Environment & Planning
EU
Provisional agreement reached on revisions to Water Framework Directive
The European Council and Parliament have agreed to update the lists of ground and surface water pollutants under the Water Framework Directive, Environmental Quality Standards Directive and Groundwater Directive, which will be amended accordingly. New substances added to the list will include certain PFAS (forever chemicals), a range of pesticides and some pharmaceuticals, including forms of antibiotics. A watch list containing substances of potential concern will also be established. Certain short-term exemptions will be available to Member States under the amendments.
The new directive will have to be formally adopted by the European Council and Parliament. It will enter into force 20 days after publication in the Official Journal. Member States must transpose the directive by 22 December 2027.
European Council agrees to postpone application of revised regulation on the classification, labelling and packaging of chemicals (the “CLP Regulation”)
The European Council has agreed to postpone the application of provisions on mandatory formatting requirements, relabelling, advertisements, distance sales offers and the labelling of fuel pumps under the CLP Regulation until 1 January 2028. This is to ensure legal clarity for businesses while these provisions are being discussed by legislators pursuant to the EU’s simplification strategy. Substantive changes to the regulation have been proposed by the Commission.
The European Council must negotiate with the European Parliament to reach a final agreement.
European Parliament adopts position on new circularity rules for the automotive sector
A proposed law is intended to reduce the environmental impact linked to the production and end-of-life treatment of vehicles. The rules will apply to all vehicles except for certain exempted categories, including vehicles for use by the armed forces, civil defence, fire and emergency medical services.
The proposal includes design requirements to facilitate the removal of as many parts and components as possible by authorised treatment facilities. An extended producer responsibility scheme is to be put in place three years after the rules enter into force. Under the proposal, manufacturers would have to cover the cost of the collection and treatment of vehicles at their end-of-life stage. An export ban is proposed for end-of-life vehicles (not affecting used vehicles).
Amendments to the Waste Framework Directive to reduce food and textile waste adopted
Under the amended directive, Member States will be obliged take measures to prevent the generation of food waste along the entire food supply chain, in primary production, processing and manufacturing, retail, restaurants and food services as well as in households. Actors in the supply chain will be involved proportionately to their capacity and role in preventing food waste, with a focus on preventing a disproportionate impact on small and medium-sized enterprises. Binding food waste reduction targets must be introduced in Ireland by 31 December 2030.
An extended producer responsibility scheme will be introduced for textiles. Annex IVc to the amended directive sets out the textile, textile-related and footwear products which will be subject to the scheme. The list covers a broad range of clothing and footwear. Producers of these products will be obliged to cover certain costs involving collection and waste management. The extended producer responsibility scheme must be established 30 months from the entry into force of the directive.
The directive will enter into force 20 days after publication in the Official Journal. The majority of laws under the directive must be brought into force 20 months after this date.
EU Parliament and Council adopt changes in EU cohesion and social funding
The European Parliament and Council have adopted a regulation to amend the European Cohesion Fund and Just Transition Fund to address strategic challenges. The amendments would enable Member States to apply funds to new objectives, including water resilience (and access to water), affordable and sustainable housing, decarbonisation and energy infrastructure. Defence is also a priority under the proposed revisions. The revisions were put forward by the Commission, and are linked to the mid-term review of the 2021-2027 cohesion policy programmes. The regulation will enter into force once it is published in the EU Official Journal.
DOMESTIC DEVELOPMENTS
Amendment to new regulations partially transposing RED III
The European Union (Planning and Development) (Renewable Energy) (No. 2) Regulations 2025 were made to rectify certain issues that have arisen with the new Renewable Energy Regulations, which came into operation on 6 August 2025. We outline general changes to the permit granting procedure for renewable energy developments in this briefing.
The new regulations came into operation on 25 September 2025. They introduce separate forms of site notices for developments which fall under the scope of RED III and all other categories of development. Regulation 7 is a transitional provision which seeks to address the position of site notices erected or newspaper notices published on or after 6 August 2025 to 25 September 2025.
Separately, the European Union (Planning and Development) (Renewable Energy) (No. 3) Regulations 2025 delay the obligation on applicants for renewable energy development to engage in a mandatory EIA Scoping process. The process will now be mandatory from 1 May 2026.
Amendment to Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (“WEEE”) circularity rules
The European Union (Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment) Regulations 2014 have been amended. Producers must now finance the management of waste arising from photovoltaic panels placed on the market from 13 August 2012. Additionally, producers must provide financial guarantees showing that the cost of the management of WEEE will be financed for a broader range of products than previously required. The regulations are in operation now.
EU OPINIONS
Opinion of Advocate General Medina on the time limit to challenge a derogation licence under the Habitats Directive
Advocate General Medina has delivered an opinion on the High Court’s referral from O’Donnell & Ors v An Bord Pleanála & Ors (No. 4) [2024] IEHC 630. The referral relates to a challenge against the grant of a derogation licence concerning a colony of microbats (a strictly protected species). The referring court asked whether the time limit to challenge a derogation licence can end before development consent is granted. Separately, the court asked whether Article 16(1) of the Habitats Directive requires an effective examination of alternative solutions to the derogation requested.
The Advocate General considered that where an EIA screening or report is required for a project, the period in which a derogation licence for the project can be challenged may not end before the date of the grant of planning permission. However, this does not apply to the recipient of the derogation decision, who must initiate a challenge within the ordinary period.
The Advocate General also confirmed that the competent authority must carry out an effective examination of alternative solutions before granting a derogation. Furthermore, as was the case in the High Court proceedings, a competent authority cannot rely on the ground for derogation set out in Article 16(1)(a) of the Habitats Directive (derogation in the interest of protecting wild fauna and flora and conserving natural habitats) to authorise a development project. This is particularly the case where no reasons are given to explain how the project promotes this interest.
Opinion of Advocate General Kokott on the prohibition on the deliberate disturbance of birds under the Birds Directive
Advocate General Kokott has delivered an opinion on the disturbance of birds under Article 5(d) of the Birds Directive. This article prohibits the “deliberate disturbance of [all species of naturally occurring birds in the wild state] particularly during the period of breeding and rearing, in so far as disturbance would be significant having regard to the objectives of this Directive.” The opinion clarifies how preventative and compensatory measures should be assessed in terms of the prohibition on disturbance, and how scientific evidence should be assessed by decision makers.
A disturbance which leads to a reduction in the population of a particular species will not trigger the prohibition under Article 5(d) if, notwithstanding the disturbance, the population remains at a satisfactory level. This is also the case if it can be assumed that the disturbance will not hinder the restoration of a satisfactory population level. Member States may take the effects of compensatory measures into account when carrying out this assessment. The Advocate General considered that in exceptional circumstances, a derogation may be granted where the conservation status of a species is unfavourable, provided it does not hinder the restoration of a favourable conservation status.
The Advocate General stated that the scientific assessments required for the application of the prohibition on disturbance should be carried out with regard to standard criteria, rather than the more restrictive criteria applied for derogations under the Habitats Directive. Member States must set their own rules governing how the effectiveness of compensatory measures is to be examined. The assessments required in judicial proceedings for the purposes of applying Article 5(d) may be based on the reasoned opinions of experts, which must be based on the most reliable scientific data available and the most recent results of international research.