Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2013:773
Date: 2013-11-28
Language of the case: French
Court formation: First Chamber
Subject matter: Environment;Waste;Pollution
Procedure: Action for failure to fulfil obligations - successful
Origin: Luxembourg

Summary — Judgment of the Court (First Chamber), 28 November 2013 1. Actions for failure to fulfil obligations — Judgment of the Court establishing the failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Period for implementation — Reference date for assessing whether there has been an infringement (Art. 228(2) EC; Art. 260(1) TFEU) 2. Actions for failure to fulfil obligations — Judgment of the Court establishing the failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Breach of the obligation to comply with the judgment — Pecuniary penalties — Periodic penalty payment — Imposition of a penalty payment — Condition — Failure to comply continuing up to the time of the Court’s examination of the facts (Art. 260(2) TFEU) 3. Actions for failure to fulfil obligations — Judgment of the Court establishing the failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Breach of the obligation to comply with the judgment — Pecuniary penalties — Periodic penalty payment — Calculation of the amount — Criteria (Art. 260(2) TFEU) 4. Actions for failure to fulfil obligations — Judgment of the Court establishing the failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Breach of the obligation to comply with the judgment — Pecuniary penalties — Periodic penalty payment — Calculation of the amount — Decreasing penalty (Art. 260(2) TFEU; Council Directive 91/271) 5. Actions for failure to fulfil obligations — Judgment of the Court establishing the failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Breach of the obligation to comply with the judgment — Pecuniary penalties — Imposition of a lump sum payment — Discretion of the Court — Criteria for assessment (Art. 260(1) TFEU) 1. See the text of the decision. (see paras 29, 42) 2. See the text of the decision. (see para. 43) 3. See the text of the decision. (see paras 46, 47) 4. With regard to the possibility of taking account, for the purposes of calculating the quantity of the daily penalty payment, of the progressive reduction in the quantity of non-compliant population equivalent, that is to say, population equivalent not collected or not treated, or treated in an unsatisfactory manner in order for account to be taken of progress made by the Member State in complying with the judgment establishing its failure to fulfil its obligations under Directive 91/271 concerning urban waste water treatment, and of the principle of proportionality, account must be taken of the aggravating circumstances established by the Commission. The penalty payment must not be suspended or reduced before the Member State has adopted all the measures necessary to comply with the judgment establishing its failure to fulfil its obligations and, consequently, compliance with its obligations under Directive 91/271, where that Member State has had more than sufficient time in which to comply fully with that judgment. In designating the entire national territory as a ‘sensitive area’, the national authorities took the view that the bodies of surface water were already affected or liable to be affected in the short term by eutrophication, which leads to the conclusion that the Member State could not be unaware of the need to undertake work to bring its water treatment plants into line with EU law, at least as of the date when the national authorities confirmed that designation to the Commission. (see paras 48, 51-54) 5. The nature, complexity, cost and duration for completing large-scale infrastructure projects by the Member State found to have infringed its obligations under Article 260(1) TFEU must be taken into account both in the assessment of whether a lump sum must be imposed and in the calculation of the amount thereof. (see para. 61)