R v Secretary of State for the Environment, ex p Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (Lappel Bank)
In classifying special protection areas under the Birds Directive, a member state may not take economic requirements into account, but must decide on the basis of ornithological criteria alone.
Facts
The Secretary of State designated the Medway Estuary and Marshes as a special protection area under the Birds Directive, but excluded Lappel Bank, an area of intertidal mudflats which was important for wading birds, because it was needed for the expansion of the Port of Sheerness. The RSPB challenged the exclusion, and the House of Lords referred questions to the Court of Justice.
Legal principle
The Court of Justice held that a member state is not authorised to take account of economic requirements when designating a special protection area and defining its boundaries. The classification must be made on the basis of ornithological criteria determined by the directive. Economic considerations could be taken into account only at a later stage, when deciding whether a plan or project which would adversely affect the site could be authorised for imperative reasons of overriding public interest under the Habitats Directive. By the time of the judgment, the port expansion had already taken place, so the decision came too late to save Lappel Bank.
Related cases on nature conservation and habitats
- Commission v Germany (Leybucht Dykes) Case C-57/89, [1991] ECR I-883
- 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
- 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.
