- 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-280/18: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 7 November 2019 (Request for a preliminary ruling from the Symvoulio tis Epikrateias — Greece) — Alain Flausch and Others v Ypourgos Perivallontos kai Energeias and Others (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Environment — Assessment of the effects of certain projects on the environment — Public participation in decision-making and access to justice — Date from which the time for bringing proceedings starts to run)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62018CA0280
62018CA0280
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
13.1.2020
Official Journal of the European Union
C 10/11
(Case C-280/18) (*)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Environment - Assessment of the effects of certain projects on the environment - Public participation in decision-making and access to justice - Date from which the time for bringing proceedings starts to run)
(2020/C 10/12)
Language of the case: Greek
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicants: Alain Flausch, Andrea Bosco, Estienne Roger Jean Pierre Albrespy, Somateio ‘Syndesmos Iiton’, Somateio ‘Elliniko Diktyo — Filoi tis Fysis’, Somateio ‘Syllogos Prostasias kai Perithalpsis Agrias Zois — SPPAZ’
Defendants: Ypourgos Perivallontos kai Energeias, Ypourgos Oikonomikon, Ypourgos Tourismou, Ypourgos Naftilias kai Nisiotikis Politikis
Operative part of the judgment
1.Article 6 of 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 must be interpreted as precluding a Member State from carrying out the procedures for public participation in decision-making that relate to a project at the level of the headquarters of the competent regional administrative authority, and not at the level of the municipal unit within which the site of the project falls, where the specific arrangements implemented do not ensure that the rights of the public concerned are actually complied with, a matter which is for the national court to establish.
2.Articles 9 and 11 of Directive 2011/92 must be interpreted as precluding legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which results in a period for bringing proceedings that starts to run from the announcement of consent for a project on the internet being relied on against members of the public concerned where they did not previously have an adequate opportunity to find out about the consent procedure in accordance with Article 6(2) of that directive.
(*) OJ C 231 du 2.7.2018