cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ca/post/67203436
cross-posted from: https://infosec.pub/post/48796725
An EU court has said the manufacture of private jets can’t be excluded from a list of activities deemed to be environmentally sustainable, fuelling concerns about the greenwashing of the emissions of the super-rich.
The list, intended to provide an overview of green investments, previously excluded aircraft for private or commercial business aviation due to their high emissions compared with other forms of transport following a 2023 decision by the European Commission.
The court argued that the 2023 ruling was made with a number of errors, including that other modes of transport couldn’t necessarily be seen as low-carbon alternatives as they “lack the flexibility and speed” of private jets.



This is a court making a decision because Dassault, a jet manufacturer, argued that it was illegal to exclude jets manufacturing from green investments. The court follows the law, not their opinion.
So Dassault’s lawyers found the gaps, not the court. The reasoning of the court is very likely that indeed, by the current laws, the exclusion is illegal, wether they agree with it or not.
Right, so I’d be interested to know what law that reasoning is based on, i.e. what are the gaps in the law, and why are they there?
Fair enough.