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
EN
2010/C 51/38
Language of the case: French
Applicant: European Commission (represented by: D. Recchia and A. Marghelis, acting as Agents)
Defendant: Kingdom of Belgium
—Declare that, as Belgian legislation does not require an appropriate environmental impact study for certain activities when those activities may affect a Natura 2000 site and as the Kingdom of Belgium has made certain activities subject to a declaratory scheme, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under the provisions of Article 6(3) of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (1),
—Order the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.
The Commission relies on a single plea in law in support of its action alleging that Article 6(3) of Directive 92/43/EEC (the ‘Habitats’ Directive) has been transposed incorrectly.
In that regard, the applicant submits that that provision requires that any plan or project not directly connected with or necessary to the management of a Natura 2000 site be subject to an appropriate environmental impact study. The Belgian legislation does not comply with Community law in so far as it does not require such an impact study as a matter of course and provides for a mere declaratory scheme in respect of certain activities which may affect a Natura 2000 site.
That is true, inter alia, of all the plans or projects which are not subject to an environmental permit in the Walloon Region.
*
(1) OJ 1992 L 206, p. 7.