Civil Society Litigation in EU Environmental Law – A Systematic Study of Preliminary References to the CJEU

Abstract This article undertakes a systematic analysis of environmental litigation at the Court of Justice of the European Union, focusing primarily on preliminary reference procedures initiated by civil society actors. It does so in order to provide a basis for future research that goes beyond individual case studies. Central take-aways are strong geographical disparities in cases brought by individuals and environmental non-governmental organisations (ENGOs), with many cases from Belgium, France, Germany, and the Netherlands and very few cases from Spain, Greece and Portugal. Cases brought by individuals are equally numerous as cases brought by ENGOs, suggesting that ENGOs are not the only beneficiaries of the procedural innovations precipitated by the Aarhus Convention. Finally, companies are the most frequent litigants in environmental cases. Not all such cases challenge environmental obligations, but the significant number of cases that do, even where they are directed at individual decisions rather than policies, pose significant questions about the cumulative effects of such litigation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
European Journal of Risk Regulation
Published
2026-10-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2026.10170
Primary Topic
Environmental law and policy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Civil Society Litigation in EU Environmental Law – A Systematic Study of Preliminary References to the CJEU

Andreas Hofmann
European Journal of Risk Regulation
Environmental law and policy
article

Civil Society Litigation in EU Environmental Law – A Systematic Study of Preliminary References to the CJEU

Andreas Hofmann
article en

Abstract

Abstract This article undertakes a systematic analysis of environmental litigation at the Court of Justice of the European Union, focusing primarily on preliminary reference procedures initiated by civil society actors. It does so in order to provide a basis for future research that goes beyond individual case studies. Central take-aways are strong geographical disparities in cases brought by individuals and environmental non-governmental organisations (ENGOs), with many cases from Belgium, France, Germany, and the Netherlands and very few cases from Spain, Greece and Portugal. Cases brought by individuals are equally numerous as cases brought by ENGOs, suggesting that ENGOs are not the only beneficiaries of the procedural innovations precipitated by the Aarhus Convention. Finally, companies are the most frequent litigants in environmental cases. Not all such cases challenge environmental obligations, but the significant number of cases that do, even where they are directed at individual decisions rather than policies, pose significant questions about the cumulative effects of such litigation.

European Journal of Risk Regulation
Leiden University (NL)
Peace, justice, and strong institutions, Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Environmental law and policy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon