ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 141/2

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 23 April 2009 — Markku Sahlstedt, Juha Kankkunen, Mikko Tanner, Toini Tanner, Liisa Tanner, Eeva Jokinen, Aili Oksanen, Olli Tanner, Leena Tanner, Aila Puttonen, Risto Tanner, Tom Järvinen, Runo K. Kurko, Maa- ja metsätaloustuottajain Keskusliitto MTK ry, MTK:n säätiö v Commission of the European Communities, Republic of Finland, Kingdom of Spain

(Case C-362/06 P) (1)

(Appeals - Conservation of natural habitats - List, adopted by a Commission decision, of sites of Community importance for the Boreal biogeographical region - Admissibility of an action for annulment brought by natural or legal persons against that decision)

2009/C 141/02

Language of the case: Finnish

Parties

Appellants: Markku Sahlstedt, Juha Kankkunen, Mikko Tanner, Toini Tanner, Liisa Tanner, Eeva Jokinen, Aili Oksanen, Olli Tanner, Leena Tanner, Aila Puttonen, Risto Tanner, Tom Järvinen, Runo K. Kurko, Maa- ja metsätaloustuottajain Keskusliitto MTK ry, MTK:n säätiö (represented by: K. Marttinen, asianajaja)

Other parties to the proceedings: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: M. Huttunen and M. van Beek, acting as Agents) Republic of Finland

Intervener in support of the Commission of the European Communities: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: F. Díez Moreno)

Re:

Appeal against the order of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities (First Chamber) of 22 June 2006 in Case T-150/05 Sahlstedt and Others v Commission of the European Communities dismissing as inadmissible an application for annulment of Commission Decision 2005/101/EC of 13 January 2005 adopting, pursuant to Council Directive 92/43/EEC, the list of sites of Community importance for the Boreal biogeographical region (OJ 2005 L 40, p. 1) — Concept of ‘direct concern’ within the meaning of Article 230 EC

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders Mr Sahlstedt and Others to pay the costs;

3. Orders the Kingdom of Spain and the Republic of Finland to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 261, 28.10.2006.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 51/26

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 13 December 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg

(Case C-244/07) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 2004/50/EC - Interoperability of the trans-European high-speed rail system and of the trans-European conventional rail system - Failure to transpose within the prescribed period)

(2008/C 51/42)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: N. Yerrell and P. Dejmek, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (represented by: C. Schiltz, Agent)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Failure to adopt, within the prescribed period, the provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2004/50/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 amending Council Directive 96/48/EC on the interoperability of the trans-European high-speed rail system and Directive 2001/16/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the interoperability of the trans-European conventional rail system (OJ 2004 L 164, p. 114)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed period, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2004/50/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 amending Council Directive 96/48/EC on the interoperability of the trans-European high-speed rail system and Directive 2001/16/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the interoperability of the trans-European conventional rail system, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to comply with its obligations under that directive;

2. Orders the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 155, 7.7.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 8/4

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 15 November 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Spain

(Case C-59/07) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 2003/109/EC - Status of third-country nationals who are long-term residents - Failure to transpose within the prescribed period)

(2008/C 8/07)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: M. Condou-Durande and A. Alcover San Pedro, Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: F. Díez Moreno, Agent)

Re:

Failure of the Member State to fulfil obligations — Failure to adopt, within the prescribed period, the provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 2003/109/EC of 25 November 2003 concerning the status of third-country nationals who are long-term residents (OJ 2004 L 16, p. 44).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 2003/109/EC of 25 November 2003 concerning the status of third-country nationals who are long-term residents, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

2. Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 69, 24.3.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 92/9

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 26 February 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg

(Case C-273/07) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Directive 2005/51/EC - Public procurement - Procedures for the award of contracts)

(2008/C 92/14)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: B. Stromsky and D. Kukovec, acting as Agent)

Defendant: Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (represented by: C. Schiltz, Agent)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Failure to adopt, within the period prescribed, the provisions necessary to comply with Commission Directive 2005/51/EC of 7 September 2005, amending Annex XX to Directive 2004/17/EC and Annex VIII to Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and the Council on public procurement (OJ 2005 L 257, p. 127)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Commission Directive 2005/51/EC of 7 September 2005, amending Annex XX to Directive 2004/17/EC and Annex VIII to Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and the Council on public procurement, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

2. Orders the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 211, 8.9.2007.
1.

Declares that, by failing to implement the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2003/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 May 2003 providing for public participation in respect of the drawing up of certain plans and programmes relating to the environment and amending with regard to public participation and access to justice Council Directives 85/337/EEC and 96/61/EC, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 6 of the Directive;
1.

