@remlifFrom the Domstol website (not related to this case, just...

@remlif

From the Domstol website (not related to this case, just their general way of ruling): "The fact that there is new legislation in progress concerning the issue speaks against leave to appeal because the value of a precedent in that case is soon overplayed."

EU law takes precedence over member state laws. The above quote from the Supreme Court should then apply for the CRMA. If so, the Supreme Court would not have to wait until the CRMA comes into force, as it is new legislation in progress. More detail here Post #: 72821547

To add some weight to your theory, Talga has not yet been named a strategic project. How then could the Supreme Court know that this new legislation would apply to Talga? The confusion is caused by the CRMA being selective in which projects the law applies to; it isn't all-encompassing. That could be the reason why the court is waiting. An overhaul of environmental codes for member states is not something that happens every day, so perhaps they want to see where they stand because "the value of the precedent would soon be overplayed" if they act prematurely.

All speculation.