Åarhus Implementation Guide 

This is of assistance both on the National Renewables Energy Action Plan NREAP issues (EU decision) and access to justice (‘not prohibitively expensive’ – UK decision).

Following the judgement on 13^th February 2014 in case C-530/11:

http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf;jsessionid=9ea7d2dc                30d69d1888abd6a44ec28610b918cefe2fe1.e34KaxiLc3qMb40Rch0SaxuOa                                                                           xj0?text=&docid=147843&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ                                     =first&part=1&cid=312644

In June 2014 the UNECE Meeting of the Parties adopted the:

Draft decision V/9o concerning compliance by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland with its obligations under the Convention ECE/MP.PP/2014/L.24

http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/pp/mop5/Documents/Category_I_ documents/ECE_MP.PP_2014_L.24_ENG.pdf
(a) By not taking sufficient measures to ensure that the costs for all court procedures subject to article 9 in England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland are not prohibitively expensive and, in particular, by not providing clear legally binding directions from the legislature or the judiciary to this effect, the Party concerned continues to fail to
comply with article 9, paragraph 4, of the Convention;
(b) In the light of the above finding that the Party concerned has failed to take sufficient measures to ensure that the costs for all court procedures subject to article 9 in England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland are not prohibitively expensive, the Party concerned has failed to sufficiently consider the establishment of appropriate
assistance mechanisms to remove or reduce financial barriers to access to justice, as required by article 9, paragraph 5;
(c) By still not ensuring clear time limits for the filing of all applications for judicial review within the scope of article 9 of the Convention in England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, nor a clear date from when the time limit started to run, the Party concerned continues to fail to comply with article 9, paragraph 4, of the Convention;
(d) By not having taken the necessary legislative, regulatory and other measures to establish a clear, transparent and consistent framework to implement article 9, paragraph 4, the Party concerned continues to fail to comply with article 3, paragraph 1, of the Convention;

Page 3 of the EU’s first National Implementation Report to UNECE helps put this into context:

• http://ec.europa.eu/environment/aarhus/pdf/sec_2008_556_en.pdf
• According to Article 300(7) of the Treaty establishing the European Community (“EC Treaty”), international agreements concluded by the European Community are binding on the institutions of the Community and on Member States. In accordance with the European Court of Justice’s case-law, those agreements prevail over provisions of secondary Community legislation. The primacy of international agreements concluded by the Community over provisions of secondary Community legislation also means that such provisions must, so far as is possible, be interpreted and applied in a manner that is consistent with those agreements. 

• In addition, according also to settled case-law, a provision in an agreement concluded by the Community with non-member countries must be regarded as being directly applicable when, regard being had to its wording and the purpose and nature of the agreement itself, the provision contains a clear and precise obligation which is not subject, in its implementation or effects, to the adoption of any subsequent measure. Such provisions constitute rules of Community law directly applicable in the internal legal order of the Member States, which can be relied on by individuals before national courts against public authorities.