Opinion of the Advocate General — ECLI:EU:C:2006:565
Date: 2006-09-14
Language of the case: Greek
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Freedom to provide services;Transport
Procedure: Action for failure to fulfil obligations - unfounded
Origin: Greece

Summary of the Judgment 1. Actions for failure to fulfil obligations – Application initiating proceedings – Examination of claims not covered by the application – Not permissible (Art. 226 EC) 2. Transport – Maritime transport – Freedom to provide services – Maritime cabotage (Council Regulation No 3577/92, Art. 2(1)) 1. It is not for the Court to give a ruling that goes beyond the grounds for complaint and form of order sought in the Commission’s application under Article 226 EC. (see para. 27) 2. Despite the non-exhaustive nature of the list of ‘maritime cabotage services’ given in Article 2(1) of Regulation No 3577/92 applying the principle of freedom to provide services to maritime transport within Member States, it follows from that provision, construed as a whole, that the services falling within its scope are, firstly, normally provided for remuneration and, secondly, as the essential characteristics of the examples of maritime cabotage in that article illustrate, serve the purpose of transporting passengers or goods by sea between two places in the territory of a single Member State. The nature and characteristics of towage are different from those of cabotage, as defined in Article 2(1) of Regulation No 3577/92. Although towage is a service normally provided for remuneration, it does not in principle entail a straightforward carriage of goods or passengers by sea, but rather involves assisting the movement of a vessel, rig, platform or buoy. In those conditions, to infer from the term ‘in particular’ in Article 2(1) of that regulation that it can extend the scope of that provision to any service related, incidental or ancillary to the provision of maritime transport services within the Member States, whether or not that service has the essential characteristics of maritime cabotage as expressly defined therein, would be contrary not only to the purpose of that regulation, but also to legal certainty as to the scope of that regulation. (see paras 28-29, 31-32)