Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2002:713
Date: 2002-11-26
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Environment
Concepts: General
Procedure: Action for failure to fulfil obligations - successful
Origin: France

summary form, the legal and factual particulars on which those complaints are based, as required by the Court in its judgment in Commission v Greece. (10) The complaint is therefore not inadmissible for lack of a statement of grounds. 58. As the proceedings are admissible and as the Commission is pursuing them despite a request for their withdrawal by the French Government, the issue is whether the French Republic has classified the Plaine des Maures in insufficient measure. On the date on which the time-limit set in the reasoned opinion expired, 19 February 1998, the French Republic had not classified even the first 879 hectares; this was not done until 5 November 1998. Since measures to remedy a failure to fulfil an obligation taken after the expiry of the time-limit set in the reasoned opinion cannot have any effect on whether the action is well founded, (11) it is irrelevant for the purposes of a declaration of failure to fulfil an obligation whether the French Republic has in the mean time classified further land. 59. However, even the subsequent classifications totalling 4 537 hectares do not satisfy the obligation under the wild birds directive to classify the most suitable territories in number and size. ZICO 1994 identifies a conservation area of 7 500 hectares for the Plaine des Maures. A reference to the findings on the first head of claim is sufficient here since the French Republic has not produced any data to prove its general assertion that the area classified by it, which extends to only 60% of the area designated in ZICO 1994, comprises the most suitable territory for the conservation of the species whilst the rest is unsuitable land cultivated by man. 60. Consequently, the French Republic has not fulfilled its obligations under Article 4 of the wild birds directive in this respect either and the whole of the declaration sought by the Commission must be granted. VÉ - Costs 61. The Commission also claims that the Court should order the French Republic to pay the 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. VÉÉ - Conclusion 62. In view of the considerations set out above, I propose that the Court should: (1) declare that by not classifying as special protection areas the territories most suitable for the conservation of the species of wild bird listed in Annex I to Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds and for the conservation of migratory species of bird and, in particular, by not classifying as a special protection area a sufficiently large area of land on the Plaine des Maures, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive and under the Treaty establishing the European Community; (2) order the French Republic to pay the costs. 1: - Original language: German. 2: - OJ 1979 L 103, p. 1, as last amended by Commission Directive 97/49/EC of 29 July 1997 (OJ 1997 L 223, p. 9). 3: - French abbreviation for zones importantes pour la conservation des oiseaux. 4: - A study entitled ‘Important Bird Areas in the European Community’. 5: - Case C-3/96 [1998] ECR I-3031. 6: - Case C-355/90 [1993] ECR I-4221. 7: - Cited in point 19. 8: - Emphasis added. 9: - Case C-365/97 [1999] ECR I-7773, paragraph 85. 10: - Case C-347/88 [1990] ECR I-4747, paragraph 28. 11: - Case C-147/00 Commission v France [2001] ECR I-2387, paragraph 26.