On 9 March 2023, the Court of Justice (Second Chamber) delivered a preliminary ruling about the coordination of two European Union measures against air pollution: the Industrial Emissions Directive and the Ambient Air Quality Directive. Upon assessment, the Court reinforced the mandatory nature of the air quality limit values vis-à-vis possible derogations foreseen in the Industrial Emissions Directive. In this case, both AG Kokott and the Second Chamber affirmed the primacy of the air quality standards. However, this Case Note finds that slightly different reasoning between the AG Opinion and the final Judgment reveals differing underlying approaches. Whilst the AG focuses on air quality plans and leaves more room for discretion to national authorities, the final Judgment anchors the coordination of the two Directives to strict and objective pollution limit values, further strengthening the Ambient Air Quality Directive as an effective instrument of environmental protection litigation.

中文翻译：

---

整体空气污染：法院加强环境空气质量指令中的环境标准，对比工业排放指令的减损

2023 年 3 月 9 日，欧洲法院（第二庭）就协调欧盟两项空气污染措施：工业排放指令和环境空气质量指令做出了初步裁决。经过评估，法院加强了空气质量限值的强制性，以防止工业排放指令中预见到的可能的减损。在这种情况下，AG Kokott 和第二议院都确认了空气质量标准的首要地位。然而，本案例说明发现，总检察长意见和最终判决之间的推理略有不同，揭示了不同的基本方法。虽然总检察长侧重于空气质量计划，并为国家当局留有更多自由裁量权，但最终判决将两个指令的协调与严格和客观的污染限值结合起来，进一步加强了环境空气质量指令作为环境保护的有效工具诉讼。