mizuumi1/LegalViz huggingface dataset:
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 19 September 2018.
Hampshire County Council v C.E. and N.E.
References for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal (Ireland).
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and in matters of parental responsibility — International child abduction — Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 — Article 11 — Application for return — Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 — Application for a declaration of enforceability — Appeal — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 47 — Right to an effective remedy — Time limit for bringing the appeal — Order authorising enforcement — Enforcement prior to service of the order.
Joined Cases C-325/18 PPU and C-375/18 PPU. (2019)
Language: Estonian

Nad esitasid 24. novembril 2017 High Court’ile (kõrge kohus, Iirimaa) ex parte kohtumääruse peale määruskaebuse. Asjaomane kaebus, mis esitati kaks päeva pärast määruse nr 2201/2003 artikli 33 lõikes 5 sätestatud tähtaja möödumist, jäeti 18. jaanuaril 2018 hilinemisega esitamise tõttu läbi vaatamata, kuna selles sättes ette nähtud tähtaeg on kohustuslik ja asja menetleval kohtul puudub selle pikendamiseks pädevus. Nad esitasid selle otsuse peale eelotsusetaotluse esitanud kohtule apellatsioonkaebuse.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "District Court (Iirimaa)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Nad"[shape=doubleoctagon];

  "Nad"->"apellatsioonkaebuse 09/10/2017";
  "apellatsioonkaebuse 09/10/2017"->"District Court (Iirimaa)";
  "kaks päeva pärast määruse nr 2201/2003 artikli 33 lõikes 5 sätestatud tähtaja möödumist"->"apellatsioonkaebuse 09/10/2017"[dir=none];
  "District Court (Iirimaa)"->"Nad"[label="jäeti 18. jaanuaril 2018 hilinemisega esitamise tõttu läbi vaatamata"];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 19 September 2018.
Hampshire County Council v C.E. and N.E.
References for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal (Ireland).
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and in matters of parental responsibility — International child abduction — Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 — Article 11 — Application for return — Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 — Application for a declaration of enforceability — Appeal — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 47 — Right to an effective remedy — Time limit for bringing the appeal — Order authorising enforcement — Enforcement prior to service of the order.
Joined Cases C-325/18 PPU and C-375/18 PPU. (2019)
Language: Greek

Στις 24 Νοεμβρίου 2017, οι ενδιαφερόμενοι γονείς προσέβαλαν τη διάταξη ex parte ενώπιον του High Court (ανωτέρου δικαστηρίου, Ιρλανδία). Στις 18 Ιανουαρίου 2018, η εν λόγω προσφυγή, που κατατέθηκε δύο ημέρες μετά την εκπνοή της προθεσμίας του άρθρου 33, παράγραφος 5, του κανονισμού 2201/2003, απορρίφθηκε ως εκπρόθεσμη, με το σκεπτικό ότι η προθεσμία που προβλέπει η διάταξη αυτή είναι δημοσίας τάξεως και ότι το επιληφθέν δικαστήριο δεν είναι αρμόδιο να την παρατείνει. Οι ενδιαφερόμενοι γονείς προσέβαλαν την απόφαση αυτή ενώπιον του αιτούντος δικαστηρίου.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "District Court (Ιρλανδία)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "γονείς"[shape=doubleoctagon];

  "γονείς"->"προσέβαλαν 09/10/2017";
  "προσέβαλαν 09/10/2017"->"District Court (Ιρλανδία)";
  "δύο ημέρες μετά την εκπνοή της προθεσμίας του άρθρου 33, παράγραφος 5, του κανονισμού 2201/2003"->"προσέβαλαν 09/10/2017"[dir=none];
  "District Court (Ιρλανδία)"->"γονείς"[label="απορρίφθηκε ως εκπρόθεσμη"];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 19 September 2018.
Hampshire County Council v C.E. and N.E.
References for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal (Ireland).
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and in matters of parental responsibility — International child abduction — Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 — Article 11 — Application for return — Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 — Application for a declaration of enforceability — Appeal — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 47 — Right to an effective remedy — Time limit for bringing the appeal — Order authorising enforcement — Enforcement prior to service of the order.
Joined Cases C-325/18 PPU and C-375/18 PPU. (2019)
Language: French

Le 24 novembre 2017, ils ont introduit, auprès de la High Court (Haute Cour, Irlande), un recours contre l’ordonnance ex parte. Le 18 janvier 2018, ce recours, qui avait été déposé deux jours après l’expiration du délai prévu à l’article 33, paragraphe 5, du règlement no 2201/2003, a été rejeté comme étant tardif, au motif que le délai prévu à cette disposition était d’ordre public et que la juridiction saisie n’était pas compétente pour le prolonger. Ils ont introduit un recours contre cette décision devant la juridiction de renvoi.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "District Court (Irlande)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Les parents"[shape=doubleoctagon];

