- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case C-263/08: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Högsta domstolen (Sweden) lodged on 19 June 2008 — Djurgården-Lilla Värtans Miljöskyddsförening v Stockholms kommun genom dess marknämnd
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62008CN0263
62008CN0263
With us you find everything. Try it now!
I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
15.8.2008
Official Journal of the European Union
C 209/34
(Case C-263/08)
(2008/C 209/51)
Language of the case: Swedish
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Djurgården-Lilla Värtans Miljöskyddsförening
Defendant: Stockholms kommun genom dess marknämnd
Questions referred
1.Is point 10 of Annex II to Directive 85/337 to be interpreted as meaning that it encompasses water-related works which involve the drawing off from a tunnel for power cables of groundwater leaking into it and infiltration (supply) of water into the ground or hill to compensate for any reduction in the groundwater, and the construction and maintenance of installations for the drawing off and infiltration?
2.If the answer to Question 1 is affirmative: Does the provision in Article 10a of Directive 85/337 — that under certain circumstances the public concerned is to have access to a review procedure before a court of law or another independent and impartial body established by law to challenge the substantive or procedural legality of a decision — imply that there is also a requirement that the public concerned is to be entitled to challenge a decision of a court in planning consent proceedings in a case where the public concerned has had the opportunity of participating in the court's examination of the question of planning consent and of submitting its views to that court?
3.If the answers to Questions 1 and 2 are affirmative: Are Articles 1(2), 6(4) and 10a of Directive 85/337 to be interpreted as meaning that different national requirements can be laid down with regard to the public concerned referred to in Articles 6(4) and 10a, with the result that small, locally established environmental protection associations have a right to participate in the decision-making procedures referred to in Article 6(4) in respect of projects which may have significant effects on the environment in the area where the association is active but do not have a right of appeal such as is referred to in Article 10a?
Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (OJ 1985 L 175, p. 40).