Recital 38

(38) As clarified by the case-law of the Court of Justice (18), Member States may not restrict a legal right to challenge a decision of a public authority to those members of the public concerned who have intervened in the preceding administrative procedure to adopt such decision. As also clarified by the case-law of the Court of Justice (19), effective access to justice in environmental matters and effective remedies require inter alia that members of the public concerned should have the right to ask the court or a competent independent and impartial body to order interim measures to prevent a given instance of pollution, including, where necessary, through the temporary suspension of the disputed permit. Therefore, it should be specified that legal standing should not be made conditional on the role that the member of the public concerned played during a participatory phase of the decision-making procedures, especially with regard to the granting of permits and site closures, under this Directive. In addition, any review procedure should be fair, equitable, timely and not prohibitively expensive, and provide for adequate and effective remedies, including injunctive relief as appropriate. In relation to livestock-rearing farms, a suspension of operations should be strictly without prejudice to the continuation of activities that are necessary for the welfare of the livestock.

1 national measure recorded under this provision, in 1 form — sign in to view the analysis.

← Recital 37 · All articles · Recital 39 →

Source: EUR-Lex (Cellar) · retrieved 2026-10-13 · Text as adopted (Official Journal); later amendments are not incorporated in this text.