ABSTRACT
The second case concerned the placing of creosote treated
posts into water from which List I (but where no daughter directive had
set limit values) substances were leaching. The court had to consider
whether this amounted to a discharge and the nature of the obligations
of States in respect of such List I substances. As to the word discharge,
the same definition was used as in Van Rouij. If the pollution was so
diffuse that it could not be attributed to a particular person, this could
not be a discharge.