  "Les parents"->"un recours 09/10/2017";
  "un recours 09/10/2017"->"District Court (Irlande)";
  "deux jours après l’expiration du délai prévu à l’article 33, paragraphe 5, du règlement no 2201/2003"->"un recours 09/10/2017"[dir=none];
  "District Court (Irlande)"->"Les parents"[label="a été rejeté comme étant tardif"];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 19 September 2018.
Hampshire County Council v C.E. and N.E.
References for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal (Ireland).
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and in matters of parental responsibility — International child abduction — Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 — Article 11 — Application for return — Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 — Application for a declaration of enforceability — Appeal — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 47 — Right to an effective remedy — Time limit for bringing the appeal — Order authorising enforcement — Enforcement prior to service of the order.
Joined Cases C-325/18 PPU and C-375/18 PPU. (2019)
Language: Croatian

Oni su 24. studenoga 2017. podnijeli High Courtu (Visoki sud, Irska) pravni lijek protiv ex parte rješenja. Dana 18. siječnja 2018. taj je pravni lijek, koji je podnesen dva dana nakon isteka roka predviđenog u članku 33. stavku 5. Uredbe br. 2201/2003, bio odbijen kao nepravodoban jer je rok predviđen u toj odredbi prisilne naravi i jer sud pred kojim je postupak pokrenut nema ovlast produljiti ga. Oni su protiv te odluke podnijeli pravni lijek sudu koji je uputio zahtjev.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "District Court (Irska)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Roditelji"[shape=doubleoctagon];

  "Roditelji"->"pravni lijek 09/10/2017";
  "pravni lijek 09/10/2017"->"District Court (Irska)";
  "Dva dana nakon isteka roka predviđenog u članku 33. stavku 5. Uredbe br. 2201/2003"->"pravni lijek 09/10/2017"[dir=none];
  "District Court (Irska)"->"Roditelji"[label="odbijen kao nepravodoban"];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 19 September 2018.
Hampshire County Council v C.E. and N.E.
References for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal (Ireland).
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and in matters of parental responsibility — International child abduction — Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 — Article 11 — Application for return — Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 — Application for a declaration of enforceability — Appeal — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 47 — Right to an effective remedy — Time limit for bringing the appeal — Order authorising enforcement — Enforcement prior to service of the order.
Joined Cases C-325/18 PPU and C-375/18 PPU. (2019)
Language: Italian

Il 24 novembre 2017 essi hanno adito la High Court (Alta Corte, Irlanda) con ricorso in opposizione all’ordinanza ex parte. Il 18 gennaio 2018, tale ricorso, che era stato depositato due giorni dopo la scadenza del termine previsto all’articolo 33, paragrafo 5, del regolamento n. 2201/2003, è stato respinto in quanto tardivo, poiché il termine previsto in tale disposizione era di ordine pubblico e il giudice adito non era competente a prorogarlo. I genitori hanno impugnato tale decisione dinanzi al giudice del rinvio.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "District Court (Irlanda)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "genitori"[shape=doubleoctagon];

  "genitori"->"impugnato tale decisione 09/10/2017";
  "impugnato tale decisione 09/10/2017"->"District Court (Irlanda)";
  "due giorni dopo la scadenza del termine previsto all’articolo 33, paragrafo 5, del regolamento n. 2201/2003"->"impugnato tale decisione 09/10/2017"[dir=none];
  "District Court (Irlanda)"->"genitori"[label="è stato respinto in quanto tardivo"];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 19 September 2018.
Hampshire County Council v C.E. and N.E.
References for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal (Ireland).
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and in matters of parental responsibility — International child abduction — Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 — Article 11 — Application for return — Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 — Application for a declaration of enforceability — Appeal — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 47 — Right to an effective remedy — Time limit for bringing the appeal — Order authorising enforcement — Enforcement prior to service of the order.
Joined Cases C-325/18 PPU and C-375/18 PPU. (2019)
Language: Latvian

2017. gada 24. novembrī viņi iesniedza High Court (Augstā tiesa, Īrija) apelācijas sūdzību par ex parte rīkojumu. 2018. gada 18. janvārī šī apelācijas sūdzība, kas tika iesniegta divas dienas pēc Regulas Nr. 2201/2003 33. panta 5. punktā paredzētā termiņa beigām, tika noraidīta kā novēlota, jo šajā normā paredzētais termiņš bija sabiedriskās kārtības norma un tiesa, kurā tā tika iesniegta, nebija kompetenta šo termiņu pagarināt. Viņi cēla prasību par šo lēmumu iesniedzējtiesā.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "District Court (Īrija)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "viņi"[shape=doubleoctagon];

  "viņi"->"apelācijas sūdzību 09/10/2017";
  "apelācijas sūdzību 09/10/2017"->"District Court (Īrija)";
  "divas dienas pēc Regulas Nr. 2201/2003 33. panta 5. punktā paredzētā termiņa beigām"->"apelācijas sūdzību 09/10/2017"[dir=none];
  "District Court (Īrija)"->"viņi"[label="tika noraidīta kā novēlota"];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 19 September 2018.
Hampshire County Council v C.E. and N.E.
References for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal (Ireland).
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and in matters of parental responsibility — International child abduction — Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 — Article 11 — Application for return — Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 — Application for a declaration of enforceability — Appeal — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 47 — Right to an effective remedy — Time limit for bringing the appeal — Order authorising enforcement — Enforcement prior to service of the order.
Joined Cases C-325/18 PPU and C-375/18 PPU. (2019)
Language: Lithuanian

