Schiphol permit case may go to European Court of Justice
The Council of State has not yet decided whether to put questions to the European Court of Justice, which would keep the appeal over Schiphol's scrapped nature permit on hold for up to two years.
The Raad van State, the Council of State, held a hearing lasting several hours on Tuesday on Schiphol's nature permit. It has not yet decided whether to ask the European Court of Justice how European rules should be interpreted.
If it does put preliminary questions to the Court, an answer could take one and a half to two years, and the appeal stays on hold until then. If it does not, the case is expected to continue in the first quarter of 2027.
A court struck down the permit last summer, finding it insufficiently prepared and substantiated. The cabinet, which granted the permit, appealed.
The environmental group Mobilisation for the Environment (MOB) argues that before Schiphol uses freed-up nitrogen space, it must first be checked whether that space is needed to restore nature. The court agreed with MOB.
Almost a year ago, the cabinet allowed Schiphol to continue for at least two years without a nature permit, through an enforcement waiver (gedoogvergunning).
More on climate, nature and farming · trains, buses and flights · the world with a dutch angle
Follow the story: Raad van State
Raad van State
The Council of State, which advises the government and parliament on proposed laws and is also the highest administrative court.
MOB (Mobilisatie voor het Milieu)
Mobilisation for the Environment is a Dutch environmental organisation that uses legal procedures to press for the protection of nature and the environment. It is one of the groups that can take government decisions and permits to court, including in disputes about Schiphol and nitrogen pollution affecting protected nature.
gedoogvergunning
A gedoogvergunning is an enforcement waiver: a formal decision by Dutch authorities to tolerate an activity that does not have the permit it legally needs, for a set period. The authorities agree not to enforce against the activity during that time, but it does not make the activity lawful. It matters here because it allows an activity to continue while the legal basis for it is still being sorted out.