2008/50/EC指令下空气质量测量和评估规定的分散执行

Kendro Pedrosa
{"title":"2008/50/EC指令下空气质量测量和评估规定的分散执行","authors":"Kendro Pedrosa","doi":"10.1163/18760104-01702007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the Craeynest case, the Court of Justice interpreted some of the core provisions of the Air Quality Directive 2008/50 in a preliminary ruling. Firstly, the court ruled that national courts may review the siting of sampling points. This manuscript pays special attention to the minimum standard of review that national judges must perform and considers to what extent the Court of Justice departs from its established case law. Secondly, the Court considered that, for an exceedance of a limit value within a zone to exist, it suffices that a pollution level higher than that value is measured at a single sampling point. Thus, the results of all sampling points within a zone must not be averaged. The ruling can be considered as a landmark judgment, as it strengthens the role of citizens, engo’s and national courts in the decentral enforcement of the Air Quality Directive.","PeriodicalId":43633,"journal":{"name":"Journal for European Environmental & Planning Law","volume":"17 1","pages":"247-261"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/18760104-01702007","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Decentralised Enforcement of the Provisions on Measurement and Assessment of Air Quality under Directive 2008/50/EC\",\"authors\":\"Kendro Pedrosa\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/18760104-01702007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the Craeynest case, the Court of Justice interpreted some of the core provisions of the Air Quality Directive 2008/50 in a preliminary ruling. Firstly, the court ruled that national courts may review the siting of sampling points. This manuscript pays special attention to the minimum standard of review that national judges must perform and considers to what extent the Court of Justice departs from its established case law. Secondly, the Court considered that, for an exceedance of a limit value within a zone to exist, it suffices that a pollution level higher than that value is measured at a single sampling point. Thus, the results of all sampling points within a zone must not be averaged. The ruling can be considered as a landmark judgment, as it strengthens the role of citizens, engo’s and national courts in the decentral enforcement of the Air Quality Directive.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43633,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal for European Environmental & Planning Law\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"247-261\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-04-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/18760104-01702007\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal for European Environmental & Planning Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/18760104-01702007\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal for European Environmental & Planning Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18760104-01702007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在克雷内斯案中,法院在初步裁决中解释了《2008/50号空气质量指令》的一些核心条款。首先,法院裁定,国家法院可以审查采样点的选址。这份手稿特别关注国家法官必须执行的最低审查标准,并考虑到法院在多大程度上偏离了其既定判例法。第二,法院认为,要想在一个区域内存在超过限值的情况,只需在一个采样点测量高于该限值的污染水平就足够了。因此,一个区域内所有采样点的结果不得取平均值。该裁决可以被视为一项具有里程碑意义的判决,因为它加强了公民、英国政府和国家法院在《空气质量指令》的分散执行中的作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Decentralised Enforcement of the Provisions on Measurement and Assessment of Air Quality under Directive 2008/50/EC
In the Craeynest case, the Court of Justice interpreted some of the core provisions of the Air Quality Directive 2008/50 in a preliminary ruling. Firstly, the court ruled that national courts may review the siting of sampling points. This manuscript pays special attention to the minimum standard of review that national judges must perform and considers to what extent the Court of Justice departs from its established case law. Secondly, the Court considered that, for an exceedance of a limit value within a zone to exist, it suffices that a pollution level higher than that value is measured at a single sampling point. Thus, the results of all sampling points within a zone must not be averaged. The ruling can be considered as a landmark judgment, as it strengthens the role of citizens, engo’s and national courts in the decentral enforcement of the Air Quality Directive.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
16.70%
发文量
19
期刊最新文献
Contributors Contributors Front matter Editorial The EU Battle on the Last Word and the Environment
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1