EU
Recast Directive on urban wastewater treatment (here)
The Council adopted a recast Directive on urban wastewater treatment which sets out rules on the collection, treatment and discharge of urban wastewater as well as sanitation, transparency rules and the monitoring of public health parameters.
The Directive will enter into force 20 days after publication in the EU's Official Journal. Member States will have up to 31 months for transposition.
Regulation establishing an EU certification framework for permanent carbon removals, carbon farming and carbon storage in products (available here)
As mentioned in the energy section, Regulation (EU) 2024/3012 establishes a voluntary framework for carbon removal and soil emission reductions. It sets out quality criteria, rules for the verification and certification of carbon removals and soil emission reductions, rules for the functioning of certification schemes and their recognition by the EU Commission and rules on the issuance and use of certified units.
Carbon removals and soil emission reductions generated under the Regulation will contribute to the EU's nationally determined contributions (NDCs) and climate objectives, but not to third-party-NDCs or international compliance schemes. The Regulation comes into effect on 26 December 2024. It comes into effect on 26 December 2024 and is directly applicable in Ireland.
Regulation on environmental, social and governance (ESG) rating activities (available here)
The Council adopted a Regulation intended to boost confidence in sustainable financial products by making rating activities more consistent, transparent and comparable and by preventing potential conflicts of interest. Specifically, ESG rating providers established in the EU will be authorised and supervised by the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA).
The Regulation applies to ESG rating providers operating in the EU. It does not apply to private ESG ratings not intended for public disclosure or distribution, and ESG ratings issued by regulated financial undertakings that are used exclusively for internal purposes, or for in-house or intragroup financial services or products. The Regulation will enter into force on the 20th day after publication in the EU's Official Journal. Provisions will apply on a staggered basis starting 18 months after entry into force.
CLIMATE CHANGE
COP29 concludes in Azerbaijan with new carbon market rules being adopted
At the COP29 UN Climate Change Conference, a New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) for climate finance was adopted through an agreement which provides for developed countries to contribute at least $300 billion per year to developing countries by 2035. This contribution is intended to reduce GHG emissions and mitigate the impacts of climate change.
New rules on a carbon-crediting mechanism which will set a UN-backed standard for carbon offsets were also finalised under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement. The crediting mechanism will set new rules for recording and tracking international transfers of carbon offsets. Further information is available here.
EU JUDGMENTS
CJEU finds that Germany failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 6(2) of the Habitats Directive
The Commission alleged that Germany ffailed to take, in a general and structural manner, appropriate steps to avoid the deterioration of habitat types 6510 and 6520 in the Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) in its territory.
The Court noted that the purpose of Article 6(2) of the Habitats Directive is to protect sites from possible deterioration and as such, "it may be necessary, in implementing it, to adopt both measures intended to avoid external man-caused impairment and disturbance and measures to prevent natural developments that may cause the conservation status of natural habitats in special areas of conservation to deteriorate." The Court also noted that deterioration cannot be offset by improvements in other sites.
It was held that there were significant losses of area covered by habitat types 6510 and 6520, that the surveillance measures implemented in Germany are not sufficiently site-specific, regular and consistent and that Germany has not adopted legally binding measures to protect the SACs against over-fertilisation and early mowing. As such, Germany was found to have infringed Article 6(2) of the Habitats Directive.
IRISH NEWS
Government publishes an updated Draft Revised National Planning Framework which sets revised housing targets
Following public consultation, the Government published an updated draft of the revised NPF. Proposed amendments include an emphasis on "compact and sequential patterns of growth" and updates to address constraints on water services in Dublin. Water reuse, sustainable drainage systems and the circular economy are highlighted as areas which will improve sustainability in Dublin, Galway, Cork, Limerick and Waterford. A new target to develop an average of 50,500 homes per year from 2025 to 2030 is also introduced, with a goal to develop 60,000 homes annually in 2030 and thereafter.
The Government is expected to finalise its proposed revisions to the NPF, which was published in 2018, following the conclusion of the required environmental assessments. Cabinet approval and the approval of both Houses of the Oireachtas will then be required. Once finalised, the first revised NPF will be incorporated into Regional Spatial and Economic Strategies and development plans nationally.
Government sets out a pipeline of Ireland's major infrastructure projects
The National Planning Framework and the National Development Plan 2021-2031 together form Project Ireland 2040. The Government published the Prospects 2024-2025 report, which sets out a pipeline for the 50 projects that make up Project Ireland 2040. The report details that over half of the projects are large-scale infrastructure in the areas of public transport, housing and health, ranging in value from €200 million to over €1 billion.
Waste Management Act 1996 (End-of-Waste) Regulations 2024 enter into force (available here)
The Regulations set out the process for decisions by the Environmental Protection Agency to establish criteria for fulfilling end-of-waste status at a national level, and to make single-case decisions as to whether certain waste has ceased to be waste. The Regulations also provide for the establishment of a register which will identify end-of-waste substances or objects being produced.
