Leybucht
Wild Birds
Protection
Case
Presented By-
Shahal Ibn Islam Joy
Neptun ID-JRKVWY
Mahmuda Rahman
Bristy
Neptun ID-VELW28
Shahria Tanzil
Neptun ID-A2T5YS

Council Directive 79/409/EEC on the conservation of wild birds, Article 4:
 Relates to the conservation of all species of naturally occurring birds.
 Covers the protection, management and control of these species and lays down rules for
their exploitation.
Article 4:
 Subject to special conservation measures with regard to their habitat to ensure survival
and reproduction.
 Member states are obliged to classify the suitable territories for the conservation of
these species.
 Measures must be taken for the regularly occurring migratory species as well.
 They shall notify the Commission all the related information so that it can coordinate to
protect the species in the areas where the Directive applies.
 Member States shall take appropriate steps to avoid pollution or deterioration of habitats

• Applicant- Commission of the European Communities (represented
by Ingolf Pernice, a member of the legal department)
• Defendant- Federal Republic of Germany (represented by Ernst
Röder)
• Third party / Intervener- United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Northern Ireland (represented by S. J. Hay)

The application initially comprised two claims-
1. Dredging and filling operations in the Rysumer Nacken.
2. Second concerning dyke-building operations carried out in the Leybucht.
With regard to the first claim-
 Rysumer Nacken is not designated as a special protection area
 they will have to bear the costs relating to the point as put forward by the defendant
Regarding the second claim-
 Dyke-building operations in the Leybucht disturb birds which enjoy special protection
under the Directive and damage.
 Member states need to take positive states to avoid any deterioration or pollution of
the habitat
 Theirs coastal defence measures are only acceptable in case of a threat to human
life

The 1st Claim-
• the defendant argued the Commission had all the information regarding
legal status of Rysumer Nacken.
• The place is not under the special protection area and is not a new
argument.
• New line of the dyke in the Leybucht and the areas located on the
landward side of the dyke are excluded from the protected areas.
• The competent authorities took account of all bird conservation
requirements and balanced against the requirements of coastal
protection.
• new line of the dyke and the temporary disturbances constitute the
smallest possible interference
• Commission has not furnished any evidence for impair the protection of

• Commission failed to establish significant effect under the
Directive- The United Kindom
• Commission materials does not support the idea that the project in
Leibucht involve deterioration of habitat of the birds.
• Supports the evidence provided by the defendant that the works at
issue will significantly improve ecological conditions in the
Leybucht.
• Member States must be able to take into account the interests of
persons living in or around a special protection area.

• Maps and information about the park were given by Germany in
1988.
• Rysumer Nacken has no defenses.
• The limits of the Leybucht have been established.
• A state may limit a protected area's size for reasons other than
ecological.
• Aerial fortification and dike construction are justified if they do
not reduce the particular protection area
• The state sets the size.
• Fortification of coastal areas and daches Wattenmeer's avocet
population is stable. They haven't updated population figures.

• Application was dismissed.
• The Commission was ordered to pay the costs including
the costs of the intervener and those related to the
application for interim measures.