Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2005:258
Date: 2005-04-28
Language of the case: Italian
Court formation: Fourth Chamber
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Social Policy;Transport
Concepts: General
Procedure: Action for failure to fulfil obligations - successful;Action for failure to fulfil obligations - unfounded
Origin: Italy

Summary of the Judgment 1. Acts of the institutions — Directives — Implementation by the Member States — Need for precise transposition — Directive 1999/95 — Provision concerning only relations between the Member States and the Commission — Provision not necessarily requiring specific transpositional measures — Need to ensure the directive is fully effective — Mere obligations to notify — None (European Parliament and Council Directive 1999/95, Art. 3, first subpara.) 2. Acts of the institutions — Directives — Implementation by the Member States — Need for precise transposition — Directive 1999/95 — Provision requiring notification under public international law — Notification intended to improve safety at sea in a clearly hazardous situation — Full effect (European Parliament and Council Directive 1999/95, Art. 6(1)) 1. A provision which concerns only relations between a Member State and the Commission or the other Member States need not, in principle, be transposed. However, each of the Member States to which a directive is addressed is obliged to adopt, within the framework of its national legal system, all the measures necessary to ensure that the directive is fully effective, in accordance with the objective it pursues. That is not so in the case of the first subparagraph of Article 3 of Directive 1999/95 concerning the enforcement of provisions in respect of seafarers’ hours of work on board ships calling at Community ports, the objective of which is primarily to improve the shipboard living and working conditions of seafarers and safety at sea. The report addressed to the government of the country in which the ship is registered is intended to draw attention to a situation which is clearly hazardous to the safety or the health of the crew. It is intended immediately to eliminate that risk and does not concern only mere obligations to notify. To have full effect the rule therefore requires transposition. (see paras 38-40) 2. The obligation, under Article 6(1) of Directive 1999/95 concerning the enforcement of provisions in respect of seafarers’ hours of work on board ships calling at Community ports, to notify the administration of the flag State or the State in which a ship is registered or the Consul, or in his absence the nearest diplomatic representative of that State, is the corollary of that State’s responsibilities under public international law. It is clear from Article 94(1) of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, signed at Montego Bay on 10 December 1982, which entered into force on 16 November 1994 and was approved by Decision 98/392 concerning the obligations of the flag State, that every State is effectively to exercise its jurisdiction and control in administrative, technical and social fields over ships flying its flag. In particular, pursuant to paragraphs 2(b) and 3(b) of that article, every State is to assume jurisdiction, under its internal law, over each ship flying its flag and its master, officers and crew in respect of administrative, technical and social matters concerning the ship, and every State is to take such measures for ships flying its flag as are necessary to ensure safety at sea, with regard, inter alia, to the manning of ships, labour conditions and training of crews, taking account of the applicable international instruments. It is also clear from Article 94(6) that, once advised of the fact that the proper control has not been exercised over a ship, the flag State is to undertake an investigation and, if appropriate, take any action necessary to remedy the situation. It follows that the notification required by Article 6(1) of Directive 1999/95 is intended directly to improve safety at sea in the case of a clearly hazardous situation. To have full effect that provision therefore requires express transposition into national law. (see paras 53-56)