CELEX: 62003CJ0089
Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations
Failure to transpose Directive 93/15/EEC

By application lodged at the Court Registry on 27 February 2003, the Commission of the European Communities brought an action
under Article 226 EC for a declaration that, by failing to adopt all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary
to comply with Council Directive 93/15/EEC of 5 April 1993 on the harmonisation of the provisions relating to the placing
on the market and supervision of explosives for civil uses (OJ 1993 L 121, p. 20) or, at any rate, by failing to inform the
Commission thereof, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive.
In accordance with Article 19 (1) of Directive 93/15, Member States had to bring into force the provisions necessary to comply
with Articles 9 to 14 of the directive before 30 September 1993. Under Article 19(2), Member States had to adopt and publish
before 30 June 1994 the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with the provisions other than
those mentioned in Article 19(1). They had to forthwith inform the Commission thereof and apply these provisions as from 1
January 1995.
Since Directive 93/15 had not been transposed into Luxembourg law within the period prescribed, the Commission initiated the
procedure provided for in Article 226 EC. Having given the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg formal notice to submit its observations,
on 26 June 2002 the Commission issued a reasoned opinion  calling on that Member State to take the measures necessary to comply
with it within a period of two months of its notification. The information sent to the Commission by the Luxembourg authorities
having indicated that Directive 93/15 had not yet been implemented, it decided to bring the present action.
Without disputing its delay in transposing Directive 93/15, the Luxembourg Government claims the delay was due to a reorganisation
of competences between different national bodies in the area of explosives for civil uses. This having now been completed,
a draft law intended to implement the directive is being drawn up.
According to settled case-law, Member States cannot plead domestic circumstances or practical difficulties to justify non-transposition
within prescribed time-limits (see, on this point, Case C-52/91
Commission
v
Netherlands
[1993] ECR I-3069, paragraph 36, and Case C-140/00
Commission
v
United Kingdom
[2002] ECR I-10379, paragraph 60).
In those circumstances, the action brought by the Commission must be regarded as well founded.
It must therefore be held that, by failing to bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary
to comply with Directive 93/15, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive.
Costs
Under Article 69(2) of the Rules of Procedure, the unsuccessful party is to be ordered to pay the costs if they have been
applied for in the successful party's pleadings. Since the Commission has applied for costs to be awarded against the Grand
Duchy of Luxembourg and the latter has been unsuccessful, it must be ordered to pay the costs.
On those grounds,
THE COURT (First Chamber),
hereby:
1.
Declares that, by failing to bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with
Council Directive 93/15/EEC of 5 April 1993 on the harmonisation of the provisions relating to the placing on the market and
supervision of explosives for civil uses, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;
2.
Orders the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to pay the costs.
Wathelet
Jann
Rosas
Delivered in open court in Luxembourg on 2 October 2003.
R. Grass
M. Wathelet
Registrar
President of the First Chamber
–
Language of the case: French.