EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case C-418/04: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 13 December 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Ireland (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Directive 79/409/EEC — Conservation of wild birds — Articles 4 and 10 — Transposition and application — IBA 2000 — Value — Quality of the data — Criteria — Margin of discretion — Directive 92/43/EEC — Conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora — Article 6 — Transposition and application)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62004CA0418

62004CA0418

December 13, 2007
With Google you find a lot.
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

23.2.2008

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51/3

(Case C-418/04) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 79/409/EEC - Conservation of wild birds - Articles 4 and 10 - Transposition and application - IBA 2000 - Value - Quality of the data - Criteria - Margin of discretion - Directive 92/43/EEC - Conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora - Article 6 - Transposition and application)

(2008/C 51/06)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (B. Doherty and M. van Beek, Agents)

Defendant: Ireland (represented by D. O'Hagan, Agent, E. Cogan, Barrister, and G. Hogan SC)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Hellenic Republic, (represented by: E. Skandalou, Agent), Kingdom of Spain (represented by N. Díaz Abad)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Articles 4 and 10 of Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds (OJ 1979 L 103, p. 1) — Breach of Article 6 of 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)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

Declares that, by failing:

to classify, since 6 April 1981, in accordance with Article 4(1) and (2) of Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds, as amended by Commission Directive 97/49/EC of 29 July 1997, all the most suitable territories in number and size for the species mentioned in Annex I to that directive, with the exception of those intended to ensure conservation of the Greenland white-fronted goose (Anser albifrons flavirostris), as well as for regularly occurring migratory species not mentioned in Annex I, with the exception of those intended to ensure protection of the lapwing (Vanellus vanellus), the redshank (Tringa totanus), the snipe (Gallinago gallinago) and the curlew (Numenius arquata);

to ensure that, since 6 April 1981, the provisions of the first sentence of Article 4(4) of Directive 79/409, as amended by Directive 97/49, are applied to areas requiring classification as special protection areas under that directive;

to transpose and apply the provisions of the second sentence of Article 4(4) of Directive 79/409, as amended by Directive 97/49, fully and correctly;

to take all the measures necessary to comply with Article 6(2) of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora in respect of all special protection areas classified under Article 4(1) of Directive 79/409, as amended by Directive 97/49, or recognised under Article 4(2) of that directive;

to take all the measures necessary to comply with Article 6(2) of Directive 92/43 in respect of recreational use of all sites intended to be subject to that article;

to take all the measures necessary to comply with Article 6(3) and (4) of Directive 92/43 in respect of plans;

to take all the measures necessary to comply with Article 6(3) of Directive 92/43 in respect of authorisation of aquaculture programmes;

to take all the measures necessary to comply with of Article 6(2) to (4) of Directive 92/43 in respect of the drain maintenance works in the Glen Lough special protection area; and

to take all the measures necessary to comply with Article 10 of Directive 79/409, as amended by Directive 97/49,

Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 4(1), (2) and (4), and 10 of Directive 79/409, as amended by Directive 97/49, and Article 6(2) to (4) of Directive 92/43.

Dismisses the remainder of the action.

Orders Ireland to pay the costs.

Orders the Hellenic Republic and the Kingdom of Spain to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 6, 8.1.2005.

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia