Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2007:808
Date: 2007-12-18
Language of the case: Italian
Court formation: Third Chamber
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Environment;Waste
Concepts: Environment
Procedure: Action for failure to fulfil obligations - successful
Origin: Italy

Summary of the Judgment 1. Environment – Waste – Directive 75/442 – Concept of waste (Art. 174(2) EC; Council Directive 75/442, as amended by Directive 91/156, Art. 1(a)) 2. Environment – Waste – Directive 75/442 – Concept of waste (Council Directive 75/442, as amended by Directive 91/156, Art. 1(a)) 3. Environment – Waste – Directive 75/442 – Scope (Council Directive 75/442, as amended by Directive 91/156, Arts 1(a) and 2(1)) 1. The classification of a substance or object as ‘waste’ for the purposes of Directive 75/442 on waste, as amended by Directive 91/156, results primarily from the holder’s actions and the meaning of the term ‘discard’. These terms must be interpreted in the light not only of the fundamental aim of the directive, which, according to the third recital in the preamble thereto, is the protection of human health and the environment against harmful effects caused by the collection, transport, treatment, storage and tipping of waste, but also of Article 174(2) EC, which provides that Community policy on the environment is to aim at a high level of protection and is based on the precautionary principle and on the principle that preventive action should be taken. It follows that those terms, and thus the concept of waste, cannot be interpreted restrictively. (see paras 32-33) 2. Whether a substance is in fact ‘waste’ within the meaning of Article 1(a) of Directive 75/442 on waste, as amended by Directive 91/156, must be determined in the light of all the circumstances, account being taken of the aim of the directive and the need to ensure that its effectiveness is not undermined. Thus, certain circumstances may constitute evidence that the holder has discarded a substance or object, or intends or is required to discard it, within the meaning of that provision. That is the case in particular where a substance is a production or consumption residue, that is to say, a product which it was not, as such, sought to produce, neither the method of treatment reserved for a substance nor the use to which that substance is put being conclusive at to whether or not it is to be classified as waste. In addition to the criterion of whether a substance constitutes a production residue, a relevant criterion for determining whether or not that substance is waste within the meaning of the directive is the degree of likelihood that that substance will be re-used without any prior processing. If, beyond the mere possibility of re-using the substance, there is also a financial advantage for the holder in so doing, the likelihood of such re-use is high. In such circumstances, the substance in question must no longer be regarded as a burden which its holder seeks to ‘discard’, but as a genuine product. However, the mere fact that a substance is intended for re-use or capable of being re-used cannot be decisive as to whether or not it is classified as waste. Goods, materials or raw materials resulting from a manufacturing process which is not designed to produce them may be regarded as by-products which the holder does not wish to discard only where their re-use (including, as the case may be, in order to meet the needs of economic operators other than the producer) is not merely a possibility, but a certainty, and where such re-use does not require any prior processing and forms an integral part of the process of production or use. (see paras 34-35, 38, 40, 49-50) 3. Since Directive 75/442 on waste, as amended by Directive 91/156, does not provide any single decisive criterion for discerning whether the holder intends to discard a given substance or object, Member States are free, in the absence of Community provisions, to choose the modes of proof of the various matters defined in the directives which they are transposing, provided that the effectiveness of Community law is not thereby undermined. Thus Member States may, for example, define different categories of waste, in particular to facilitate the organisation and control of their management of waste, provided that the obligations arising under the directive or other provisions of Community law relating to such waste are complied with and that the exclusion of any categories from the scope of legislation enacted in order to transpose obligations under the directive is in compliance with Article 2(1) of the directive. (see para. 41)