Europe – By judgment of 2 September 2026 (Case T-120/24 – Global Legal Action Network and Climate Action Network Europe (CAN-Europe) v Commission), the General Court of the European Union held that, although the Commission had made certain errors of law when examining the request for internal review submitted under the Aarhus Regulation, those errors had no bearing on the outcome of the dispute, since the challenges relating to the climate targets laid down by the EU legislature and to the impact assessment preceding their adoption could not, in any event, validly be raised in the context of an internal review, as acts and activities falling within the exercise of legislative powers are excluded from the scope of the Aarhus Regulation. The General Court therefore dismissed the action in its entirety

Europe – By judgment of 2 September 2026 (Case T-120/24 – Global Legal Action Network and Climate Action Network Europe (CAN-Europe) v Commission), the General Court of the European Union held that, although the Commission had made certain errors of law when examining the request for internal review submitted under the Aarhus Regulation, those errors had no bearing on the outcome of the dispute, since the challenges relating to the climate targets laid down by the EU legislature and to the impact assessment preceding their adoption could not, in any event, validly be raised in the context of an internal review, as acts and activities falling within the exercise of legislative powers are excluded from the scope of the Aarhus Regulation. The General Court therefore dismissed the action in its entirety

par | 4 septembre 2026 | *Europe

HAVET & VANHUFFEL – Association d’avocats By their action brought pursuant to Article 263 TFEU, the applicants, Global Legal Action Network and Climate Action Network Europe (CAN-Europe), seek the annulment of European Commission Decision Ares(2023)...
Europe – France – In its judgment of 2 September 2026, the European Court of Human Rights held that the criminal confiscation of jointly owned property, despite the absence of a criminal conviction of one of the spouses deprived of the property, did not violate Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the European Convention on Human Rights

Europe – France – In its judgment of 2 September 2026, the European Court of Human Rights held that the criminal confiscation of jointly owned property, despite the absence of a criminal conviction of one of the spouses deprived of the property, did not violate Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the European Convention on Human Rights

par | 4 septembre 2026 | *Europe

HAVET & VANHUFFEL – Association d’avocats 1. The facts The applicant is the wife of a man who was criminally convicted of breach of trust. In the context of these proceedings, two properties belonging to the spouses’ matrimonial community were seized...
Belgium – Federal State – The Chamber of Representatives Adopts Book 7 of the New Civil Code on 16 July 2026 and Modernises the Various Real Estate Contracts (Sale, Construction/Real Estate Services and Lease)

Belgium – Federal State – The Chamber of Representatives Adopts Book 7 of the New Civil Code on 16 July 2026 and Modernises the Various Real Estate Contracts (Sale, Construction/Real Estate Services and Lease)

par | 1 septembre 2026 | *Europe

The Chamber of Representatives has adopted Book 7 of the new Civil Code, devoted to special contracts. This reform forms part of the extensive recodification of Belgian civil law that has been underway for several years. Following the books devoted to property,...
Europe – In its judgment of 16 July 2026 (Joined Cases C-27/25 and C-356/25), the Court of Justice of the European Union held that Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive precludes a national authority from lawfully carrying out an appropriate assessment of a project affecting a Special Protection Zone (Zone de Protection Spéciale – ZPS) where the site-specific conservation objectives for that zone have not been adopted beforehand. The Court further held that, prior to the adoption of those conservation objectives, only the geographical delimitation of the area potentially affected may be undertaken, whereas the assessment of the project’s effects on the protected site cannot. The judgment thus reinforces the principle that site-specific conservation objectives are a necessary and indispensable prerequisite for the protection regime governing Natura 2000 sites

Europe – In its judgment of 16 July 2026 (Joined Cases C-27/25 and C-356/25), the Court of Justice of the European Union held that Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive precludes a national authority from lawfully carrying out an appropriate assessment of a project affecting a Special Protection Zone (Zone de Protection Spéciale – ZPS) where the site-specific conservation objectives for that zone have not been adopted beforehand. The Court further held that, prior to the adoption of those conservation objectives, only the geographical delimitation of the area potentially affected may be undertaken, whereas the assessment of the project’s effects on the protected site cannot. The judgment thus reinforces the principle that site-specific conservation objectives are a necessary and indispensable prerequisite for the protection regime governing Natura 2000 sites

par | 20 juillet 2026 | *Europe

HAVET & VANHUFFEL – Association d’avocats In its judgment of 16 July 2026 (Joined Cases C-27/25 and C-356/25), the Court of Justice of the European Union held that Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive precludes a national authority from lawfully...
Powered by  GDPR Cookie Compliance
Résumé de la politique de confidentialité

Ce site utilise des cookies afin que nous puissions vous fournir la meilleure expérience utilisateur possible. Les informations sur les cookies sont stockées dans votre navigateur et remplissent des fonctions telles que vous reconnaître lorsque vous revenez sur notre site Web et aider notre équipe à comprendre les sections du site que vous trouvez les plus intéressantes et utiles.