Article 8(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1348/2000 of 29 May 2000 on the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters is to be interpreted as meaning that the addressee of a document instituting the proceedings which is to be served does not have the right to refuse to accept that document, provided that it enables the addressee to assert his rights in legal proceedings in the Member State of transmission, where annexes are attached to that document consisting of documentary evidence which is not in the language of the Member State addressed or in a language of the Member State of transmission which the addressee understands, but which has a purely evidential function and is not necessary for understanding the subject matter of the claim and the cause of action. It is for the national court to determine whether the content of the document instituting the proceedings is sufficient to enable the defendant to assert his rights or whether it is necessary for the party instituting the proceedings to remedy the fact that a necessary annex has not been translated.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 116/8

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 13 March 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v Hellenic Republic

(Case C-81/07) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Environment - Directive 2000/59/EC - Waste reception and handling plans for ship-generated waste)

(2008/C 116/13)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: G. Zavvos and K. Simonsson, Agents)

Defendant: Hellenic Republic (represented by: S. Chala and I. Pouli, Agents)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Failure to adopt, within the period prescribed, all the provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2000/59/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2000 on port reception facilities for ship-generated waste and cargo residues — Commission declaration (OJ 2000 L 332, p. 81)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to develop, implement and approve waste reception and handling plans for ship-generated waste and cargo residues, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 5(1) and Article 16(1) of Directive 2000/59/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2000 on port reception facilities for ship-generated waste and cargo residues.

2. Orders the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 69, 24.3.2007.
1.

declares that, by failing to adopt the measures necessary to transpose Council Directive 89/48/EEC of 21 December 1988 on a general system for the recognition of higher-education diplomas awarded on completion of professional education and training of at least three years' duration, as amended by Directive 2002/19/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 14 May 2001, in relation to the profession of pharmacist specialising in medical biology, the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 183/4

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 5 June 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v Republic of Poland

(Case C-170/07) (1)

(Failure of Member State to fulfil obligations - Internal taxation - Requirement for imported second-hand vehicles to undergo a roadworthiness test - Articles 28 EC and 30 EC - Directive 96/96/EC - Recognition of roadworthiness tests carried out in other Member States)

(2008/C 183/06)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: J. Hottiaux and K. Herrmann, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Republic of Poland (represented by: E. Osniecka-Tamecka, Agent)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Breach of Article 28 EC — National legislation requiring imported second-hand vehicles to undergo a roadworthiness test prior to their registration, whereas domestic vehicles with the same characteristics are not subject to such a requirement

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Declares that, by subjecting imported second-hand vehicles registered in other Member States to a roadworthiness test prior to their registration in Poland, the Republic of Poland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 28 EC;

2. Orders the Republic of Poland to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 183, 4.8.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 285/10

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 11 September 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v Republic of Lithuania

(Case C-274/07) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 2002/22/EC - Universal service and users' rights relating to electronic communications networks and services - Article 26(3) - Single European emergency call number - Making available caller location information)

(2008/C 285/15)

Language of the case: Lithuanian

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: G. Braun and A. Steiblytė, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Republic of Lithuania (represented by: D. Kriaučiūnas, acting as Agent)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Failure to adopt within the prescribed period the provisions necessary to comply with Article 26(3) of Directive 2002/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on universal service and users' rights relating to electronic communications networks and services (Universal Service Directive) (OJ 2002 L 108, p. 51)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Declares that, by not ensuring in practice that authorities handling emergencies are, to the extent technically feasible, given caller location information for all callers to the single European emergency call number ‘112’ when public telephone networks are used, the Republic of Lithuania has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 26(3) of Directive 2002/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on universal service and users' rights relating to electronic communications networks and services (Universal Service Directive);

2. Orders the Republic of Lithuania to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 183, 4.8.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 223/11

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 10 July 2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Dâmbovița — Romania) — Ministerul Administrației și Internelor — Direcția Generală de Pașapoarte București v Gheorghe Jipa

(Case C-33/07) (1)

(Citizenship of the Union - Article 18 EC - Directive 2004/38/EC - Right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States)

(2008/C 223/16)

Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Tribunal Dâmbovița

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Ministerul Administrației și Internelor — Direcția Generală de Pașapoarte București

Defendant: Gheorghe Jipa

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Tribunal Dâmbovița — Interpretation of Article 18 EC and Article 27 of Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC (OJ 2004 L 158, p. 77)

Operative part of the judgment

Article 18 EC and Article 27 of Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC do not preclude national legislation that allows the right of a national of a Member State to travel to another Member State to be restricted, in particular on the ground that he has previously been repatriated from the latter Member State on account of his ‘illegal residence’ there, provided that the personal conduct of that national constitutes a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat to one of the fundamental interests of society and that the restrictive measure envisaged is appropriate to ensure the achievement of the objective it pursues and does not go beyond what is necessary to attain it. It is for the national court to establish whether that is so in the case before it.

