Dear members of the EEL Network, Our first issue of 2017 looks at a number of new CJEU judgments and two AG Opinions. In an interesting VAT case related to the circular economy, the Court ruled that used parts from end-of-life vehicles are second-hand goods under the VAT Directive. In another judgment, the Court found that certain provisions of a Regulation on the monitoring and reporting of GHG emissions were invalid as they widened the scope of ’emissions’ as defined in the ETS Directive. Although strictly speaking not an environmental case, we included a decision on the compatibility of national prohibitions of amino acids with the General Food Law as it deals with the precautionary principle. We also look at a dismissed Spanish claim that sought the annulment of a fisheries Regulation laying down certain total allowable catch (TAC) limits. In a case related to an Italian Natura 2000 zone, the Court interpreted the notion of ‘small areas at local level’ under the Strategy Environmental Assessment (SEA) Directive. The General Court ruled in a case on the granting of third party access to certain documents by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA). The Court found that ECHA had not been wrong to grant access, and the claim made on the basis of the protection of commercial interests was thus rejected. AG Bobek delivered a notable Opinion in the Folk case. The AG recommended that the Court find national measures precluding the right of owners of fishing rights to initiate a review under the Environmental Liability Directive incompatible with certain provisions of that Directive. There were also several notable news developments. The Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement (CETA) between the EU and Canada was approved by the European Parliament at the plenary session in Strasbourg. In plenary, MEPs also backed emissions trading system (ETS) reforms that aim to bring the EU in line with the obligations of the Paris agreement, but failed to tackle some structural weaknesses according to critics. The European Commission also published its first comprehensive Environmental Implementation Review, assessing implementation in all member states. We would like to thank again the participants and attendees at our conference “Trade and Sustainability: CETA Dissected” (see the conference report), which took place on 26 January 2017 at the Asser Institute. Best regards, Wybe Douma and Olivier van Geel |
|
EU Court judgmentsMember states curtailed in adopting precautionary food measuresCJEU judgment: Case C-282/15 Queisser Pharma (19/01/2017) According to the Court’s reasoning, in order to be compatible with EU law, national food safety laws must comply with the general principles of food law, as laid down in the General Food Law (Regulation 178/2002). In particular, the principles of risk analysis and precaution, as enshrined in Articles 6 and 7, must be respected. The key factor in the Court’s ruling was Article 7(2), which stipulates that national precautionary measures must be proportionate and no more trade restrictive than required to achieve a high level of health protection. By demanding a prior derogation for all types of amino acids in food supplements, although potential risks only arise for some of these amino acids, and by granting such derogations only for a specific period of time even where the safety of the substance is established, German law in its current form is precluded by EU General Food Law. Also see: Geert van Calster’s blog post on this case. He stresses that the way in which the EU Food Regulation defines precaution curtails the Member States considerably. “Further ammunition against the often heard, and wrong, accusation that the EU is trigger happy to ban substances and processes in the face of uncertainty.” GHG monitoring regulation declared partially invalidCJEU judgment: Case C-460/15 Schaefer Kalk (19/01/2017) The case concerned the German organisation Schaefer Kalk, which operates an installation for the calcification of lime, a process that falls under the ETS Directive. The referring Court asked whether the relevant provisions of Regulation 601/2012 were invalid as, by including, regardless of whether it is released in the atmosphere, CO2 transferred for production of precipitated calcium carbonate (PCC) in the emissions of a lime combustion installation, they go beyond the definition of emissions in Article 3(b) of the EU ETS Directive. The Court clarified that, as follows from the text of Article 3(b), for there to be an emission within the meaning of the EU ETS Directive, a GHG must be released into the atmosphere. Since the CO2 produced by Schaefer Kalk’s installation is transferred to an installation for the production of PCC, it is not always released into the atmosphere and therefore is not an emission under Article 3(b). The relevant provisions thus unlawfully expanded the definition of emissions, and conflict with the EU ETS Directive. The AG Opinion in this case was addressed in an earlier News Service. Used motor vehicle parts are “second-hand goods” under VAT DirectiveCJEU judgment: Case C-471/15 Sjelle Autogenbrug (18/01/2017) The case concerned Sjelle Autogenbrug, a Danish vehicle reuse undertaking that trades in motor vehicle parts from end-of-life vehicles. The referring court wanted to know whether Sjelle Autogenbrug, which was declaring VAT under the general rules, was eligible for the special VAT arrangements applicable to second-hand goods. The Court looked at Article 311(1)(1) of the VAT Directive, which defines second-hand goods