2017 m. lapkričio 24 d. jie apskundė ex parte nutartį High Court (Aukštasis teismas, Airija). 2018 m. sausio 18 d. šis skundas, pateiktas praėjus dviem dienom po to, kai pasibaigė Reglamento Nr. 2201/2003 33 straipsnio 5 dalyje numatytas terminas, buvo atmestas kaip pateiktas pavėluotai, motyvuojant tuo, kad šioje nuostatoje numatytas terminas buvo imperatyvus ir kad teismas, į kurį kreiptasi, neturėjo kompetencijos jį pratęsti. Šį sprendimą jie apskundė prašymą priimti prejudicinį sprendimą pateikusiam teismui.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "District Court (Airija)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "jie"[shape=doubleoctagon];

  "jie"->"apskundė 09/10/2017";
  "apskundė 09/10/2017"->"District Court (Airija)";
  "praėjus dviem dienom po to, kai pasibaigė Reglamento Nr. 2201/2003 33 straipsnio 5 dalyje numatytas terminas"->"apskundė 09/10/2017"[dir=none];
  "District Court (Airija)"->"jie"[label="atmestas kaip pateiktas pavėluotai"];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 19 September 2018.
Hampshire County Council v C.E. and N.E.
References for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal (Ireland).
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and in matters of parental responsibility — International child abduction — Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 — Article 11 — Application for return — Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 — Application for a declaration of enforceability — Appeal — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 47 — Right to an effective remedy — Time limit for bringing the appeal — Order authorising enforcement — Enforcement prior to service of the order.
Joined Cases C-325/18 PPU and C-375/18 PPU. (2019)
Language: Hungarian

2017. november 24‑én a szülők a High Court (felsőbíróság, Írország) előtt keresetet indítottak az ex parte végzéssel szemben. 2018. január 18‑án e keresetet – amelyet két nappal a 2201/2003 rendelet 33. cikkének (5) bekezdésében megállapított határidő lejártát követően terjesztettek elő – késedelem miatt elutasították, mivel az e rendelkezésben előírt határidő imperatív volt, és az eljáró bíróság nem rendelkezett hatáskörrel annak meghosszabbítására. A szülők megtámadták a határozatot a kérdést előterjesztő bíróság előtt.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "District Court (Írország)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "szülők"[shape=doubleoctagon];

  "szülők"->"megtámadták a határozatot 09/10/2017";
  "megtámadták a határozatot 09/10/2017"->"District Court (Írország)";
  "Két nappal a 2201/2003 rendelet 33. cikkének (5) bekezdésében megállapított határidő lejártát követően"->"megtámadták a határozatot 09/10/2017"[dir=none];
  "District Court (Írország)"->"szülők"[label="késedelem miatt elutasították"];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 19 September 2018.
Hampshire County Council v C.E. and N.E.
References for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal (Ireland).
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and in matters of parental responsibility — International child abduction — Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 — Article 11 — Application for return — Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 — Application for a declaration of enforceability — Appeal — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 47 — Right to an effective remedy — Time limit for bringing the appeal — Order authorising enforcement — Enforcement prior to service of the order.
Joined Cases C-325/18 PPU and C-375/18 PPU. (2019)
Language: Maltese

Fl-24 ta’ Novembru 2017, huma ppreżentaw, quddiem il-High Court (il-Qorti Għolja, l-Irlanda), rikors kontra d-digriet ex parte. Fit-18 ta’ Jannar 2018, dan ir-rikors, li kien ġie ppreżentat jumejn wara l-iskadenza tat-terminu previst fl-Artikolu 33(5) tar-Regolament Nru 2201/2003, ġie miċħud bħala tardiv, għar-raġuni li t-terminu previst f’din id-dispożzzjoni kien terminu ta’ ordni pubbliku u li l-qorti adita ma kellhiex il-kompetenza li testendih. Huma ppreżentaw appell minn din id-deċiżjoni quddiem il-qorti tar-rinviju.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "District Court (l-Irlanda)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Ġenituri"[shape=doubleoctagon];

  "Ġenituri"->"appell 09/10/2017";
  "appell 09/10/2017"->"District Court (l-Irlanda)";
  "jumejn wara l-iskadenza tat-terminu previst fl-Artikolu 33(5) tar-Regolament Nru 2201/2003"->"appell 09/10/2017"[dir=none];
  "District Court (l-Irlanda)"->"Ġenituri"[label="ġie miċħud bħala tardiv"];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 19 September 2018.
Hampshire County Council v C.E. and N.E.
References for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal (Ireland).
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and in matters of parental responsibility — International child abduction — Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 — Article 11 — Application for return — Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 — Application for a declaration of enforceability — Appeal — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 47 — Right to an effective remedy — Time limit for bringing the appeal — Order authorising enforcement — Enforcement prior to service of the order.
Joined Cases C-325/18 PPU and C-375/18 PPU. (2019)
Language: Dutch

Op 24 november 2017 hebben zij bij de High Court (Ierland) beroep ingesteld tegen de niet-contradictoire beschikking. Op 18 januari 2018 is dit beroep, dat twee dagen na het verstrijken van de termijn van artikel 33, lid 5, van verordening nr. 2201/2003 was ingesteld, verworpen omdat het te laat was ingesteld, met de motivering dat de termijn van deze bepaling van openbare orde is en dat de aangezochte rechter niet bevoegd was om die te verlengen. Zij hebben tegen deze beslissing hoger beroep ingesteld bij de verwijzende rechter.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "District Court (Ierland)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Ouders"[shape=doubleoctagon];

