2) to (4) of Directive 92/43/EEC, (2) be interpreted as precluding national regulatory provisions, such as those set out [in the grounds for the judgment], which provide that measures for the special protection, conservation and restoration of wild bird species and habitats in special protection areas (SPAs) apply only to the ‘classification species’, that is to say only to the species of wild birds listed in Annex I to Directive 2009/147/EC and to the regularly occurring migratory birds in each SPA which, combined with the criteria for the classification of SPAs contained in the national legislation, are used as indicators to justify the classification of an area as an SPA?
(2) Is the answer to the preceding question affected by the fact that the measures referred to above for the special protection, conservation and restoration of wild bird species and habitats in special protection areas (SPAs) are, in essence, basic preventive measures to safeguard SPAs (‘precautionary safeguards’) that apply horizontally, that is to say, to all SPAs, or by the fact that management plans for each specific SPA setting out the targets and measures needed to achieve or ensure satisfactory conservation of each SPA and the species living within it have not been adopted to date in Greek law?
(3) Is the answer to the two preceding questions affected by the fact that, based on the obligation to assess the environmental effects of projects and activities in accordance with Directive 2011/92/EU (3) and to carry out an ‘appropriate assessment’ in accordance with Article 6(2) to (4) of Directive 92/43/EEC, all the species listed in Annex I to Directive 2009/147/EC or the regularly occurring migratory birds in each SPA must be recorded as part of the assessment of the environmental effects of each specific planned public or private project?
(1) (2) (3)
Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds (Codified version) (OJ 2010 L 20, p. 7).
Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (OJ 1992 L 206, p. 7).
Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (codification) Text with EEA relevance (OJ 2012 L 26, p. 1).
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Administratīvā apgabaltiesa (Latvia) lodged on 15 February 2023 — Biedrība ‘Latvijas Informācijas un komunikācijas tehnoloģijas asociācija’ v Valsts ieņēmumu dienests (Case C-87/23, Latvijas Informācijas un komunikācijas tehnoloģijas asociācija) (2023/C 173/27) Language of the case: Latvian Referring court Administratīvā apgabaltiesa