bg es de el en fr hr it lv pt
 

Protection of the environment is capable of justifying a restriction on the use of the right to property which does not necessarily give rise to a right to compensation

Natura 2000 is a Community network of nature protection areas established under the ‘Habitats’ Directive. 1 This network also includes areas designated pursuant to the ‘Birds’ Directive 2 and seeks to ensure the long-term survival of the most valuable and threatened species and habitats in Europe.

Case C-234/20
In 2002, Sātiņi-S purchased 7.7 ha of peat bog, situated in a nature protection area and in a Natura 2000 conservation area of Community importance in Latvia. On 2 February 2017, Sātiņi-S applied to the Rural Support Service for compensation for 2015 and 2016 in view of the prohibition on establishing cranberry plantations on that peatland. By decision of 28 February 2017, that authority rejected that application on the ground that the applicable national legislation did not provide for such compensation. Sātiņi-S brought an appeal against that decision before the Administratīvā apgabaltiesa (Regional Administrative Court, Latvia), which dismissed that action by judgment of 26 March 2018. Sātiņi-S brought an appeal on a point of law against that judgment before the referring court, the Augstākā tiesa (Senāts) (Supreme Court, Latvia). This court referred to the Court of Justice several questions for a preliminary ruling concerning Regulation No 1305/2013 on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) 3 and Article 17 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’). Article 30 of that regulation provides that support is to be granted annually per hectare of agricultural area or per hectare of forest in order to compensate beneficiaries, in the areas concerned, for additional costs and income foregone resulting from disadvantages, related to the implementation of the ‘Habitats’ Directive, the ‘Birds’ Directive and the ‘Water Framework’ Directive4 . That article further states that Natura 2000 agricultural and forest areas designated pursuant to the ‘Habitats’ Directive and the ‘Birds’ Directive are to be eligible for payments related to the support in question. In today’s judgment, the Court finds, in the first place, that ‘peat bogs’ or ‘peat land’ situated in Natura 2000 areas which are not covered by the definition of ‘agricultural area’ or that of ‘forest’ within the meaning of Regulation No 1305/2013 are ineligible for payments under Article 30 of that regulation