  "Ouders"->"beroep 09/10/2017";
  "beroep 09/10/2017"->"District Court (Ierland)";
  "twee dagen na het verstrijken van de termijn van artikel 33, lid 5, van verordening nr. 2201/2003"->"beroep 09/10/2017"[dir=none];
  "District Court (Ierland)"->"Ouders"[label="Verworpen omdat het te laat was ingesteld"];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 19 September 2018.
Hampshire County Council v C.E. and N.E.
References for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal (Ireland).
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and in matters of parental responsibility — International child abduction — Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 — Article 11 — Application for return — Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 — Application for a declaration of enforceability — Appeal — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 47 — Right to an effective remedy — Time limit for bringing the appeal — Order authorising enforcement — Enforcement prior to service of the order.
Joined Cases C-325/18 PPU and C-375/18 PPU. (2019)
Language: Polish

W dniu 24 listopada 2017 r. zainteresowani rodzice zainicjowali przed High Court (wysokim trybunałem, Irlandia) postępowanie odwoławcze przeciwko orzeczeniu ex parte. Ów środek zaskarżenia, który został wniesiony dwa dni po upływie terminu przewidzianego w art. 33 ust. 5 rozporządzenia nr 2201/2003, został odrzucony w dniu 18 stycznia 2018 r. jako wniesiony po terminie z tego względu, że termin przewidziany przez ten przepis jest terminem zawitym i sądowi rozpatrującemu sprawę nie przysługuje jurysdykcja do jego przedłużenia. Rodzice odwołali się od tej decyzji do sądu odsyłającego.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "District Court (Irlandia)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Rodzice"[shape=doubleoctagon];

  "Rodzice"->"postępowanie odwoławcze 09/10/2017";
  "postępowanie odwoławcze 09/10/2017"->"District Court (Irlandia)";
  "dwa dni po upływie terminu przewidzianego w art. 33 ust. 5 rozporządzenia nr 2201/2003"->"postępowanie odwoławcze 09/10/2017"[dir=none];
  "District Court (Irlandia)"->"Rodzice"[label="odrzucony w dniu 18 stycznia 2018 r. jako wniesiony po terminie"];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 19 September 2018.
Hampshire County Council v C.E. and N.E.
References for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal (Ireland).
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and in matters of parental responsibility — International child abduction — Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 — Article 11 — Application for return — Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 — Application for a declaration of enforceability — Appeal — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 47 — Right to an effective remedy — Time limit for bringing the appeal — Order authorising enforcement — Enforcement prior to service of the order.
Joined Cases C-325/18 PPU and C-375/18 PPU. (2019)
Language: Portuguese

Em 24 de novembro de 2017, interpuseram na High Court (Tribunal Superior, Irlanda) um recurso do despacho ex parte. Em 18 de janeiro de 2018, este julgou o recurso, que tinha sido entregue dois dias depois do termo do prazo previsto no artigo 33.o, n.o 5, do Regulamento n.o 2201/2003, extemporâneo, com o fundamento de que o prazo previsto nesta disposição era de ordem pública e que o tribunal chamado a pronunciar‑se não era competente para o prorrogar. Os progenitores recorreram desta decisão para o órgão jurisdicional de reenvio.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "District Court (Irlanda)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "progenitores"[shape=doubleoctagon];

  "progenitores"->"recurso 09/10/2017";
  "recurso 09/10/2017"->"District Court (Irlanda)";
  "dois dias depois do termo do prazo previsto no artigo 33.o, n.o 5, do Regulamento n.o 2201/2003"->"recurso 09/10/2017"[dir=none];
  "District Court (Irlanda)"->"progenitores"[label="julgou o recurso, extemporâneo"];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 19 September 2018.
Hampshire County Council v C.E. and N.E.
References for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal (Ireland).
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and in matters of parental responsibility — International child abduction — Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 — Article 11 — Application for return — Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 — Application for a declaration of enforceability — Appeal — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 47 — Right to an effective remedy — Time limit for bringing the appeal — Order authorising enforcement — Enforcement prior to service of the order.
Joined Cases C-325/18 PPU and C-375/18 PPU. (2019)
Language: Romanian

La 24 noiembrie 2017, ei au introdus la High Court (Înalta Curte, Irlanda) o cale de atac împotriva ordonanței ex parte. La 18 ianuarie 2018, această cale de atac, care fusese depusă la două zile după expirarea termenului prevăzut la articolul 33 alineatul (5) din Regulamentul nr. 2201/2003, a fost respinsă ca fiind tardivă, pentru motivul că termenul prevăzut la această dispoziție era de ordine publică și că instanța sesizată nu era competentă să îl prelungească. Ei au atacat această decizie în fața instanței de trimitere.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "District Court (Irlanda)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "ei"[shape=doubleoctagon];

