ABSTRACT
Amongst environmentalists Denmark is known for its good environmental law reputation. In both Denmark and other Member States of the Community the impression is that Denmark is complying with European Union (EU) minimum standards on environmental protection and has even higher ideals. This attitude towards EU and Danish environmental law interrelationship has been indirectly supported by the absence of cases brought before the European Court of Justice (ECJ). The theoretical objections are based on two observations: it is misleading to measure environmental protection on a one-dimensional scale; it is not possible to judge what are incomparable entities such as EU and Danish environmental law on a one-dimensional scale. The 'stricter' or 'higher' approach ignores the complex impact on different environmental elements. According to the ECJ ruling, quality standards for drinking water under the Drinking Water Directive are legally binding. According to Article 3 of the Birds Directive (79/409), Member States are required to preserve, and/or re-establish habitats for wild birds.