as ‘movable tangible property that is suitable for further use as it is or after repair’, stating that there was nothing to suggest that this provision excluded goods that had been incorporated as a component of other property. In line with AG Bot’s Opinion, the Court found that the key factor was that the used property had maintained the functionalities it possessed as new, and could therefore be reused after repair, which is the case for the discussed motor vehicle parts. The CJEU also pointed out that such a conclusion is consistent with the fundamental principle that motor vehicle waste should be reused and recovered, as laid down in recital 5 of Directive 2000/53 on end-of-life vehicles. For more information on the AG Opinion in this case see Geert van Calster’s interesting blog post. ECHA correctly granted third party access to documentsGeneral Court judgment: Case T-189/14 Deza v ECHA (13/01/2017) Council correctly applied precautionary approach in setting TAC limits deep-sea fish stocksCJEU judgment: Case C-128/15 Spain v Council (11/01/2017) In particular the claim concerned the undertaking in Regulation 1367/2014 to, on the basis of scientific advice and discussions in the North East Atlantic Fisheries Commission (NEAFC) establish a Total Allowable Catch (TAC) limit simultaneously covering both the roundnose grenadier and the roughhead grenadier. The differences between these two species are only visible to the naked eye once the head has been removed and the fish is frozen. It is noteworthy that, regarding the Council allegedly exceeding its bounds of discretion the Court pointed out that, under the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), it is in fact the Council’s duty to apply a precautionary approach as underlined in Article 2(2) of CFP Regulation 1380/2013. Thus, even in the absence of conclusive scientific evidence, the Council had the power to adopt the measures in question. Court interprets ‘small areas at local level’ under SEA DirectiveCJEU judgment: Case C-444/15 Associazione Italia Nostra Onlus (21/12/2016) The preliminary questions in this case were raised in proceedings concerning building plans near an Italian Natura 2000 zone that were not subjected to an environmental assessment under the SEA Directive. This assessment was not performed, according to the competent authority, because the plans concerned only small areas at local level covered by the exemption in Article 3(3). Italia Nostra challenged the validity of this provision, pointing out that it allows for plans and programmes that need an environmental assessment pursuant Articles 6 and 7 of the Habitats Directive to not be subjected to mandatory assessment under the SEA Directive. The Court of Justice rejected this argument, particularly since the discussed exemption does not extend to projects with significant effects on the environment. Additionally, it was found that the fact that national authorities could potentially abuse the provision to circumvent assessment requirements was insufficient to prove its invalidity. Though the Court did confirm the relevance of the type of authority involved, in the case at hand, it is not inconceivable that the measure was adopted at local level in view of the authority (Comune di Venezia) that adopted it, as Advocate-General Kokott pointed out in her Opinion. AG OpinionsAG delivers opinion in Hungarian polluter-pays principle caseAdvocate General Kokott has recommended the Court to rule that EU law, including the polluter-pays principle, does not preclude national laws that impose an appropriate penalty on the owner of a leased plot of land based on the statutory presumption of shared responsibility between the actual user and the owner, if it is in principle possible to rebut this presumption by means of reasonable evidence. The first preliminary question put before the Court concerns the compatibility of a law imposing penalties for environmental harm with Article 191 TFEU and the Environmental Liability Directive 2004/35/EC. The AG pointed out that, whereas the national court is correct to assume that the polluter-pays principle can only be applied in connection with a specific implementation in secondary law, the Court should look at Waste Framework Directive 2008/98/EC and not the Environmental Liability Directive as the correct source of this implementation. Relevant according to Kokott are Article 36(2) on penalties in the Waste Framework Directive, the polluter-pays principle in Article 191(2) TFEU, the principle that penalties must be proportionate in Article 49(3) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights (CFREU), and the presumption of innocence in Article 48(1) CFREU. The second preliminary question, which concerned the concept of more stringent protective provisions, should be answered in the negative, according to the AG. Article 36(2) of the Waste Framework Directive provides that penalties for the breach of waste management law should be proportionate. Thus, the AG claims that ‘more stringent’ penalties based on unreasonable requirements or which impose inappropriate penalties would violate that principle, and that member states cannot use Article 193 TFEU as the basis for imposing such penalties. AG: owners fishing rights must be able to initiate review over environmental damageAG Opinion: Case C-529/15 Folk (10/01/2017) The preliminary questions arose in Austrian proceedings regarding the operation of a hydroelectric power plant that caused fish to be killed. The referring court wanted to know whether a number of Austrian provisions