  "ei"->"cale de atac 09/10/2017";
  "cale de atac 09/10/2017"->"District Court (Irlanda)";
  "la două zile după expirarea termenului prevăzut la articolul 33 alineatul (5) din Regulamentul nr. 2201/2003"->"cale de atac 09/10/2017"[dir=none];
  "District Court (Irlanda)"->"ei"[label="a fost respinsă ca fiind tardivă"];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 19 September 2018.
Hampshire County Council v C.E. and N.E.
References for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal (Ireland).
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and in matters of parental responsibility — International child abduction — Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 — Article 11 — Application for return — Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 — Application for a declaration of enforceability — Appeal — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 47 — Right to an effective remedy — Time limit for bringing the appeal — Order authorising enforcement — Enforcement prior to service of the order.
Joined Cases C-325/18 PPU and C-375/18 PPU. (2019)
Language: Slovak

Dňa 24. novembra 2017 podali na High Court (Vyšší súd, Írsko) odvolanie proti uzneseniu ex parte. Dňa 18. januára 2018 bolo toto odvolanie, ktoré bolo podané dva dni po uplynutí lehoty upravenej v článku 33 ods. 5 nariadenia č. 2201/2003, odmietnuté ako oneskorene podané z toho dôvodu, že lehota upravená týmto ustanovením je lehotou verejného poriadku a konajúci súd nemá právomoc ju predĺžiť. Proti tomuto rozhodnutiu dotknutí rodičia podali ďalší opravný prostriedok na vnútroštátny súd.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "District Court (Írsko)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "dotknutí rodičia"[shape=doubleoctagon];

  "dotknutí rodičia"->"odvolanie 09/10/2017";
  "odvolanie 09/10/2017"->"District Court (Írsko)";
  "dva dni po uplynutí lehoty upravenej v článku 33 ods. 5 nariadenia č. 2201/2003"->"odvolanie 09/10/2017"[dir=none];
  "District Court (Írsko)"->"dotknutí rodičia"[label="odmietnuté ako oneskorene podané"];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 19 September 2018.
Hampshire County Council v C.E. and N.E.
References for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal (Ireland).
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and in matters of parental responsibility — International child abduction — Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 — Article 11 — Application for return — Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 — Application for a declaration of enforceability — Appeal — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 47 — Right to an effective remedy — Time limit for bringing the appeal — Order authorising enforcement — Enforcement prior to service of the order.
Joined Cases C-325/18 PPU and C-375/18 PPU. (2019)
Language: Slovenian

24. novembra 2017 sta pri High Court (višje sodišče, Irska) vložila pravno sredstvo zoper sklep ex parte. To pravno sredstvo, ki je bilo vloženo dva dni po izteku roka, določenega v členu 33(5) Uredbe št. 2201/2003, je bilo 18. januarja 2018 zavrženo kot prepozno z obrazložitvijo, da je rok iz te določbe zavezujoč in da sodišče, ki mu je to pravno sredstvo predloženo, ni pristojno za njegovo podaljšanje. Zoper to odločbo sta pri predložitvenem sodišču vložila pravno sredstvo.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "District Court (Irska)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Starši"[shape=doubleoctagon];

  "Starši"->"pravno sredstvo 09/10/2017";
  "pravno sredstvo 09/10/2017"->"District Court (Irska)";
  "dva dni po izteku roka, določenega v členu 33(5) Uredbe št. 2201/2003"->"pravno sredstvo 09/10/2017"[dir=none];
  "District Court (Irska)"->"Starši"[label="zavrženo kot prepozno"];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 19 September 2018.
Hampshire County Council v C.E. and N.E.
References for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal (Ireland).
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and in matters of parental responsibility — International child abduction — Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 — Article 11 — Application for return — Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 — Application for a declaration of enforceability — Appeal — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 47 — Right to an effective remedy — Time limit for bringing the appeal — Order authorising enforcement — Enforcement prior to service of the order.
Joined Cases C-325/18 PPU and C-375/18 PPU. (2019)
Language: Finnish

He tekivät 24.11.2017 Irlannin High Courtiin valituksen ex parte ‑määräyksestä. Tämä valitus, joka oli tehty kaksi päivää asetuksen N:o 2201/2003 33 artiklan 5 kohdassa säädetyn määräajan päättymisen jälkeen, hylättiin myöhässä tehtynä, koska kyseisessä säännöksessä säädetty määräaika oli pakottava ja tuomioistuimella, jonka käsiteltäväksi asia oli saatettu, ei ollut toimivaltaa pidentää sitä. He hakivat muutosta tähän päätökseen ennakkoratkaisua pyytäneessä tuomioistuimessa.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "District Court (Irlannin)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Vanhemmat"[shape=doubleoctagon];

  "Vanhemmat"->"valitus 09/10/2017";
  "valitus 09/10/2017"->"District Court (Irlannin)";
  "kaksi päivää asetuksen N:o 2201/2003 33 artiklan 5 kohdassa säädetyn määräajan päättymisen jälkeen"->"valitus 09/10/2017"[dir=none];
  "District Court (Irlannin)"->"Vanhemmat"[label="hylättiin myöhässä tehtynä"];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 19 September 2018.
Hampshire County Council v C.E. and N.E.
References for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal (Ireland).
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and in matters of parental responsibility — International child abduction — Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 — Article 11 — Application for return — Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 — Application for a declaration of enforceability — Appeal — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 47 — Right to an effective remedy — Time limit for bringing the appeal — Order authorising enforcement — Enforcement prior to service of the order.
Joined Cases C-325/18 PPU and C-375/18 PPU. (2019)
Language: Swedish