(1) OJ C 140, 23.6.2006.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 313/5

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 16 October 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Spain

(Case C-136/07) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directives 89/48/EEC and 92/51/EEC - Recognition of diplomas and professional education and training - Profession of air traffic controller)

(2008/C 313/07)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: H. Støvlbæk and R. Vidal Puig, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: M Muñoz Pérez, Agent)

Re:

Failure of Member State to fulfil its obligations — Infringement of Council Directives 89/48/EEC of 21 December 1988 on a general system for the recognition of higher-education diplomas awarded on completion of professional education and training of at least three years' duration (OJ 1989 L 19, p. 16) and 92/51/EEC of 18 June 1992 on a second general system for the recognition of professional education and training to supplement Directive 89/48/EEC (OJ 1992 L 209, p. 25) — Taking up the profession of air traffic controller.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt, in connection with the profession of air traffic controller, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 89/48/EEC of 21 December 1988 on a general system for the recognition of higher-education diplomas awarded on completion of professional education and training of at least three years' duration and Council Directive 92/51/EEC of 18 June 1992 on a second general system for the recognition of professional education and training to supplement Directive 89/48, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under those directives;

2. Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 117, 26.5.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 301/8

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 9 October 2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Lietuvos Respublikos Konstitucinis Teismas (Republic of Lithuania)) — Proceedings for review of the constitutionality of legislation brought by Julius Sabatauskas and Others

(Case C-239/07) (1)

(Internal market in electricity - Directive 2003/54/EC - Article 20 - Transmission and distribution systems - Third party access - Obligations of Member States - Open access of third parties to electricity transmission and distribution systems)

(2008/C 301/15)

Language of the case: Lithuanian

Referring court

Lietuvos Respublikos Konstitucinis Teismas

Parties in the main proceedings

Julius Sabatauskas and Others

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Lietuvos respublikos konstitucinis teismas — Interpretation of Article 20 of Directive 2003/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2003 concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity and repealing Directive 96/92/EC — Statements made with regards to decommissioning and waste management activities (OJ 2003 L 176, p. 37) — Compatibility with the directive of national legislation permitting consumers to have access to the electricity transmission system only after refusal by the distribution system operator to grant access to a distribution system.

Operative part of the judgment

1. Article 20 of Directive 2003/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2003 concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity and repealing Directive 96/92/EC is to be interpreted as defining the Member States' obligations only in respect of the access and not the connection of third parties to the electricity transmission and distribution systems and as not laying down that the system of network access that the Member States are required to establish must allow an eligible customer to choose, at his discretion, the type of system to which he wishes to connect.

2. Article 20 must also be interpreted as not precluding national legislation which lays down that an eligible customer's equipment may be connected to a transmission system only where the distribution system operator refuses, on account of established technical or operating requirements, to connect to its system the equipment of the eligible customer which is on the territory included in its licence. It is, however, for national courts to verify that the implementation and application of that access system takes place in accordance with objective and non discriminatory criteria between the users of the transmission and distribution systems.

(1) OJ C 170, 21.7.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 19/4

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 4 December 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of the Netherlands

(Case C-249/07) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Articles 28 EC and 30 EC - Directive 92/43/EC - Measure having equivalent effect - Prior authorisation for the planting of oysters and mussels of native species from other Member States - Justification - Protection of the life of animals - Maintenance of biodiversity and conservation of fish species in the interest of fisheries)

(2009/C 19/06)

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: M. Konstantinidis and S. Noe, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: C.M. Wissels and C. ten Dam, Agents)

Re:

Failure to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Articles 28 EC and 30 EC — System of prior authorisation for the planting of oysters and mussels from other Member States in Netherlands coastal waters

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Declares that, by instituting a system of prior authorisation for the planting, in Netherlands coastal waters, of oysters and mussels coming lawfully from other Member States and being of species native to the Netherlands, the Kingdom of the Netherlands has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 28 EC and 30 EC;

2. Orders the Kingdom of the Netherlands to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 183, 4.8.2007.