Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
COILLTE CUIDEACHTA GHN�OMHA�OCHTA AINMNITHE, IRELAND AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (BY ORDER)
            This request for a preliminary ruling concerns the interpretation of Article 6(1) and/or (2) of Directive 2003/4 and/or Article 9(1) and/or (4) of the UNECE Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters done at Aarhus on 25 June 1998 (Aarhus Convention).
            The request is being made in proceedings concerning a challenge to a decision of the Commissioner for Environmental Information (as the competent authority under domestic law acting under Article 6(2) of Directive 2003/4 and/or Article 9(1) of the Aarhus Convention) to remit a request for access to environmental information to the public body rather than decide on it himself.
            The proceedings were issued on 14 March 2025, and heard on 20 October 2025.� The referring court gave an initial judgment on 5 November 2025, rejecting the domestic law grounds of challenge and identifying two European law points arising in the balance of the proceedings.� That judgment was amended on 3 December 2025 to clarify the factual timeline.� On 8 December 2025, the amicus curiae was added to the proceedings.
            In those circumstances the referring court is staying the proceedings and referring the questions below to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
[2026] EWCA Crim 486
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.