62023TJ0519_RES
Case T‑519/23
Keserű Művek Fegyvergyár Kft.
v
European Union
Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 23 October 2024
(Non-contractual liability – Control of the acquisition and possession of weapons – Implementing Directive (EU) 2019/69 – Causal link – Concept of ‘firearm’ – Concept ‘alarm and signal weapons’)
Approximation of laws – Acquisition and possession of weapons – Directive 2021/555 – Firearms – Concept – Portable barrelled weapon that expels rubber bullets by the action of a combustible propellant – Inclusion
(European Parliament and Council Directive 2021/555, Art. 1(1)(1))
(see paragraphs 23, 27)
Approximation of laws – Acquisition and possession of weapons – Directive 2021/555 – Alarm and signal weapons – Criteria – Use only for that specific use – Devices that cannot be converted to expel a projectile by the action of a combustible propellant – Inclusion
(European Parliament and Council Directive 2021/555, Art. 1(1)(4))
(see paragraphs 24, 25, 34)
Résumé
Hearing an action for non-contractual liability based on Article 268 TFEU and the second paragraph of Article 340 TFEU, which it dismisses, since it does not satisfy the condition relating to the existence of a causal link, the General Court rules on the novel question whether weapons using a combustible propellant to expel rubber bullets belong to the category of firearms, within the meaning of EU law, and whether their holders must therefore be subject to an authorisation or declaration regime.
The applicant, Keserű Művek Fegyvergyár Kft., is a company established in Hungary which manufactures and sells weapons. It states that it has exclusive rights for the manufacturing and marketing of a weapon model that is capable of shooting rubber bullets (‘the Keserű weapon’). Further to Hungary’s transposition of Implementing Directive 2019/69, (
1
) taking the view that that directive caused it damage, in so far as it had the effect of restricting the sale of the Keserű weapon only to persons in possession of a firearm licence, the applicant brought the present action.
Findings of the Court
After pointing out that, according to settled case-law, the European Union may incur non-contractual liability only if a number of cumulative conditions are satisfied, namely the existence of a sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law intended to confer rights on individuals, the fact of damage and the existence of a causal link between the breach of the obligation resting on the author of the act and the damage sustained by the injured parties, the Court first examines the condition relating to the existence of a causal link.
In that regard, it points out that the purpose of Implementing Directive 2019/69 is to lay down technical specifications relating to the marking of alarm and signal weapons. (
2
) Therefore, the Court verifies first of all, whether a weapon with the characteristics of the Keserű weapon may be classified as an ‘alarm and signal weapon’ within the meaning of Directive 2021/555 and whether, consequently, Implementing Directive 2019/69, which, according to the applicant, is the cause of its damage, should have provided for an exception for the type of weapons with characteristics similar to those of the Keserű weapon.
The concept of a ‘firearm’ (
3
) means any portable barrelled weapon that expels a shot, bullet or projectile by the action of a combustible propellant. Objects which correspond to that definition but which are designed for alarm, signalling, life-saving, animal slaughter or harpoon fishing or for industrial or technical purposes are not included in the definition of a ‘firearm’, (
4
) provided that they can be used only for that specific purpose.
The concept of ‘alarm and signal weapons’ (
5
) is defined as referring to ‘devices with a cartridge holder which are designed to fire only blanks, irritants, other active substances or pyrotechnic signalling rounds and which are not capable of being converted to expel a shot, bullet or projectile by the action of a combustible propellant’.
In the present case, the Court finds that it follows that the Keserű weapon is a portable barrelled weapon which expels ‘bullets’, in this case rubber ones, by the action of a combustible propellant and that, therefore, it must be classified as a ‘firearm’. Thus, the mere fact that that weapon is designed to shoot rubber bullets by the action of a combustible propellant is sufficient to classify it as a ‘firearm’.
Furthermore, the Keserű weapon equally does not fall within the category of weapons referred to in point III(a) of Annex I to Directive 2021/555, which are not included in the definition of a ‘firearm’. In fact, that weapon is not designed for alarm or signalling purposes and therefore does not satisfy the condition that it may be used only for that specific use, as required by point III(a) of Annex I to Directive 2021/555. In any event, even assuming that that weapon was designed for the purposes of alarm, the fact remains that it can also shoot rubber bullets, and such use cannot be classified as use solely for the purposes of alarm. Lastly, the fact that that weapon is designed as a non-lethal weapon is not a relevant criterion for determining whether it is a ‘firearm’.
It follows that the Keserű weapon cannot be categorised as an ‘alarm and signal weapon’ within the meaning of Directive 2021/555 and that, consequently, it does not fall within the scope of Implementing Directive 2019/69. Therefore, Implementing Directive 2019/69 could not have caused the damage alleged by the applicant.
The Court concludes that the condition relating to the existence of a causal link between the conduct complained of and the damage alleged is not satisfied.
(
1
)	Commission Implementing Directive (EU) 2019/69 of 16 January 2019 laying down technical specifications for alarm and signal weapons under Council Directive 91/477/EEC on control of the acquisition and possession of weapons (OJ 2019 L 15, p. 22).
(
2
)	Under Council Directive 91/477/EEC of 18 June 1991 on control of the acquisition and possession of weapons (OJ 1991 L 256, p. 51), which was repealed by Directive (EU) 2021/555 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 March 2021 on control of the acquisition and possession of weapons (OJ 2021 L 115, p. 1).
(
3
)	Pursuant to Article 1(1)(1) of Directive 2021/555.
(
4
)	In accordance with point III(a) of Annex I to Directive 2021/555.
(
5
)	Pursuant to Article 1(1)(4) of Directive 2021/555.