Article 2.17 Activities Decree Environmental Management lays down noise standards for establishments. If these are exceeded, the Municipal Executive may impose an order under penalty payments. To help an establishment comply with these standards, customized regulations may be imposed in which, for example, noise limiters are required. However, in the ruling of October 3, 2018(ECLI:NL:RVS:2018:3218), the Division ruled that complying with tailor-made regulations does not yet mean that a violation of the noise standards can no longer take place. So it remains to pay attention!
Noise pollution and request for enforcement
In this case, the neighbor across the street from a gym is bothered by loud music coming from the gym's building. He therefore submits an enforcement request to the college. After initially rejecting this request, the Municipal Executive subsequently imposed a penalty payment on the gym for violating Section 2.17 of the Activities Decree, which contains noise regulations for establishments.
Customized regulations had previously been established for the gym, which included rules of conduct and technical provisions designed to ensure that the gym met the noise standards. In this case, those regulations stipulated, among other things, that working noise limiters must be present in the gym.
Following the neighbor's complaint, the college commissions several noise measurements, which show that the noise standards are exceeded. As a result, the college ultimately decides to recover the penalty payment.
Despite tailoring requirements, still exceed standards
The gym disagrees and goes to court. At the hearing in first instance, the gym defended itself by arguing that it has noise limiters in operation and therefore complies with the measure regulations. Therefore, according to her, there can be no violation of the noise regulations from Section 2.17 of the Activities Decree.
During the hearing, it is established that the tailoring requirements have indeed been met. Nevertheless, the court rules that there is a violation. The customized regulations, which must be implemented, do not replace the noise standards. The fact that these regulations have been met does not alter the fact that a violation of the noise standards may be at issue, the court said. And that was the case here.
Own responsibility
The Division concurred with the District Court and found that noise standards had been violated despite compliance with the customization requirements. Here it refers to a previous ruling (ECLI:NL:RVS:2013:752), in which it considered that, regardless of whether or not the noise limiters work properly, it remains the responsibility of the operator of the establishment to ensure that the establishment complies with the noise standards. Thus, mere compliance with the customization requirements is not enough.
Keep paying close attention!
The noise standards in Section 2.17 of the Activities Decree are relevant to all types of establishments. In this case it concerned a gym, but manufacturing companies also frequently have to deal with these standards. In any case, this ruling makes it clear that complying with all the customized regulations to prevent noise pollution does not exempt an establishment from violating noise standards. It therefore remains important to keep a close eye on whether the standards from Section 2.17 of the Activities Decree are not being violated, regardless of whether other noise prevention regulations have been met.
