ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Member States – Obligations – Duty of loyal cooperation with the Community institutions

(Art. 10 EC)

Summary

The duty of genuine cooperation provided for in Article 10 EC is of general application and does not depend either on whether the Community competence concerned is exclusive or on any right of the Member States to enter into obligations towards non-member countries. When it is apparent that the subject‑matter of an agreement or convention falls partly within the competence of the Community and partly within that of its Member States, it is essential to ensure close cooperation between the latter and the Community institutions, both in the process of negotiating and concluding and in the fulfilling of the commitments entered into. That obligation to cooperate flows from the requirement of unity in the international representation of the Community.

Member States are subject to special duties of action and abstention in a situation in which the Commission has submitted to the Council proposals that, although they have not been adopted by the Council, represent the point of departure for concerted Community action. In such circumstances an infringement of the duty of cooperation in good faith is constituted by the unilateral proposal of a Member State to list a substance in Annex A to the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, therefore dissociating that Member State from a concerted common strategy within the Council although, having regard to the institutional and procedural framework of that convention, such a proposal has consequences for the Union, inter alia as regards exercising rights. Under the provisions of that convention a regional economic integration organisation, such as the Union, is not to exercise its right to vote if any of its Member States exercises its right to vote, and vice versa. Furthermore, in the case of such an organisation, one or more of whose member States is, like that organisation, a Party to that Convention, the organisation and the member States are not to be entitled to exercise rights under the Convention concurrently.

Such a situation is likely to compromise the principle of unity in the international representation of the Union and its Member States and weaken their negotiating power with regard to the other parties to the Convention concerned.

By unilaterally submitting such a proposal, a Member State fails to fulfil its obligations under Article 10 EC.

(see paras 71, 73-74, 91-93, 103-104, operative part 1)
Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 27 September 2007 – Commission v France

(Case C‑9/07)

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Directive 2002/74/EC – Protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer – Failure to transpose within the prescribed period

1. Actions for failure to fulfil obligations – Examination of merits by the Court – Situation to be taken into consideration – Situation on expiry of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 8)

2. Member States – Obligations – Implementation of directives – Failure to fulfil obligations – National system pleaded as justification – Not permissible (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 9)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Failure to adopt within the prescribed period the provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2002/74/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2002 amending Council Directive 80/987/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer (OJ 2002 L 270, p. 10).

Operative part

The Court:

Declares that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2002/74/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2002 amending Council Directive 80/987/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive.
Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 6 December 2007 – Commission v Luxembourg

(Case C‑57/07)

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Directive 2003/86/EC – Right to family reunification – Non-transposition within the prescribed period

1. Actions for failure to fulfil obligations – Examination of merits by the Court – Situation to be taken into consideration – Situation on expiry of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 9)

2. Acts of the institutions – Directives – Implementation by Member States (see para. 10)

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Failure to adopt, within the prescribed period, the measures necessary to comply with Council Directive 2003/86/EC of 22 September 2003 on the right to family reunification (OJ 2003 L 251, p. 12).

Operative part

The Court:

Declares that by not adopting, within the prescribed period, the legislative, regulatory and administrative measures necessary to comply with Council Directive 2003/86/EC of 22 September 2003 on the right to family reunification, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;
By failing to bring into force all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2004/49/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on safety on the Community’s railways and amending Council Directive 95/18/EC on the licensing of railway undertakings and Directive 2001/14/EC on the allocation of railway infrastructure capacity and the levying of charges for the use of railway infrastructure and safety certification (Railway Safety Directive), the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive.
1.

Declares that, by failing to ensure that, for each river basin district falling within its territory, an analysis of its characteristics, a review of the impact of human activity on the status of surface waters and on groundwater, and an economic analysis of water use, are undertaken in accordance with the technical specifications set out in Annexes II and III to Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 5(1) of the directive and, by failing to submit summary reports of the analyses required by that provision, it has also failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 15(2) of the directive;
Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 3 April 2008 – Commission v Portugal

(Case C‑289/07)

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Directive 2004/17/EC – Coordination of the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors – Failure to transpose within the prescribed period

Actions for failure to fulfil obligations – Examination of merits by the Court – Situation to be taken into consideration – Situation on expiry of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 9)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations – Failure to adopt, within the prescribed period, the measures necessary to comply with Directive 2004/17/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 coordinating the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors (OJ 2004 L 134, p. 1).

