Opinion of Mr Advocate General Saggio delivered on 25 May 2000. - Commission of the European Communities v Ireland. - Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Directives 94/55/EC and 96/86/EC - Failure to transpose into national law within the period prescribed. - Case C-408/99.



European Court reports 2000 Page I-07799



Opinion of the Advocate-General

Legislative context, facts and procedure

1. Both Council Directive 94/55/EC of 21 November 1994 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States with regard to the transport of dangerous goods by road (OJ 1994 L 319, p. 7) and Commission Directive 96/86/EC of 13 December 1996 adapting to technical progress Council Directive 94/55/EC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States with regard to the transport of dangerous goods by road (OJ 1996 L 335, p. 43) require Member States to adopt by 1 January 1997 the laws, regulations and administrative measures necessary to comply with those Directives and immediately to notify the Commission thereof.

2. Since the Commission received no information concerning the measures adopted by Ireland to comply with those obligations, it addressed a letter of formal notice to Ireland on 31 March 1998, calling upon it to submit observations within two months. By letter of 26 May 1998 the Irish authorities replied that they had already set in motion the procedure for adoption of the legislative measures necessary to implement the Directives and that they expected these to be adopted and to enter into force shortly.

3. When no word was forthcoming that those measures had been adopted, the Commission delivered a reasoned opinion to the Irish Government by letter of 16 October 1998, stating that, by not adopting the measures necessary to comply with the Directives, Ireland had failed to fulfil its obligations thereunder and calling upon the Irish Government to take the measures necessary to comply with the reasoned opinion within two months of its notification.

4. In its reply to the reasoned opinion, dated 24 November 1998, the Irish Government again stated that the internal measures for implementation of the Directives would take effect as soon as they met with parliamentary approval.

Whether Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations

5. Pursuant to the third paragraph of Article 189 of the EC Treaty (now Article 249 EC), a directive is binding, as to the result to be achieved, upon each Member State to which it is addressed. Under the first paragraph of Article 5 of the EC Treaty (now Article 10 EC), Member States are to take all appropriate measures, whether general or particular, to ensure fulfilment of the obligations arising out of the Treaty or resulting from action taken by the institutions of the Community. So far as regards the transposition into national law of Council Directive 94/55, as amended by Commission Directive 96/86, the relevant obligation is expressly laid down in Articles 10 and 2(1) respectively. The deadline set by those provisions for that purpose is 1 January 1997 and the Member States are required thereunder to inform the Commission as soon as they have adopted the relevant national measures.

6. In its defence, the Irish Government does not contest the fact that it has not incorporated into national law the measures necessary to comply with the Directives. It merely contends that the procedure for giving effect to the Directives involves a number of Government Departments and State agencies and that an inter-departmental working group has therefore been set up to prepare a preliminary draft of the national regulations necessary.

7. That said, and in view of the fact that there is no indication that Ireland has adopted the measures necessary to implement the two Directives - nor, a fortiori, that it has sent the Commission further information regarding the adoption of such measures - the assertion that Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under those Directives is well founded.

8. The defence put forward by the Irish Government, based on the alleged complexity of the national legislative process in relation to the adoption of the necessary implementing measures, cannot be accepted. It is settled law that such difficulties in no way relieve the Member States of their responsibility vis-à-vis delays in the discharge of Community obligations and, in particular, with regard to the adoption of measures giving effect to directives.

9. In view of the foregoing considerations, it must be concluded that the complaints raised against Ireland by the Commission in its reasoned opinion of 16 October 1998 are well founded.

Costs

10. In my view, Ireland cannot succeed in its pleadings. Under Article 69(2) of the Court's Rules of Procedure, the unsuccessful party is to be ordered to pay the costs if they have been applied for in the successful party's pleadings. Since the Commission has made such an application, Ireland must be ordered to pay the costs.

Conclusion

11. In view of all the foregoing considerations, I propose that the Court:

(1) declare that, by not adopting the laws, regulations and administrative measures necessary to comply with Council Directive 94/55/EC of 21 November 1994 and Commission Directive 96/86/EC of 13 December 1996, Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under those Directives;

(2) order Ireland to pay the costs.