Environment and Planning
EU
CLIMATE CHANGE GUIDANCE FOR NATURA 2000 SITES
The European Commission published guidance on adapting Natura 2000 sites to climate change on 25 March 2026. The guidance is directed to Member States, Natura 2000 site managers and environmental authorities. It clarifies how the provisions of the Birds and Habitats Directives can be applied when designating and managing Natura 2000 sites in the context of climate change impacts, including how “flexibilities” in the directives can be utilised. This includes the option to bypass certain administrative procedures to respond to immediate threats to the site and public safety during emergencies.
EU GUIDANCE FOR STRICT PROTECTION OF WILD BIRDS
The European Commission has published new guidance on Article 5 and 9 of the Birds Directive (PDF 968 KB). This guidance is designed to aid Member States in the correct implementation of the systems of strict protection of wild birds required by the Birds Directive. The guidance covers prohibitions on the killing, disturbance etc. of birds as well as derogations from those prohibitions.
AMENDMENTS TO EUROPEAN WATER LAW
A new directive amending the Water Framework Directive, the Groundwater Directive and the Environmental Quality Standards Directive has been published in the Official Journal of the EU. It will come into force on 10 May 2026. Member States will have until 21 December 2027 to transpose the Directive into domestic law.
Changes to the Water Framework Directive include a new definition of Deterioration of Status, new “exception” rules allowing for certain negative impacts on water, and additions to the list of pollutants that need to be monitored and controlled. The directive puts a stronger focus on substances of emerging concern, such as PFAS, pharmaceuticals, industrial substances, microplastics, antimicrobial resistance indicators, and pesticides.
Ireland
OFFICE OF THE PLANNING REGULATOR (“OPR”)
The Minister for Housing has announced the commencement of a review of the role and functions of the OPR. The review will consider the relevance of the OPR’s original purpose to the planning system today; the alignment of the OPR’s functions to the delivery of housing; an assessment of the compatibility of the regulatory roles and the support/promotional roles which are currently undertaken by the office; the optimal use of resources in the OPR; and changes that may be needed (including legislative change) to enable the delivery of housing and critical infrastructure.
NEW GREENWASHING REGULATIONS
The Minister for Enterprise, Tourism and Employment introduced new regulations in relation to greenwashing, including a prohibition on the making of generic environmental claims and on claiming that a product has a neutral, reduced or positive environmental impact, where this is based on GHG offsetting. The regulations will come into operation on 27 September 2026.
SUBSTITUTE CONSENT AND AN COIMISIÚN PLEANÁLA (ACP)
ACP has published new guidance on substitute consent and section 37L applications under the 2000 Act on 23 March 2026. The guidance covers pre-application consultation, the contents of such applications, and the validation of applications by ACP.
NITRATES DEROGATION
The Government has introduced new regulations on eligibility for the nitrates derogation. They amend the 2025 regulations of the same name. The regulations came into effect on 23 March 2026 (published on 3 April 2026).
European judgments
ADVOCATE GENERAL OPINION ON APPROPRIATE ASSESSMENT, AA SCREENING, AND SITE-SPECIFIC CONSERVATION OBJECTIVES
Advocate General Kokott delivered her Opinion to the Court of Justice of the EU on 16 April in the cases of C-27/25, Knocknamona (a.k.a. Power) and C-356/25, Massey. AG Kokott concluded that the setting of site-specific conservation objectives (SSCOs) is not a pre-requisite for Appropriate Assessment (AA) or AA Screening. The AG made comments about how an AA or AA Screening could be carried out without SSCOs, including that conservation objectives for an assessment could be inferred “in particular from the information which was used as a basis for designating the relevant area of conservation”.
The AG stressed that the evidential bar is higher in circumstances where there are no SSCOs. The AG also concluded that any ruling from the Court finding that SSCOs are a prerequisite should “only apply to plans and projects agreed to after the judgment in the present proceedings is delivered”.
THREE-MONTH JUDICIAL REVIEW PERIOD FOR DEROGATION LICENCES UPHELD
A derogation licence is required to lawfully carry out actions which would otherwise breach the prohibitions on disturbance, killing etc. of protected wildlife under the Birds and Habitats Directives. The CJEU has previously held that planning permission for a project which requires a derogation licence should not be granted until that licence is in place. In C-58/24 Drumakilla (16 April 2026), the CJEU considered whether the three-month deadline for judicial review in Ireland, and its application to decisions to grant derogation licences associated with planning applications, is consistent with that principle.
The CJEU held that it was acceptable to impose a 3-month time limit on challenges to derogation licences “provided that such a rule of law is not less favourable than those governing similar domestic actions (principle of equivalence) and does not render virtually impossible or excessively difficult the exercise of rights conferred by EU law (principle of effectiveness)”.
Domestic judgments
CHALLENGE AGAINST THE SHANNON LNG LIQUEFIED NATURAL GAS TERMINAL IS DISMISSED
On 1 April 2026, the High Court upheld the Commission’s grant of permission to Shannon LNG Limited (PDF 606KB) in a challenge taken by Friends of the Irish Environment. The permission is for a gas-powered plant with 600MW generation capacity and a 120MW battery energy storage system, which has been subject to seven judgments to date.
Although Justice Humphreys was sympathetic to the applicant’s climate-based concerns, he emphasised that the applicant did not participate adequately in the planning process and did not engage sufficiently with the developer’s GHG emissions analysis. The primary reason for the dismissal was that the applicant did not raise the grounds relied on in the legal challenge at the planning stage. Humphreys J found that the decision to grant permission was not inconsistent with section 15(1) of the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act 2015. He also ruled that the EU Taxonomy Regulation does not impose a substantive obligation on planning decision-takers to act in an environmentally friendly manner.
CONSISTENCY BETWEEN NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANS
The Court of Appeal has reiterated that development plans should be consistent with national plans and policies (PDF 488KB) across the local authority’s functional area. However, the requirement is for “general consistency”. It cannot be applied to every site.
In Mount Salus Residents Owners Management Company Limited By Guarantee -v- An Bord Pleanála & Ors [2026] IECA 28, a residents’ group challenged a Recommendation of the OPR and a Ministerial Direction to remove the “0/0” Zoning Objective from the Dun Laoghaire Rathdown Development Plan 2022-2028. The objective restricted development to protect the architectural heritage of the area.
The High Court quashed the OPR’s Recommendation, rendering the Direction invalid. The Minister and OPR appealed to the Court of Appeal. The core issue on appeal was whether the OPR was entitled to focus on the particular areas zoned 0/0 rather than on the local authority as a whole. The area in question is served by two DART stations (Killiney and Dalkey) and would ordinarily be suitable for more compact development. The Court found the High Court was correct to determine that the notices were invalid as the OPR and Minister applied the wrong standard by which consistency must be judged. The High Court’s decision was upheld.
© 2026 Arthur Cox LLP | All rights reserved