Den 24 november 2017 överklagade föräldrarna ex parte-beslutet till High Court (Förvaltningsöverdomstolen, Irland). Den 18 januari 2018 avvisades överklagandet såsom för sent inkommet, då det inkom två dagar efter det att den frist som föreskrivs i artikel 33.5 i förordning nr 2201/2003 hade löpt ut. Som skäl angavs att den i denna bestämmelse föreskrivna fristen utgör bindande rätt (ordre public) och att den aktuella domstolen saknade behörighet att förlänga den. Föräldrarna har överklagat sistnämnda beslut till den hänskjutande domstolen.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "District Court (Irland)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Föräldrarna"[shape=doubleoctagon];

  "Föräldrarna"->"överklagade 09/10/2017";
  "överklagade 09/10/2017"->"District Court (Irland)";
  "två dagar efter det att den frist som föreskrivs i artikel 33.5 i förordning nr 2201/2003 hade löpt ut."->"överklagade 09/10/2017"[dir=none];
  "District Court (Irland)"->"Föräldrarna"[label="avvisades överklagandet såsom för sent inkommet"];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 12 June 2019.
Terre wallonne ASBL v Région wallonne.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d'État (Belgium).
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Environment — Directive 2001/42/EC — Assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment — Decree — Establishment of conservation objectives for the Natura 2000 network, in accordance with Directive 92/43/EEC — Definition of ‘plans and programmes’ — Obligation to undertake an environmental assessment.
Case C-321/18. (2019)
Language: Bulgarian

На 8 ноември 2012 г. министърът на опазване на природата внася във валонското правителство докладна записка с предмет приемането на предварителен проект на наредба за определяне на целите за опазване за мрежата „Натура 2000“. От 10 декември 2012 г. до 8 февруари 2013 г. в 218 общини, засегнати от тази мрежа, е проведено допитване до обществеността.
През октомври и ноември 2016 г. на валонското правителство е представен втори, а след това и трети проект за наредба.
На 1 декември 2016 г. това правителство приема оспорваната наредба.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "министърът на опазване на природата"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "валонското правителство"[shape=doubleoctagon];

  "министърът на опазване на природата"->"валонското правителство"[label="втори проект за наредба 10/2016"];
  "министърът на опазване на природата"->"валонското правителство"[label="трети проект за наредба 11/2016"];
  "министърът на опазване на природата"->"докладна записка 08/11/2012";
  "докладна записка 08/11/2012"->"валонското правителство";
  "докладна записка 08/11/2012"->"приемането на предварителен проект на наредба за определяне на целите за опазване за мрежата „Натура 2000“"[dir=none];
  "валонското правителство"->"оспорваната наредба"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 12 June 2019.
Terre wallonne ASBL v Région wallonne.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d'État (Belgium).
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Environment — Directive 2001/42/EC — Assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment — Decree — Establishment of conservation objectives for the Natura 2000 network, in accordance with Directive 92/43/EEC — Definition of ‘plans and programmes’ — Obligation to undertake an environmental assessment.
Case C-321/18. (2019)
Language: Spanish

El 8 de noviembre de 2012, el ministre de la Nature (Ministro de la Naturaleza, Bélgica) presentó al Gobierno valón una nota que tenía por objeto la adopción de un anteproyecto que fijaba los objetivos de conservación para la Red Natura 2000. Entre el 10 de diciembre de 2012 y el 8 de febrero de 2013, se realizó una encuesta pública en los 218 municipios a los que afecta la mencionada red.
En octubre y noviembre de 2016, se presentaron al Gobierno valón un segundo y un tercer proyecto de Decreto.
El 1 de diciembre de 2016, el Gobierno valón adoptó el Decreto controvertido.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "ministre de la Nature"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Gobierno valón"[shape=doubleoctagon];

  "ministre de la Nature"->"Gobierno valón"[label="un segundo proyecto de Decreto. 10/2016"];
  "ministre de la Nature"->"Gobierno valón"[label="un tercer proyecto de Decreto. 11/2016"];
  "ministre de la Nature"->"una nota 08/11/2012";
  "una nota 08/11/2012"->"Gobierno valón";
  "una nota 08/11/2012"->"la adopción de un anteproyecto que fijaba los objetivos de conservación para la Red Natura 2000"[dir=none];
  "Gobierno valón"->"Decreto controvertido."[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 12 June 2019.
Terre wallonne ASBL v Région wallonne.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d'État (Belgium).
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Environment — Directive 2001/42/EC — Assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment — Decree — Establishment of conservation objectives for the Natura 2000 network, in accordance with Directive 92/43/EEC — Definition of ‘plans and programmes’ — Obligation to undertake an environmental assessment.
Case C-321/18. (2019)
Language: Czech

Dne 8. listopadu 2012 předložil ministr životního prostředí valonské vládě ke schválení návrh vyhlášky, kterou se stanoví cíle ochrany pro síť Natura 2000. Od 10. prosince 2012 do 8. února 2013 proběhlo veřejné projednání ve 218 obcích, které jsou dotčeny touto sítí.
V říjnu a listopadu 2016 byl valonské vládě předložen druhý a třetí návrh vyhlášky.
Dne 1. prosince 2016 přijala tato vláda napadenou vyhlášku.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "ministr životního prostředí"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "valonské vládě"[shape=doubleoctagon];