RECENT DOMESTIC JUDGMENTS
High Court remits matter to An Bord Pleanála at the point just before it refused planning permission
This case relates to an application for a strategic housing development to An Bord Pleanála (the "Board"). The applicant and respondent (the Board) agreed that the decision should be quashed and remitted to the Board, as the Board's refusal of permission was required by case law which was subsequently overturned by the Court of Appeal. The Court considered the type of directions it has jurisdiction to make. As the parties agreed that the decision should be quashed, the only issue was to what point in the process the application should be remitted.
The applicant argued that the matter should be remitted to the point just before the Board decided to refuse permission. The respondent argued that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration without specific directions, allowing the Board to determine the process.
The Court stated that it was not attempting to micromanage the process, and that process and procedure are for the Board. However, the overriding principle behind any civil remedy should be to undo the consequences of a wrongful or invalid act, but go no further. Therefore, the Court remitted the matter to the Board at the point just before it refused planning permission, starting from the point where the Inspector's assessment and recommendations were accepted. The Court considered that it was appropriate in this case to go back to the place where the mistake occurred and that the Board could proceed with oral hearings from this point if required.
High Court upholds refusal to extend the duration of a planning permission
Dún Laoghaire Rathdown County Council's decision to refuse an extension of the duration of a permission on the basis that substantial works had not been carried out was upheld in the High Court. Demolition and excavation works to the value of around €1.125 million had been completed in the project, with an overall construction budget of around €7.4 million.
The definition of "substantial works" was considered, and the Court emphasised that works are not to be considered in isolation but must be relative to the entire permitted development. The Court stated that whether substantial works have been done is a matter for the planning authority, and once that question has been answered, the authority has no discretion in deciding whether to extend the duration. The Court highlighted the importance of the planning authority's expertise and discretion when determining whether substantial works had been carried out.
The Court observed that the developer's decision to commence works five months prior to the expiration of permission must have been a calculated risk, but noted that this did not bear on the central question of whether substantial works were done other than possibly with regards to proportionality.
High Court quashes Dublin City Council's zoning decision
The proceedings concerned a challenge to Dublin City Council's decision to rezone land from Employment/Enterprise to Inner Suburban and Inner City Sustainable Mixed-Uses. The applicant submitted an objection to the rezoning, but the Chief Executive's Report failed to list the applicant as a submitter.
The Court noted that section 12(8)(b)(i) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 imposes a mandatory obligation to list persons who made submissions by name, rather than by their planning agents. The Council's failure to list the applicant was not de minimis as it failed to inform the elected members that a long-established local employer and business had made a submission.
Other grounds raised by the applicant were rejected. The Court quashed the zoning by reason of the failure to list the applicant in the Chief Executive's Report, and will decide whether to order remittal at a later date.
High Court dismisses challenge to Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028
The applicants in this case sought to challenge the zoning of their lands in the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028. The applicants claimed that the Chief Executive inadequately summarised their submission. The Court refused to grant relief on this ground, noting that the "applicants' points are considered in some detail and taken seriously" and that "by definition a summary leaves a lot out."
Separately, the applicants claimed that a lack of reasons were given for the open space zoning. The Court also rejected this argument. The decision to be made was whether to leave the land unzoned or to give it an open space zoning. The Court remarked that the decision set out sufficient reason in the circumstances, especially considering that the Chief Examiner did not suggest any alternative specific zoning. The proceedings were dismissed.
High court grants stay on the Passenger Air Traffic Movement (PATM) seat cap
The High Court granted a stay on the implementation of the Passenger Air Traffic Movement (PATM) cap at Dublin Airport determined by the Irish Aviation Authority (IAA).
The IAA sought to cap the number of passengers at 25.2 million for the summer 2025 period. In making this decision, the IAA took into account a planning condition imposed by the Board. The applicants argued that this 32mppa condition does not constitute "relevant technical, operational and environmental constraints" for the purposes of Article 6(1) of the Slot Regulations and, as such, the IAA acted unlawfully. They also argued that their statutory entitlement to historic slots can be characterised as property rights, and that the PATM seat cap amounts to an unlawful interference with those rights.
Justice O'Donnell noted that "there is no real dispute but that the applicants will suffer serious irreparable and permanent harm if the PATM seat cap in the S25 Decision proceeds". He gave significant weight to the fact that a stay would not adversely impact the overall implementation of the IAA's Summer 25 Decision and stated that "the balance of justice overwhelmingly supports the putting in place of a stay".
High Court dismisses proceedings on the grounds that claims were frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of process
The plaintiffs sought a stay on the enforcement of an order directing them to remove an unauthorised development from their land made following proceedings taken under section 160 of the Planning and Development Act 2000. However, the Court was satisfied that the claim was frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of process on a number of different bases. It was also satisfied that there was no fair issue to be tried. The plaintiffs' application for an interlocutory injunction was refused.
This article contains a general summary of developments and is not a complete or definitive statement of the law. Specific legal advice should be obtained where appropriate.
