CJEU decision on justice costs could threaten access to justice

Report an error

Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

The document argues that the CJEU's narrow interpretation of the NPE rule in Article 11(4) of the EIA Directive may discourage public challenges to unlawful environmental decisions by creating cost uncertainty for applicants.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • The CJEU adopted a narrow interpretation of the 'not prohibitively expensive' (NPE) rule in Article 11(4) of the EIA Directive, ruling that it only applies to arguments in a judicial review application that relate to the public participation obligations of that specific Directive.
  • While the CJEU stated that arguments based on other EU or national laws are covered by the NPE rule in Articles 9(3) and 9(4) of the Aarhus Convention, these provisions lack direct effect, meaning their application depends on the willingness of national judges to interpret procedural rules consistently with them.
  • The ruling requires national courts to separate and distinguish between costs associated with arguments based on the EIA Directive's public participation provisions and those based on other legal provisions.
  • The CJEU determined that Member States are not permitted to deviate from the NPE rule in instances where a challenge is considered vexatious or frivolous, or when there is no connection between the alleged breach of national environmental law and environmental damage.
  • The author contends that this narrow interpretation undermines the predictability of costs for applicants and contradicts the goal of ensuring the widest possible access to justice in environmental matters.

Cite the original document

APA
ClientEarth (2018). CJEU decision on justice costs could threaten access to justice. https://www.clientearth.org/projects/access-to-justice-for-a-greener-europe/updates-annual-newsletters/cjeu-decision-on-justice-costs-could-threaten-access-to-justice/
Chicago
ClientEarth. CJEU decision on justice costs could threaten access to justice. 2018. https://www.clientearth.org/projects/access-to-justice-for-a-greener-europe/updates-annual-newsletters/cjeu-decision-on-justice-costs-could-threaten-access-to-justice/.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |author=ClientEarth |title=CJEU decision on justice costs could threaten access to justice |date=12 April 2018 |url=https://www.clientearth.org/projects/access-to-justice-for-a-greener-europe/updates-annual-newsletters/cjeu-decision-on-justice-costs-could-threaten-access-to-justice/ |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{clientearth2018cjeu, author = {{ClientEarth}}, title = {{CJEU decision on justice costs could threaten access to justice}}, institution = {ClientEarth}, year = {2018}, month = apr, url = {https://www.clientearth.org/projects/access-to-justice-for-a-greener-europe/updates-annual-newsletters/cjeu-decision-on-justice-costs-could-threaten-access-to-justice/}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated