EU Court Overturns Bizav’s Sustainability Criteria Exclusion

The European Union General Court today reversed a 2023 ruling by the European Commission (EC) excluding the manufacturing of business aircraft from the European Union’s green taxonomy process. Lawyers for Dassault Aviation, which in 2024 filed a case against the ruling, supported by the European Business Aviation Association (EBAA), successfully argued that the ruling unfairly excluded the industry from economic activities in support of environmental sustainability.

In a statement issued by Dassault, the manufacturer of Falcon jets said that the court in Luxembourg confirmed the EC’s ruling had “blatantly failed to consider the specific characteristics and [business aviation's] role in certain missions.” Its legal team argued that in Section 3.21 of the Climate Delegated Act, European officials had ignored the social and economic value of business aviation, as well as “insufficiently taking account” of the decarbonizing impact of increased use of sustainable aviation fuel (SAF).

The EC has two months in which it could appeal the General Court’s ruling [case reference T-77/24] through the European Court of Justice. Oral hearings for the case started in February in a case that was also backed by another French aircraft maker, Daher, which—along with EBAA—was an “intervener” in the proceedings.

According to EBAA, business aviation’s exclusion from the EU green taxonomy has resulted in the industry being excluded from some sources of financing on the grounds that it did not meet sustainability criteria required by some investors. A spokesperson for the industry group told AIN that the June 24 ruling is “an important recognition that business aviation cannot simply be excluded from sustainable finance on the basis of a blanket assumption.”

EBAA has consistently argued that the criteria for the EU taxonomy should be objective, technology-neutral, and proportionate, while also recognizing the decarbonization efforts being made by business aviation. The group has previously said that the exclusion had resulted in higher costs for its member companies.

Manufacturing Distinct from Operations

The court specifically ruled that the EC had not adequately established that other modes of transport necessarily constitute credible low-carbon alternatives to private flights. The judges noted that the carbon footprint of aircraft manufacturing should be treated as distinct from emissions resulting from operations.

EBAA said it supported the case to defend its members from a discriminatory decision. In a statement, the organization said the General Court’s ruling “corrects the course of the legislation and recognizes that business aviation cannot be singled out on the basis of assumptions that are not sufficiently supported.”

The group said the case would result in a fair and objective approach to sustainable finance rules. “More broadly, the judgment underlines that sustainable finance rules must remain evidence-based, proportionate and aligned with the actual characteristics of the activity being regulated,” it concluded.

According to EBAA, the judgment sets a significant legal precedent with “an important signal that EU legislation must be based on facts, must respect equal treatment, and must properly reflect the contribution that business aviation makes to European connectivity, innovation, and industrial competitiveness.”

EBAA highlighted the industry’s role as an innovator in aviation, “including through the development of more efficient aircraft, advanced materials, aerodynamic improvements, and lower-emission propulsion pathways.” It pointed out that business aircraft operators are also contributing to the uptake of SAF in response to European legislation such as the ReFuelEU requirements.