Operative part

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed period, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2004/17/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 coordinating the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors, the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 71 of that directive;
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 10 July 2008 – Commission v Portugal

(Case C‑307/07)

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Directive 89/48/EEC – Recognition of higher-education diplomas awarded on completion of professional education and training of at least three years’ duration – Failure to recognise diplomas which give access to the profession of pharmacist specialising in medical biology – Failure to transpose

1. Actions for failure to fulfil obligations – Examination of the merits by the Court – Situation to be taken into consideration – Situation on expiry of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 20)

2. Freedom of movement for persons – Freedom of establishment – Workers – Recognition of higher-education diplomas awarded on completion of professional education and training of at least three years’ duration – Scope of Directive 89/48 (Council Directive 89/48) (see paras 18, 22, operative part)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Failure 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 (OJ 1989 L 19, p. 16) in relation to the profession of pharmacist specialising in medical biology.

Operative part

The Court:

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;
Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 5 June 2008 – Commission v Germany

(Case C‑395/07)

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Directive 2004/48/EC – Enforcement of intellectual property rights – Failure to transpose within the prescribed period

1. Member States – Obligations – Implementation of directives – Failure to fulfil obligations – National system pleaded as justification – Not permissible (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 7)

2. Actions for failure to fulfil obligations – Examination of the merits by the Court – Situation to be taken into consideration – Situation on expiry of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 8)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Failure to adopt, within the prescribed period, all the provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights (OJ 2004 L 157, p. 45, with corrigendum OJ 2004 L 195, p. 16).

Operative part

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the period prescribed, all the provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights, the Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 September 2008 – Commission v Italy

(Case C‑447/07)

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Article 39 EC – Employment in the public administration – Masters and chief officers of vessels – Allocation of State authority on board – Requirement to hold the nationality of the flag Member State

1. Freedom of movement for persons – Exceptions – Employment in the public administration (Art. 39(4) EC) (see paras 16, 18, 21, operative part)

2. Freedom of movement for persons – Exceptions – Protection of public policy, public security and public health (Art. 39(3) EC) (see para. 17, operative part)

3. Actions for failure to fulfil obligations – Examination of the merits by the Court – Situation to be taken into consideration – Situation on expiry of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 23)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Infringement of Article 39 EC – National legislation reserving the posts of master and chief officer on all vessels flying the flag of that Member State to its nationals.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Declares that, by maintaining in its legislation the requirement that masters and chief officers on all vessels flying the Italian flag hold Italian nationality, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 39 EC;
Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 17 July 2008 – Commission v Belgium

(Case C‑543/07)

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Directive 2002/73/EC – Equal treatment for men and women – Access to employment – Vocational training and promotion – Working conditions – Failure to transpose within the prescribed period

1. Actions for failure to fulfil obligations – Examination of the merits by the Court – Situation to be taken into consideration – Situation on expiry of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 9)

2. Member States – Obligations – Implementation of directives – Failure to fulfil obligations – National system pleaded as justification – Not permissible (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 11)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Failure to adopt, within the prescribed period, the provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2002/73/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2002 amending Council Directive 76/207/EEC on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women as regards access to employment, vocational training and promotion, and working conditions (OJ 2002 L 296, p. 15).

Operative part

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed period, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2002/73/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2002 amending Council Directive 76/207/EEC on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women as regards access to employment, vocational training and promotion, and working conditions, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;
Appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber) of 12 July 2007 in Case T‑312/05

Commission

v

Alexiadou

[2007] ECR II‑86, in which that Court dismissed an action based on an arbitration clause seeking an order that the defendant reimburse the amount of the advance paid by the Commission under a contract concerning a technological development programme relating to the production of water‑repellent leather (Contract No G1ST‑CT‑2002‑50227).
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 11 December 2008 – Commission v Greece

(Case C‑293/07)

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Directives 79/409/EEC and 92/43/EC – Conservation of wild birds – Special protection areas – Insufficient measures of protection

1. Environment – Conservation of wild birds – Directive 79/409 – Special conservation measures (Council Directive 79/409, Art. 4(1) and (2), and Art. 4(4), as amended by Directive 92/43, Art. 6(2) to (4)) (see paras 21-23, 36, operative part 1)

2. Actions for failure to fulfil obligations – Proof of failure – Burden of proof on Commission (see para. 32)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Infringement of Articles 4(1) and (2) of Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds (OJ 1979 L 103, p. 1), in conjunction with Article 4(4) of that directive, as amended by Article 6(2) to (4) of Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (OJ 1992 L 206, p. 7) – Lack of protection for Special Protection Areas (SPAs) – Existence of activities likely to damage the integrity of SPAs and have negative consequences for the objectives of conservation of SPAs and of the species for which the areas have been defined.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to take all the measures necessary to establish and apply a coherent, specific and integrated legal regime capable of ensuring sustainable management and effective protection of areas designated as Special Protection Areas, in the light of the conservation objectives of Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 4(1) and (2), in conjunction with the first sentence of Article 4(4) of that directive, as amended by Article 6(2) to (4) of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora;

