Key Contacts: Alice Whittaker – Partner

In a recent decision delivered on 25 March 2025, the Irish Court of Appeal (Ms Justice Butler) has decided to refer three questions to the Court of Justice of the EU relating to the requirement for Appropriate Assessment of a high-level strategy prepared for the Irish Agri-food sector – Food Vision 2030 – the “2030 Vision for Ireland’s Agri-Food Sector”.

Agri-food sector in Ireland

According to Food Vision 2030, the Agri-food sector employed approximately 164,400 people in 2020, representing at that time 7.1% of Ireland’s total employment. The Agri-food sector in Ireland covers agriculture, food and drink processing and manufacturing, fisheries, aquaculture and fish processing, forestry and forestry processing and the equine sector. It estimated that in 2019, approximately €8.5 billion in output was produced by the sector, much of which will have been exported to global markets.

Questions Referred

The requirement for Appropriate Assessment (AA) of a plan or project arises under Article 6(3) of the EU Habitats Directive. An AA is required where a plan or project is likely to have a significant effect on a European site – that is a site designated or proposed for designation under the Habitats Directive or the Birds Directive – and that forms part of the EU Natura 2000 network.

In essence, the Court of Appeal is asking the EU Court whether:

  1. A high-level policy or strategy like Food Vision 2030 is capable of being deemed a “plan or project” for the purposes of Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive?
  2. If a policy like Food Vision 2030 is capable of being deemed a “plan or project” under Article 6(3), whether it can constitute such a plan or project if it does not contain measures that are specific enough to allow them to be quantified and assessed in accordance with the requirements of Article 6(3), and if it is not possible to identify any specific Natura 2000 site or sites which might be affected by its implementation so as to enable an AA to be carried out by reference to the site(s) particular conservation measures?
  3. If the answer to question 2 is “Yes”, whether it is sufficient for such AA to be carried out on the basis of generalised environmental risks, and on Natura 2000 sites generally, without identifying Natura 2000 site-specific risks that are likely to arise from the strategy?

The Court of Appeal has helpfully framed the questions in a way that is likely to provide clarity from the CJEU, in particular by describing the characteristics of the high-level policy or strategy document at issue in the following terms:

  • it was adopted on a voluntary basis by a stakeholder committee;
  • it is formally supported by a decision of the Government;
  • it does not authorise or limit any activity;
  • it does not have any mandatory or binding effects on downstream decision makers but may have some influence in that it may be considered by such decision-makers;
  • it does not set criteria by reference to which development consent decisions will be made; and
  • it does not set criteria by reference to which other plans or programmes will be adopted.

Wider Implications

There are many high-level strategies and policies with similar characteristics adopted by Government for a variety of sectors and that have similar characteristics. Indeed, the Planning and Development Act 2000, as amended, specifically requires planning authorities to have regard to the policies of the Government, and of Ministers of the Government, even where such policies are non-binding. Therefore the ruling of the EU Court in this case is likely to have broader application and relevance.

In the meantime, with protectionist trade policies being pursued by some of Ireland’s largest export markets, the Agri-food sector and those who depend on it will be hoping for a sensible and timely outcome from the CJEU in response to these questions.

Friends of the Irish Environment v Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Ireland and the Attorney General [2025] IECA 71.

Key Contacts