Precedents concerning judicial review of the decision issued under art. 6 of the Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and wild fauna and flora and post-Brexit operation of “Natura 2000” Network as a form of nature conservation
Ewa Katarzyna Czech
Faculty of Law University of BiałystokHubert Sitnik
King’s College LondonAbstract
Brexit changed the operation of legal forms of nature conservation including Natura 2000. The legal environment created by the application of the EU law and domestic caselaw concerned with the judicial review of decisions issued under article 6 of the Habitats Directive necessarily warrants the analysis of the latter both in terms of the general role of the doctrine of judicial precedent in the British legal system and specifically in the judicial review under the Habitats directive. Analysis of this area of law allow achieving the goal of identification of contentious issues originating from the caselaw. Furthermore, it will lead to conclusions concerning the operation of “Natura 2000” after Brexit i.e., an attempt to identify potential changes in its operation. What justifies such an analysis is the fact that British administrative law lacks a precise definition of the standard to be applied for judicial review which allows public authorities for such a discretion which should not be allowed under the EU law. Therefore, though the relevant provisions only slightly change Brexit may negatively impact the standard of environmental protection
in the UK.
Keywords:
Brexit, Natura 2000 Network, forms of environmental conservation, judicial precedent, precautionary principleReferences
A.W. Bradley, K.D. Ewing and C.J.S. Knight, Constitutional and Administrative Law (17th edn Pearson 2018), Google Scholar
Corkin, ‘Science, Legitimacy and the Law: Regulating Risk Regulation Judiciously in the EC’ (2008) 33 European Law Review 359 Google Scholar
P. Craig, ‘Judicial Review, Intensity and Deference in EU Law’ in Dyzenhaus: The Unity of Public Law (Hart Publishing, 2004) Google Scholar
P. Craig, ‘Constitutional Principe, the Rule of Law and Political Reality: The European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018’ (2019) 82(2) MLR 319, 321 Google Scholar
D. Edwards, ‘Judicial Review, the Precautionary Principle and the Protection of Habitat: Do we have a System of Administrative Law yet?’ in The Habitats Directive: A Developer’s Obstacle Course? (Hart Publishing, 2004) Google Scholar
D. Edwards, ‘Judicial Review, the Precautionary Principle and the Protection of Habitat: Do we have a System of Administrative Law yet?’ in The Habitats Directive: A Developer’s Obstacle Course? (Hart Publishing, 2012) Google Scholar
R. Huxley-Binns, J. Martin and T. Frost, Unlocking the English Legal System, Routledge 2020 Google Scholar
M. Koszkowski, Rozumienie per analogiam w prawie precedensowym: dwa ujęcia analogii, „Rocznik Nauk Prawnych” (Tom XXV, numer 1 – 2015) Google Scholar
J. Lee, The Doctrine of Precedent and the Supreme Court, The Supreme Court and the Doctrine of Precedent James Lee Inner Temple Academic Fellow’s Lecture, lecture_james_lee.pdf (d17g388r7gqnd8.cloudfront.net) dostęp 28.01.2020 Google Scholar
Practical Law Environment, ‘Habitats and wildlife: EU and international regimes (2020) accessed 23 February 2020 Google Scholar
Faculty of Law University of Białystok
King’s College London