  "ministr životního prostředí"->"valonské vládě"[label="druhý návrh vyhlášky 10/2016"];
  "ministr životního prostředí"->"valonské vládě"[label="třetí návrh vyhlášky 11/2016"];
  "ministr životního prostředí"->"Poznámka 08/11/2012";
  "Poznámka 08/11/2012"->"valonské vládě";
  "Poznámka 08/11/2012"->"Dne 8. listopadu 2012 předložil ministr životního prostředí valonské vládě ke schválení návrh vyhlášky, kterou se stanoví cíle ochrany pro síť Natura 2000."[dir=none];
  "valonské vládě"->"napadenou vyhlášku."[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 12 June 2019.
Terre wallonne ASBL v Région wallonne.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d'État (Belgium).
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Environment — Directive 2001/42/EC — Assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment — Decree — Establishment of conservation objectives for the Natura 2000 network, in accordance with Directive 92/43/EEC — Definition of ‘plans and programmes’ — Obligation to undertake an environmental assessment.
Case C-321/18. (2019)
Language: Danish

Den 8. november 2012 indgav ministeren med ansvar for natur en notits til den vallonske regering med henblik på vedtagelse af et udkast vedrørende fastlæggelsen af bevaringsmålsætninger for Natura 2000-nettet. Fra den 10. december 2012 til den 8. februar 2013 fandt en offentlig undersøgelse sted i de 218 kommuner, der var berørt af Natura 2000-nettet.
I oktober og november 2016 blev et andet og dernæst et tredje udkast til bekendtgørelse fremlagt for den vallonske regering.
Den 1. december 2016 vedtog denne regering den anfægtede bekendtgørelse.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "ministeren med ansvar for natur"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "den vallonske regering"[shape=doubleoctagon];

  "ministeren med ansvar for natur"->"den vallonske regering"[label="et andet udkast til bekendtgørelse 10/2016"];
  "ministeren med ansvar for natur"->"den vallonske regering"[label="et tredje udkast til bekendtgørelse 11/2016"];
  "ministeren med ansvar for natur"->"notits 08/11/2012";
  "notits 08/11/2012"->"den vallonske regering";
  "notits 08/11/2012"->"vedtagelse af et udkast vedrørende fastlæggelsen af bevaringsmålsætninger for Natura 2000-nettet."[dir=none];
  "den vallonske regering"->"den anfægtede bekendtgørelse."[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 12 June 2019.
Terre wallonne ASBL v Région wallonne.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d'État (Belgium).
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Environment — Directive 2001/42/EC — Assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment — Decree — Establishment of conservation objectives for the Natura 2000 network, in accordance with Directive 92/43/EEC — Definition of ‘plans and programmes’ — Obligation to undertake an environmental assessment.
Case C-321/18. (2019)
Language: German

Am 8. November 2012 übergab der Umweltminister der wallonischen Regierung einen Vermerk betreffend die Annahme eines Vorentwurfs zur Festlegung der Erhaltungsziele für das Natura‑2000-Netz. Vom 10. Dezember 2012 bis zum 8. Februar 2013 fand eine öffentliche Untersuchung in den 218 von diesem Netz betroffenen Gemeinden statt.
In den Monaten Oktober und November 2016 wurden der wallonischen Regierung ein zweiter und sodann ein dritter Erlassentwurf vorgelegt.
Am 1. Dezember 2016 nahm diese Regierung den angefochtenen Erlass an.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Umweltminister"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "wallonischen Regierung"[shape=doubleoctagon];

  "Umweltminister"->"wallonischen Regierung"[label="ein zweiter Erlassentwurf 10/2016"];
  "Umweltminister"->"wallonischen Regierung"[label="ein dritter Erlassentwurf 11/2016"];
  "Umweltminister"->"Vermerk 08/11/2012";
  "Vermerk 08/11/2012"->"wallonischen Regierung";
  "Vermerk 08/11/2012"->"betreffend die Annahme eines Vorentwurfs zur Festlegung der Erhaltungsziele für das Natura‑2000-Netz."[dir=none];
  "wallonischen Regierung"->"den angefochtenen Erlass an."[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 12 June 2019.
Terre wallonne ASBL v Région wallonne.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d'État (Belgium).
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Environment — Directive 2001/42/EC — Assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment — Decree — Establishment of conservation objectives for the Natura 2000 network, in accordance with Directive 92/43/EEC — Definition of ‘plans and programmes’ — Obligation to undertake an environmental assessment.
Case C-321/18. (2019)
Language: Estonian

Looduskaitseminister esitas 8. novembril 2012 Vallooni valitsusele taotluse võtta vastu eelnõu, määramaks kindlaks Natura 2000 võrgustiku kaitse-eesmärgid. Ajavahemikus 10. detsembrist 2012 kuni 8. veebruarini 2013 toimus avalik küsitlus 218 vallas, mida võrgustik puudutab.
Oktoobris ja novembris 2016 esitati Vallooni valitsusele määruse teine ja seejärel kolmas eelnõu.
Vallooni valitsus võttis vaidlustatud määruse vastu 1. detsembril 2016.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Looduskaitseminister"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Vallooni valitsus"[shape=doubleoctagon];

