Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2000:337
Date: 2000-06-22
Language of the case: Italian
Court formation: Sixth Chamber
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Environment;Waste
Concepts: Environment;Jurisdiction of the Court of Justice
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Italy

Summary of the Judgment 
1. Preliminary rulings — Jurisdiction of the Court — Limits — Manifestly irrelevant 
question — jurisdiction of national courts — Establishment and evaluation of the 
facts — Application of provisions interpreted by the Court 
(EC Treaty, Art. 177 (now Art. 234 EC)) 
I - 4785 
SUMMARY — CASE C-318/98 
2. Environment — Elimination of waste — Directive 91/689 — Hazardous waste — 
Definition — Waste featuring on the list drawn up in accordance with the procedure 
laid down by Article 18 of Directive 75/442 — Waste classified as hazardous by a 
Member State — Scope of the classification — Obligation to notify the Commission 
(Council Directives 75/442, Art. 18, and 91/689, Art. 1(4) and Annex III) 
3. Environment — Elimination of waste — Directive 91/689 — Hazardous waste — 
Definition — Member State's classification as hazardous waste other than that 
featuring on the list laid down by Decision 94/904 — Whether permissible — 
Obligation to notify the Commission 
(Council Directive 91/689, Art. 1(4); Council Decision 94/904) 
4. Environment — Elimination of waste — Directive 91/689 — Hazardous waste — List 
of hazardous waste laid down by Decision 94/904 — Need to determine origin of 
waste to classify it as dangerous in a particular case — None 
(Council Directive 91/689, Art. 1(4), and Annex III; Council Decision 94/904) 
1. Under the procedure provided for in 
Article 177 of the Treaty (now Arti­
cle 234 EC), it is solely for the national 
courts before which actions are 
brought, and which must bear the 
responsibility for the subsequent judi­
cial decision, to determine in the light 
of the special features of each case both 
the need for a preliminary ruling in 
order to enable them to deliver judg­
ment and the relevance of the questions 
which they submit to the Court. Dis­
missal of a request from a national 
court is possible only where it is clear 
that the interpretation of Community 
law or the consideration of the validity 
of a Community rule requested by that 
court has no bearing on the real 
situation or on the subject-matter of 
the case in the main proceedings. 
Nonetheless, in the context of that 
procedure which is based on a clear 
separation of the functions between the 
national courts and the Court of Jus­
tice, any assessment of the facts is a 
matter for the national court. Accord­
ingly the Court has no jurisdiction to 
give a ruling on the facts in an indivi­
dual case or to apply the rules of 
Community law which it has inter­
preted to national measures or situa­
tions since those questions fall within 
the exclusive jurisdiction of the 
national courts. 
(see para 27, 31-32) 
2. The term 'hazardous waste' in Arti­
cle 1(4) of Directive 91/689 must be 
considered to mean the waste featuring 
in the list drawn up in accordance with 
the procedure laid down by Article 18 
of Directive 75/442, and any other 
I - 4786 
FORNASAR AND OTHERS 
waste which is considered by a Mem­
ber State to display any of the proper­
ties listed in Annex III to Directive 
91/689. 
Such waste is considered hazardous 
only in the territory of the Member 
States which have adopted such a 
classification. In that event, the Mem­
ber States are bound to notify such 
cases to the Commission for review in 
accordance with the procedure laid 
down in Article 18 of Directive 
75/442, with a view to adaptation of 
the list of hazardous waste. 
(see paras 45, 48-49) 
3. Directive 91/689 on hazardous waste 
does not prevent the Member States, 
including, for matters within their 
jurisdiction, the courts, from classify­
ing as hazardous waste other than that 
featuring on the list of hazardous waste 
laid down by Council Decision 94/904 
establishing a list of hazardous waste 
pursuant to Article 1(4) of the direc­
tive, and thus from adopting more 
stringent protective measures in order 
to prohibit the abandonment, dumping 
or uncontrolled disposal of such waste. 
If they do so, it is for the authorities of 
the Member State concerned which 
have competence under national law 
to notify the Commission of such cases 
in accordance with the second indent 
of Article 1(4) of Directive 91/689. 
(see para 51, operative part 1) 
4. Article 1(4) of Directive 91/689 on 
hazardous waste and Decision 94/904 
establishing a list of hazardous waste 
pursuant to that provision must be 
interpreted as meaning that it is not a 
necessary precondition for waste to be 
classified, in a specific case, as hazar­
dous, that its origin be determined. 
It is clear on the wording alone of that 
provision that the decisive criterion, as 
regards the definition of 'hazardous 
waste', is whether the waste displays 
one or more of the properties listed in 
Annex III to that directive. Although 
the basis for inclusion in the list of 
'hazardous waste' is indeed the origin 
of the waste, that origin is not the only 
criterion for classifying it as hazardous 
but constitutes one of the factors which 
the list of hazardous waste merely 
'takes into account'. 
(see paras 56-57, operative part 2) 
I - 4787