concerning environmental liability could be squared with EU law and if parties who, like the applicant Dr Folk, hold fishing rights, must be granted a right to complain under the Environmental Liability Directive. In addition to affirming standing in relation to fishing rights, the AG further suggested, making reference to AG Kokott’s Opinion in case C-378/08, that regardless of whether a facility was brought into operation prior to the transposition date specified in Article 19(1), the Directive covers damage caused by continued or repetitive ‘events’ causing damage after that date. Additionally, he argued that legal provisions that generally exempt from the environmental liability regime environmental damage covered by an authorisation granted under national law are incompatible with Article 2(1)(b) of the Directive. Finally, the AG stated that, in the absence of assessment by the competent authorities under Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC, Article 2(1)(b) of the Environmental Liability Directive does not require national courts to apply the criteria of Article 4(7) of the Water Framework Directive directly. The AG pointed out that this provision, which is not unconditional, is thus also not directly applicable. |
|
European Parliament passes CETA at Strasbourg plenaryEuropean Parliament Press Release: CETA: MEPs back EU-Canada trade agreement Also see: European Parliament backs ETS reforms in plenaryEuropean Parliament Press Release: MEPs back plans to cut carbon emission allowances and fund low-carbon innovation Also see: European Commission publishes the first EU Environmental Implementation ReviewEuropean Commission press release: Environmental Implementation Review: new way to help Member States apply EU rules benefits citizens, administrations and economy Also see: European Remanufacturing Council LaunchedEuractiv: New remanufacturing trade body launched to advise EU policy EU decision-making in 2016 dominated by trilogue meetingsEUobserver: Secret EU law making takes over Brussels Trump adviser calls climate scientists “urban eco-imperialists”EUobserver: Climate experts are eco imperialists, says Trump adviser |
|
Paris uses emissions sticker scheme to ban worst offendersThe Guardian: Paris tries something different in the fight against smog Also see: Polish smog causes 50,000 deaths a year in country of 38 million inhabitantsEuractiv: Smog chokes coal-addicted Poland |
|
Commission registers ‘Ban Glyphosate’ initiativeEuropean Commission Press Release: Commission registers ‘Ban Glyphosate’ European Citizens’ Initiative Also see: |
|
European Parliament’s AFET and ENVI Committees adopt resolution on the ArcticEuropean Parliament press release: Protect the Arctic from emerging risks, urge MEPs Also see: Chinese envisage leadership role in climate actionThe Guardian: China eyes an opportunity to take ownership of climate change fight Also see: US could withdraw from Paris Agreement, says Trump aideEuractiv: US to withdraw from Paris Agreement, says Trump aide Also see: MEP Ian Duncan talks ETS reformsEuractiv: Emissions Trading Scheme by numbers Also see: |
|
Second Report on the State of the Energy UnionEuropean Commission Press Release: Europe’s energy transition is well underway Also see: The Energy Union Project: a success?EUobserver: Energy Union report provides little evidence of progress Towards Energy governance that puts efficiency firstEuractiv: How can Energy Union governance help put efficiency first? Plan to build solar farm on land contaminated by ChernobylThe Guardian: Solar power to rise from Chernobyl’s nuclear ashes |
|
Farmers should give rabbits more space, say MEPsEuropean Parliament Press Release: Give rabbits more space, urge Agriculture Committee MEPs China bans ivory, but more action needed to tackle poachingThe Guardian: Alone, China’s ban on ivory could make life worse for elephants First FLEGT-licensed wood arrives in the UKEuractiv: Illegal timber trade set for the chop Review of agricultural data in Europe reveals 20 years of inactionEUobserver: EU farming policy: The damage done by 20 years of inertia |
|
Commission is amending ETS to implement ICAO emissions agreementEuropean Commission Press Release: The EU tackles growing aviation emissions Also see: British motorists launch class action dieselgate lawsuit against VolkswagenThe Guardian: Dieselgate: UK motorists file class-action suit against VW |
|
European Parliament Environment Committee amends draft ‘waste package’ legislationEuropean Parliament Press Release: Waste: boost recycling, cut landfilling and curb food waste, say MEPs Also see: European Commission reports on delivery and progress of Circular Economy Action PlanEuropean Commission Press Release: Circular Economy: Commission delivers on its promises, offers guidance on recovery of energy from waste and works with EIB to boost investment Also see: |
|
Nordic Council set to ban microplastics in cosmeticsNordic Cooperation: Nordic Council: Ban microplastics in cosmetics |
|
17-18 May 2017 Event: International VDI Conference 2017: Sewage Sludge Treatment Organiser: Association of German Engineers (VDI) Venue: Park Inn by Radisson Copenhagen Airport, Engvej 171, 2300 Copenhagen, Denmark Click here to register |
Editors-in-ChiefWybe Th. Douma (Senior Researcher, T.M.C. Asser Instituut and Lecturer of Leonardo Massai (Senior Lecturer on International and EU Environmental Law, Catholic University of Lille) EditorsOlivier van Geel (T.M.C. Asser Instituut, The Hague) Steffen van der Velde (Researcher, T.M.C. Asser Instituut, The Hague) |