  "Looduskaitseminister"->"Vallooni valitsus"[label="määruse teine eelnõu 10/2016"];
  "Looduskaitseminister"->"Vallooni valitsus"[label="kolmas eelnõu 11/2016"];
  "Looduskaitseminister"->"Märkus 08/11/2012";
  "Märkus 08/11/2012"->"Vallooni valitsus";
  "Märkus 08/11/2012"->"Looduskaitseminister esitas 8. novembril 2012 Vallooni valitsusele taotluse võtta vastu eelnõu, määramaks kindlaks Natura 2000 võrgustiku kaitse-eesmärgid."[dir=none];
  "Vallooni valitsus"->"vaidlustatud määruse vastu"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 12 June 2019.
Terre wallonne ASBL v Région wallonne.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d'État (Belgium).
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Environment — Directive 2001/42/EC — Assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment — Decree — Establishment of conservation objectives for the Natura 2000 network, in accordance with Directive 92/43/EEC — Definition of ‘plans and programmes’ — Obligation to undertake an environmental assessment.
Case C-321/18. (2019)
Language: Greek

Στις 8 Νοεμβρίου 2012, ο Υπουργός Περιβάλλοντος υπέβαλε στην Κυβέρνηση της Βαλλονίας υπόμνημα με αντικείμενο την έγκριση προκαταρκτικού σχεδίου καθορισμού των στόχων διατήρησης του δικτύου Natura 2000. Από τις 10 Δεκεμβρίου 2012 έως τις 8 Φεβρουαρίου 2013 διεξήχθη δημόσια διαβούλευση στους 218 δήμους τους οποίους αφορά το δίκτυο αυτό.
Τον Οκτώβριο και τον Νοέμβριο 2016, υποβλήθηκε στην Κυβέρνηση της Βαλλονίας δεύτερο, και στη συνέχεια τρίτο, σχέδιο απόφασης.
Την 1η Δεκεμβρίου 2016, η εν λόγω κυβέρνηση εξέδωσε την προσβαλλόμενη απόφαση.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Υπουργός Περιβάλλοντος"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Κυβέρνηση της Βαλλονίας"[shape=doubleoctagon];

  "Υπουργός Περιβάλλοντος"->"Κυβέρνηση της Βαλλονίας"[label="δεύτερο σχέδιο απόφασης 10/2016"];
  "Υπουργός Περιβάλλοντος"->"Κυβέρνηση της Βαλλονίας"[label="τρίτο, σχέδιο απόφασης 11/2016"];
  "Υπουργός Περιβάλλοντος"->"Υπόμνημα 08/11/2012";
  "Υπόμνημα 08/11/2012"->"Κυβέρνηση της Βαλλονίας";
  "Υπόμνημα 08/11/2012"->"την έγκριση προκαταρκτικού σχεδίου καθορισμού των στόχων διατήρησης του δικτύου Natura 2000"[dir=none];
  "Κυβέρνηση της Βαλλονίας"->"εξέδωσε την προσβαλλόμενη απόφαση"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 12 June 2019.
Terre wallonne ASBL v Région wallonne.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d'État (Belgium).
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Environment — Directive 2001/42/EC — Assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment — Decree — Establishment of conservation objectives for the Natura 2000 network, in accordance with Directive 92/43/EEC — Definition of ‘plans and programmes’ — Obligation to undertake an environmental assessment.
Case C-321/18. (2019)
Language: French

Le 8 novembre 2012, le ministre de la Nature a déposé au gouvernement wallon une note ayant pour objet l’adoption d’un avant-projet fixant les objectifs de conservation pour le réseau Natura 2000. Du 10 décembre 2012 au 8 février 2013, une enquête publique s’est déroulée dans les 218 communes concernées par ce réseau.
Aux mois d’octobre et de novembre 2016, un deuxième, puis un troisième projet d’arrêté ont été présentés au gouvernement wallon.
Le 1er décembre 2016, ce gouvernement a adopté l’arrêté contesté.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "le ministre de la Nature"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "gouvernement wallon"[shape=doubleoctagon];

  "le ministre de la Nature"->"gouvernement wallon"[label="un deuxième projet d’arrêté 10/2016"];
  "le ministre de la Nature"->"gouvernement wallon"[label="un troisième projet d’arrêté 11/2016"];
  "le ministre de la Nature"->"une note ayant pour objet l’adoption d’un avant-projet fixant les objectifs de conservation pour le réseau Natura 2000 08/11/2012";
  "une note ayant pour objet l’adoption d’un avant-projet fixant les objectifs de conservation pour le réseau Natura 2000 08/11/2012"->"gouvernement wallon";
  "une note ayant pour objet l’adoption d’un avant-projet fixant les objectifs de conservation pour le réseau Natura 2000 08/11/2012"->"ayant pour objet l’adoption d’un avant-projet fixant les objectifs de conservation pour le réseau Natura 2000."[dir=none];
  "gouvernement wallon"->"l’arrêté contesté."[dir=none];
    
}