Commission v Germany (Leybucht Dykes)
A member state may reduce the area of a special protection area only on exceptional grounds of general interest superior to the ecological objective, such as danger to life, and not for economic or recreational reasons.
Facts
Germany carried out dyke strengthening works in the Leybucht, a bay in Lower Saxony which was part of a special protection area for birds. The works reduced the area of the protected site. The Commission brought infringement proceedings, arguing that Germany had breached the Birds Directive by reducing the area of the site.
Legal principle
The Court of Justice held that a member state may reduce the area of a special protection area only on exceptional grounds, corresponding to a general interest which is superior to the general interest represented by the ecological objective of the directive. Economic and recreational requirements cannot justify such a reduction. However, the danger of flooding and the protection of the coast constituted sufficiently serious reasons to justify the dyke works, provided that they were confined to a strict minimum. The works were justified, except insofar as they were designed to improve access for fishing vessels. The decision led to the more flexible regime in article 6(4) of the Habitats Directive.
Related cases on nature conservation and habitats
- Coöperatie Mobilisation for the Environment UA v College van gedeputeerde staten van Limburg Joined Cases C-293/17 and C-294/17, EU:C:2018:882
- Grace and Sweetman v An Bord Pleanála Case C-164/17, EU:C:2018:593
- Holohan v An Bord Pleanála Case C-461/17, EU:C:2018:883
- Landelijke Vereniging tot Behoud van de Waddenzee v Staatssecretaris van Landbouw (Waddenzee) Case C-127/02, [2004] ECR I-7405
- People Over Wind and Sweetman v Coillte Teoranta Case C-323/17, EU:C:2018:244
- R (Morge) v Hampshire County Council [2011] UKSC 2, [2011] 1 WLR 268
- R v Secretary of State for the Environment, ex p Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (Lappel Bank) Case C-44/95, [1996] ECR I-3805
- Sweetman v An Bord Pleanála Case C-258/11, EU:C:2013:220
Studying environmental law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
