Name of the Act/s

Änderung des Ökostromgesetzes 2012 (ÖSG 2012)

BGBl I Nr. 97/2019

Date 

22^th October 2019

Type of Act

Federal Law; Federal Constitutional Law

Enacted by 

National Council/Federal Council

Reference to the Constitution (FCL) (art.)

Art 12 para 1 Z 4 B-VG (Federal Constitutional Law)

Subject area

Green energy; energy from renewable sources

If the act implements a source of EU Law: cite the relevant EU legal source

Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources

Comment  

Promotion of green energy plants; assigns the legislative and administrative powers for green energy plants to the Federation (§ 1 - constitutional law) 

In February 2019, the Federal Council had vetoed the first version of the law because the SPÖ (Socialist Party) considered it not effective, forcing the governing coalition ÖVP/FPÖ to renegotiate the law.

Secondary sources/ doctrinal works (if any)

Available Text

https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/eli/bgbl/I/2019/97/20191022

Date of entry into force 

23th October/1th November 2019

Date 

24^th October 2019

Type of Act

(name in English / in the official language)

Decision of the Administrative High Court (Verwaltungsgerichtshof),Ra 2019/07/0021  

Enacted by 

Administrative High Court

Reference to the Constitution (art.)

--

Subject area

Access to environmental information

If the act implements a source of EU Law: cite the relevant EU legal source

Comment  

At the core of the decision lies the question of whether legislative bills and opinions linked to them can be classified as “information on policies” as laid down in Directive 2003/4/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2003 on public access to environmental information. The Administrative High Court decided, that opinions on legislative bills in the evaluation phase of a bill can be classified as environmental information. Yet, the assessment has to be done case by case. The classification as environmental information depends on the impact of the bill after its realization: If it has an impact on the environmental components mentioned in the bill or if the bill intends to protect those components and the realization of the project has an impact on those components, the information has to be classified as environmental information.

Secondary sources/ doctrinal works (if any)

Available Text

https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/Dokument.wxe?Abfrage=Vwgh&Dokumentnummer=JWT_2019070021_20191024L00

Date of entry into force 

Date 

9^th October 2019

Type of Act

(name in English / in the official language)

Decision of the Constitutional Court, E1851/2019

Enacted by 

Constitutional Court

Reference to the Constitution (art.)

§ 2 Annulment of nobility Act (Adelsaufhebungsgesetz) [constitutional law]

Subject area

Annulment of nobility

If the act implements a source of EU Law: cite the relevant EU legal source

Comment  

The Constitutional Court had to decide whether the finding, that the complainant was found guilty because he used “von” (as a title of nobility) in his name on his homepage, constituted a violation of constitutionally guaranteed rights. The Court could not find a violation. 

Since § 2 Annulment of nobility Act is part of the Austrian Constitution further considerations regarding the constitutionality were not to be made.

Secondary sources/ doctrinal works (if any)

Available Text

https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/Dokument.wxe?Abfrage=Vfgh&Dokumentnummer=JFT_20191009_19E01851_00

Date of entry into force 

Date 

1^st October 2019

Type of Act

(name in English / in the official language)

Decision of the Constitutional Court, E1643/2019 (rejection of the complaint)

Enacted by 

Constitutional Court

Reference to the Constitution (art.)

Art 7 and Art 144 Austrian Constitution

Subject area

Environmental impact assessment

If the act implements a source of EU Law: cite the relevant EU legal source

Comment  

Based on Art 144 the Constitutional Court may reject a complaint if there is no prospect of success. The complaint was based on Art 7 Austrian Constitution and claimed, that the Federal Administrative Court had arbitrarily construed a contradiction between Austrian Law and EU Law (Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment). Yet, the Constitutional Court acknowledged, that the Federal Administrative Courts´ reasoning was based on the jurisprudence of the ECJ. According to the Constitutional Court, such reasoning might be taken. 

It is reasonable to classify places which are listed as cultural heritage according to the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage as particularly worthy of protection, and as a material criterion according to Annex III, No. 2, lit. c Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment.

Secondary sources/ doctrinal works (if any)

Available Text

https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/Dokument.wxe?Abfrage=Vfgh&Dokumentnummer=JFT_20191001_19E01643_00

Date of entry into force 

Date

18^th of June 2019

Type of Act

(name in English / in the official language)

Decision of the Constitutional Court, G 150-151/2018-34, G 155/2018-32

Enacted by

Constitutional Court

Reference to the Constitution (art.)

Art 7 Austrian Federal Constitution

Subject area

Equality principle, non-discrimination

If the act implements a source of EU Law: cite the relevant EU legal source

Comment

The Constitutional Court did not find that several provisions of the Law that amended the Tobacco Law (TabakG) and the Law on the Protection of non-smokers (Nichtraucherinnen und Nichtraucherschutzgesetz) were unconstitutional. The government of Vienna had filed a complaint grounded on Art 140 Austrian Federal Constitution and claiming a violation of Art 7 Austrian Federal Constitution. Yet, the Constitutional Court decided, that the legislator has a duty to forbid smoking in bars and restaurants in the light of Art 7 Austrian Federal Constitution.

Secondary sources/ doctrinal works (if any)

Available Text

https://www.vfgh.gv.at/downloads/VfGH_Entscheidung_G_150_2018.pdf

Date of entry into force