2. Dismisses the remainder of the action;

3. Orders the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 12 February 2009 – Commission v Poland

(Case C-475/07)

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Electricity tax – Directive 2003/96/EC – First subparagraph of Article 21(5) – Time at which the tax becomes chargeable

1. Procedure – Application initiating proceedings – Formal requirements – Identification of the subject-matter of the dispute – Brief summary of the pleas in law on which the application is based – Unambiguous wording of the form of order sought by the applicant (Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 38(1)(c)) (see paras 43-44)

2. Acts of the institutions – Directives – Implementation by Member States – Need for clear and precise transposition (Art. 249 EC) (see para. 49)

3. Actions for failure to fulfil obligations – Proof of failure – Burden of proof on Commission – Insufficient or inadequate transposition of a directive (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 54)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Failure to adopt, within the prescribed period, the measures necessary to comply with Article 21(5) of Council Directive 2003/96/EC of 27 October 2003 restructuring the Community framework for the taxation of energy products and electricity (OJ 2003 L 283, p. 51) – Time at which the electricity tax becomes chargeable.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to adapt, by 1 January 2006, its system of electricity tax, with regard to the time at which the electricity tax becomes chargeable, to the requirements of the first subparagraph of Article 21(5) of Council Directive 2003/96/EC of 27 October 2003 restructuring the Community framework for the taxation of energy products and electricity, as amended by Council Directive 2004/74/EC of 29 April 2004, the Republic of Poland has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 23 April 2009 – Commission v Belgium

(Case C‑287/07)

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Public contracts – Directive 2004/17/EC – Procedures for the award of contracts in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors – Incorrect or incomplete transposition – Failure to transpose within the prescribed period

1. Acts of the institutions – Directives – Implementation by Member States (Art. 249 EC) (see paras 67-69)

2. Acts of the institutions – Directives – Implementation by Member States – Need for clear and precise transposition (Art. 249 EC) (see para. 98)

3. Actions for failure to fulfil obligations – Examination of the merits by the Court – Situation to be taken into consideration – Situation on expiry of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 187)

Re:

Failure of Member State to fulfil obligations – Failure to adopt, within the prescribed period, all the measures necessary to comply with Directive 2004/17/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 coordinating the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors (OJ 2004 L 134, p. 1).

Operative part

The Court:

1. Declares that,

– by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to transpose completely and correctly Article 1(2)(b); the second subparagraph of Article 1(2)(c), Article 1(2)(d); the second subparagraph of Article 1(13); Article 14(4); Article 17(10)(a) and (c); Article 34(8), Article 36(2); Article 39(2); Article 45(1) and (3)(a) and (c); Article 48(1) to (4) and (6)(c); the second indent of Article 49(2); Article 49(3) to (5); the first subparagraph of Article 50(1)(c); Article 52(1); the second subparagraph of Article 57(1)(d) and (e); the first sentence of Article 57(3), and Article 65(2) of Directive 2004/17/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 coordinating the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors, and

– by failing to adopt, within the prescribed period, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Article 9, Article 34(2), Article 52(3) and the second sentence of Article 57(3) of Directive 2004/17,

the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under that Directive.
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Actions for failure to fulfil obligations

–

Examination of the merits by the Court

–

Situation to be taken into consideration

–

Situation on expiry of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 7

)

Subject of the case

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Failure to adopt, within the prescribed period, the measures necessary to comply with Council Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004 on minimum standards for the qualification and status of third country nationals or stateless persons as refugees or as persons who otherwise need international protection and the content of the protection granted (OJ 2004 L 304, p. 12).

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt within the prescribed period the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004 on minimum standards for the qualification and status of third country nationals or stateless persons as refugees or as persons who otherwise need international protection and the content of the protection granted, the Republic of Finland has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

2. Orders the Republic of Finland to pay the costs.
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Actions for failure to fulfil obligations

–

Examination of the merits by the Court

–

Situation to be taken into consideration

–

Situation on expiry of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 9

)

Subject of the case

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Failure to adopt, within the prescribed period, the provisions necessary to give effect to Commission Directive 2006/73/EC of 10 August 2006 implementing Directive 2004/39/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards organisational requirements and operating conditions for investment firms and defined terms for the purposes of that directive (OJ 2006 L 241, p. 26).

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed period, all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Commission Directive 2006/73/EC of 10 August 2006 implementing Directive 2004/39/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards organisational requirements and operating conditions for investment firms and defined terms for the purposes of that directive, the Republic of Poland has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive.

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