# C_2017070EN.01001102.xml

| 6.3.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 70/11 |
| -------- | -- | -------------------------------------- | ------- |

---

Action brought on 23 December 2016 — European Commission v Federal Republic of Germany

(Case C-668/16)

(2017/C 070/18)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: C. Hermes, A.C. Becker, D. Kukovec, Agents)

Defendant: Federal Republic of Germany

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | declare that:
—
by failing to take the measures necessary to restore the conformity of vehicles of types 246, 176 and 117 with their approved types (Articles 12 and 30 of the Framework Directive); —
by failing to take the measures necessary to implement penalties (Article 46, in conjunction with Articles 5 and 18, of the Framework Directive); and —
by upholding on 17 May 2013 an application by Daimler AG for extension of the existing vehicle type 245G to vehicles for which a different type-approval had been granted previously, to which the new requirements of the MAC Directive are applicable, and thereby circumventing the MAC Directive; the Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its obligations under Directive 2006/40/EC( 1 ) (MAC Directive) and Directive 2007/46/EC( 2 ) (Framework Directive), | — | by failing to take the measures necessary to restore the conformity of vehicles of types 246, 176 and 117 with their approved types (Articles 12 and 30 of the Framework Directive); | — | by failing to take the measures necessary to implement penalties (Article 46, in conjunction with Articles 5 and 18, of the Framework Directive); and | — | by upholding on 17 May 2013 an application by Daimler AG for extension of the existing vehicle type 245G to vehicles for which a different type-approval had been granted previously, to which the new requirements of the MAC Directive are applicable, and thereby circumventing the MAC Directive; |
| - | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | - | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | - | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | - | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| — | by failing to take the measures necessary to restore the conformity of vehicles of types 246, 176 and 117 with their approved types (Articles 12 and 30 of the Framework Directive); | | | | | | |
| — | by failing to take the measures necessary to implement penalties (Article 46, in conjunction with Articles 5 and 18, of the Framework Directive); and | | | | | | |
| — | by upholding on 17 May 2013 an application by Daimler AG for extension of the existing vehicle type 245G to vehicles for which a different type-approval had been granted previously, to which the new requirements of the MAC Directive are applicable, and thereby circumventing the MAC Directive; | | | | | | |

| — | order the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
| - | -------------------------------------------------------------------------- |

Pleas in law and main arguments

Under Article 12 of and Annex X to the Framework Directive, Member States are required, in the event of non-conformity of production, to take the measures necessary to ensure that production vehicles conform to the approved type. Under Article 30 of the Framework Directive, the necessary measures are also to be taken to restore conformity where new vehicles deviate from approved types. The production and completed new vehicles of some of Daimler AG’s vehicle types have deviated from their approved type with regard to the use of a certain refrigerant. The German authorities did not take the measures necessary to restore conformity, contrary to Articles 12 and 30 of the Framework Directive.

Furthermore, the German authorities infringed Article 46 of the Framework Directive insofar as they imposed no penalties in respect of Daimler AG’s infringements of Article 5(1) and Article 18 of the Framework Directive.

Lastly, the German authorities circumvented the MAC Directive in an impermissible way by extending an earlier vehicle type to the abovementioned vehicle types.

---

( 1 )  Directive 2006/40/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2006 relating to emissions from air conditioning systems in motor vehicles and amending Council Directive 70/156/EEC, OJ 2006 L 161, p. 12.

( 2 )  Directive 2007/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 September 2007 establishing a framework for the approval of motor vehicles and their trailers, and of systems, components and separate technical units intended for such vehicles, OJ 2007 L 263, p. 1.

---