# C_2007129EN.01000501.xml

| 9.6.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 129/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.6.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 129/5

---

Action brought on 15 March 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Republic of Poland

(Case C-149/07)

(2007/C 129/07)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: J. Hottiaux and K. Herrmann, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Republic of Poland

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | declare that, by failing to establish a specific legal framework for the grant of authorisations for the parallel import of plant protection products into Poland, the Republic of Poland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 28 EC; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare that, by failing to establish a specific legal framework for the grant of authorisations for the parallel import of plant protection products into Poland, the Republic of Poland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 28 EC;

| — | order the Republic of Poland to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Republic of Poland to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Article 28 EC prohibits quantitative restrictions on imports between Member States and all measures having equivalent effect. The Commission submits that, by failing to establish a specific legal framework regarding the grant of authorisations for the placing on the market of plant protection products which are imported from other Member States, where those products have already obtained authorisation to be placed on the market, and which are identical (within the meaning of the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Communities) to products already placed on the market in Poland, the Republic of Poland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 28 EC.

According to the Court of Justice's case-law, in the absence of harmonisation ‘all trading rules enacted by Member States which are capable of hindering, directly or indirectly, actually or potentially, intra-Community trade are to be considered as measures having an effect equivalent to quantitative restrictions’. The Court has also held that national rules or practices which result in imports being channelled in such a way that only certain traders can effect these imports, whereas others are prevented from doing so, constitute a measure having an effect equivalent to a quantitative restriction. A procedure under which prior authorisation is required for the sale of imported products must be established by means of rules which are of general application and which also explicitly bind the national authorities. That procedure must be easily accessible and carried out within a reasonable time. It is necessary for such general rules to exist in national law because they enable citizens to exercise the rights accorded to them by Community law.

While the new proposal for legislative amendment may be accepted by the Commission, it had not entered into force on expiry of the two-month period set in the Commission's reasoned opinion calling for elimination of the infringement. In accordance with settled case-law, the question whether a Member State has failed to fulfil its obligations must be determined by reference to the legal situation prevailing in that State at the end of the period laid down by the Commission in the reasoned opinion. The Court cannot take account of any subsequent changes in national law.

---