Opinion of the Advocate General — ECLI:EU:C:2001:543
Date: 2001-10-11
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Agriculture and Fisheries;Fisheries policy
Procedure: Action for failure to fulfil obligations - successful
Origin: France

SUMMARY — JOINED CASES C-418/00 AND C-419/00 
Summary of the Judgment 
1. Actions against Member States for failure to fulfil obligations — Commission's right 
to bring an action — Exercise of that right not dependent on a specific interest in 
bringing an action 
(Arts 211 EC and 226 EC) 
2. Fisheries — Conservation of the resources of the sea — Fishing quotas — Obli­
gations of Member States — Practical difficulties — Not relevant 
(Council Regulations No 2241/87, Art. 11(2), and No 2847/93, Art. 21(2)) 
3. Fisheries — Conservation of the resources of the sea — Fishing quotas — Control 
measures — Obligation of Member States to impose penalties — Scope 
(Council Regulation No 2847/93, Art. 31(2)) 
1. When exercising its powers under 
Articles 211 EC and 226 EC, the 
Commission, when it brings an action 
for failure to fulfil obligations, does not 
have to show that there is a specific 
interest in bringing the action since its 
function is, in the general interest of the 
Community, to ensure that Member 
States give effect to the EC Treaty and 
to obtain a declaration of any failure to 
fulfil the obligations deriving there­
from, with a view to bringing it to an 
end. 
(see para. 29) 
2. It is imperative that the Member States 
fulfil the obligations incumbent on 
them under the Community rules for 
the conservation and management of 
fish stocks in order to ensure the 
protection of fishing grounds, the con­
servation of the biological resources of 
the sea and their balanced exploitation 
on a lasting basis and in appropriate 
economic and social conditions. 
On those grounds, the interpretation 
according to which Article 11(2) of 
Regulation No 2241/87, establishing 
certain control measures for fishing 
activities, requires Member States to 
adopt binding measures to prohibit on 
a provisional basis all fishing activity 
even before quotas are exhausted is 
also valid for Article 21(2) of Regu­
lation No 2847/93, establishing a con­
trol system applicable to the common 
fisheries policy, the wording of which 
is essentially the same as that of 
Article 11(2) of Regulation No 2241/87, 
which it replaces. 
I - 3970 
COMMISSION v FRANCE 
Furthermore, a Member State cannot 
plead provisions, practices or situations 
in its internal legal system to justify 
non-compliance with obligations and 
time-limits arising from rules of Com­
munity law. 
It follows that a Member State cannot 
rely on a delay due to the time taken to 
transmit data or to publish a decision 
to justify failure to implement appro­
priate measures to suspend fishing in 
good time. On the contrary, a Member 
State is bound to take account of such 
administrative delays when it sets the 
date for the suspension of fishing. 
(see paras 57-60) 
3. A national system of control does not 
fulfil the requirements of Article 31(2) 
of Regulation No 2847/93 establishing 
a control system applicable to the 
common fisheries policy, which pro­
vides that the competent authorities of 
a Member State are required to take 
penal or administrative action which is 
proportionate to the infringement and 
serves as a deterrent against those 
responsible for exceeding quotas, if, in 
the event of breach of Community rules 
on the conservation and control of 
fishery resources, it provides for a 
simple readjustment the following year 
for producers' organisations respon­
sible for exceeding quotas. Such a 
system does not have an effect com­
mensurate with the seriousness of the 
infringement. Moreover, since it does 
not immediately deprive those respon­
sible for the infringement of the econ­
omic advantage they derived from it, 
this system does not serve as a genuine 
deterrent. 
(see paras 62, 65, operative part) 
I - 3971