Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-l82ql Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-25T13:48:20.645Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Member States Have a Wide Margin of Appreciation When Drawing National Action Plans in Environmental Protection

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Vihar Georgiev
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Commission's task is to verify the legality of the national allocation plan while respecting the “margin for manoeuvre” granted to the Member State in the implementation of Directive 2003/87/EC in the context of the drawing up of that plan. Within this “margin of manoeuvre” Member States also have the right to choose the data and its method of evaluation (author's headnote).

Type
Case Notes
Information
European Journal of Risk Regulation , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , March 2010 , pp. 86 - 89
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 OJ 2009 C 267/59.

2 OJ 2009 C 267/58.

** Editorial Hint: Article 10 and Annex III, Directive 2003/87/EC establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community, OJ 2003 L 275/32.

3 Approved by Council Decision 2002/358/CE concerning the approval, on behalf of the European Community, of the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the joint fulfillment of commitments thereunder, OJ 2002 L130 /1.

4 Approved on behalf of the Community by Council Decision 94/69/EC of 15 December 1993 concerning the conclusion of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, OJ 1994 L 33/11.

5 Directive 2003/87/EC establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community, OJ 2003 L 275/32.

6 Directive 2003/87/EC, supra note 3, at calling 5.

7 See Directive 2004/101/EC, OJ 2004 L 338/18.

8 Directive 2003/87/EC, supra note 5, Article 9, para. 1.

9 Directive 2003/87/EC, supra note 5, Article 9, para. 3.

10 Commission Decision of 4 May 2007 concerning the national allocation plan for the allocation of greenhouse gas emission allowances notified by the Republic of Estonia for the period from 2008 to 2012, pursuant to Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community and amending Council Directive 96/61/EC.

11 Commission Decision of 26 March 2007 concerning the national allocation plan for the allocation of greenhouse gas emission allowances notified by Poland for the period from 2008 to 2012 in accordance with Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community and amending Council Directive 96/61/EC.

12 On 30 June 2006, though the Commission claimed that the Estonian NAP was submitted on 7 July 2006.

13 Case T-263/07 Republic of Estonia v Commission of the European Communities, OJ 2009 C 267/59.

14 Case T-183/07 Republic of Poland v Commission of the European Communities, OJ 2009 C 267/58.

15 Now the General Court of the European Union.

16 Case T-263/07, supra note 11, at para. 35.

17 Case T-183/07, supra note 12, at paras. 25–26.

18 Case T-263/07, supra note 11, at para. 36.

19 Case T-183/07, supra note 12, at para. 59.

20 Case T-183/07, supra note 12, at para. 65.

21 Case T-183/07, supra note 12, at para. 64.

22 Case T-263/07, supra note 11, at para. 75.

23 Article 5 of the Treaty on the European Community – 2006 consolidated version, OJ 2006 C 321/38.

24 Case T-183/07, supra note 12, at para. 89.

25 Case T-183/07, supra note 12, at para. 116.

26 Case T-183/07, supra note 12, at para.129.

27 Case C-237/07 Janecek [2008] ECR I-6221, at para. 46.

28 Case T-178/05 United Kingdom v Commission [2005] ECR II-4807.

29 Case T-374/04 Germany v Commission [2007] ECR II-4431.

30 See also Van Zeben, Josephine, “The European Emissions Trading Scheme Case Law”, Amsterdam Center for Law & Economics Working Paper No. 12 (2009), at pp. 4–6 Google Scholar and Weishaar, Stefan, “Germany v. Commission: The ECJ on ex post adjustments under the EU ETS”, Review of European Community & International Environmental Law (2008), Vol. 17, Issue 1, pp. 126 et sqq. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

31 Case T-374/04, supra note 27, at p. 78.

32 Case T-183/07, supra note 12, at para. 89.

33 Case T-263/07, supra note 11, at para. 62.

34 Commission decision of 11 December 2009 concerning the national allocation plan for the allocation of greenhouse gas emission allowances notified by Estonia in accordance with Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council.

35 Commission decision of 11 December 2009 concerning the national allocation plan for the allocation of greenhouse gas emission allowances notified by Poland in accordance with Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council.

36 Supra notes 32 and 33.

37 Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union – consolidated version, OJ 2008 C 115/47.

38 Treaty on the European Community, supra note 21.

39 See the preambles of both decisions – supra notes 32 and 33, at calling 16.

40 The appeals were brought forward on 3 December 2009.

41 Q&A in relation to the Commission's decision to appeal in Cases T-183/07 and T-263/07, MEX/09/1203, 3 December 2009.

42 Case T-369/07 Latvia v Commission, OJ 2007 C 269/66.

43 Case T-368/07 Lithuania v Commission, OJ 2007 C 283/35.

44 Case T-484/07 Romania v Commission, OJ 2008 C 51/57.

45 Case T-499/07 Bulgaria v Commission, OJ 2008 C 64/50.

46 See Directive 2009/29/EC, OJ 2009 L 140/63.