Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2010:184
Date: 2010-04-15
Language of the case: Swedish
Court formation: Third Chamber
Subject matter: Free movement of goods;Measures having equivalent effect;Quantitative restrictions
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Sweden

Summary of the Judgment 1. Approximation of laws – Recreational craft – Directive 94/25 (European Parliament and Council Directives 94/25, Art. 2(2), and 2003/44) 2. Free movement of goods – Quantitative restrictions – Measures having equivalent effect – Prohibition of the use of personal watercraft on waters other than designated waterways – Whether permissible – Justification – Conditions (Arts 34 TFEU and 36 TFEU) 3. Approximation of laws – Information procedure in the field of technical standards and regulations and of rules relating to services in the information society – Directive 98/34 (European Parliament and Council Directive 98/34, Art. 8(1)) 1. Directive 94/25 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to recreational craft, as amended by Directive 2003/44, does not preclude national regulations that, for reasons relating to the protection of the environment, prohibit the use of personal watercraft on waters other than designated waterways. (see paras 33-34, 40, operative part 1) 2. Articles 34 TFEU and 36 TFEU do not preclude national regulations that, for reasons relating to the protection of the environment, prohibit the use of personal watercraft on waters other than designated waterways, provided that: – the competent national authorities are required to adopt the implementing measures provided for in order to designate waters other than general navigable waterways on which personal watercraft may be used; – those authorities have actually made use of the power conferred on them in that regard and designated the waters satisfying the conditions laid down in the national regulations, and – such measures have been adopted within a reasonable period after the entry into force of those regulations. It is for the national court to ascertain whether those conditions are satisfied. Regarding the first condition, under the national regulations, the competent national authority is required to adopt provisions for designating areas other than general navigable waterways where personal watercraft may be used. Regarding the second condition, it is for the national court to ascertain whether it may be reasonably considered that the permission to use personal watercraft in certain areas designates all areas which, in the county in question, satisfy the conditions laid down in the national regulations. Where the use of personal watercraft in an area satisfying those conditions is not liable to give rise to risks or pollution deemed unacceptable for the environment, it must be considered that any prohibition of use of personal watercraft in such an area, resulting from its not being designated in the implementing measure, is a measure going beyond what is necessary to achieve the objective of protection of the environment. Lastly, regarding the determination of whether an 11-month lapse from the entry into force of the national regulations and that of the permission was reasonable, account must be taken of the fact that it was adopted following consultation with the municipalities and other parties concerned. (see paras 33, 36-40, operative part 2) 3. Article 8(1) of Directive 98/34 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations is to be interpreted as meaning that an amendment made to a draft technical regulation already notified to the Commission, pursuant to the first subparagraph of that provision, and which contains, in relation to the notified draft, merely a relaxation of the conditions of use of the product in question and which, therefore, reduces the possible impact of the technical regulation on trade, is not a significant alteration of the draft for the purposes of the third subparagraph of that provision and need not be notified beforehand to the Commission. In the absence of such an obligation of prior notification, the failure to inform the Commission of a non-significant amendment to a technical regulation, before its adoption, does not affect the applicability of that regulation. (see para. 49, operative part 3)