Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 29 May 1997. - Commission of the European Communities v French Republic. - Failure to fulfil obligations - Failure to transpose Directives 91/157/EEC and 93/86/EEC. - Joined cases C-282/96 and C-283/96.



European Court reports 1997 Page I-02929



Parties

Grounds

Decision on costs

Operative part



Keywords

Member States - Obligations - Implementation of directives - Failure to fulfil obligations not contested

(EC Treaty, Art. 169)

Parties

In Joined Cases C-282/96 and C-283/96,

Commission of the European Communities, represented by G. zur Hausen, Legal Adviser, acting as Agent, assisted by J.-J. Evrard, of the Brussels Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the office of C. Gómez de la Cruz, of its Legal Service, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg,

applicant,

v

French Republic, represented by C. de Salins, Head of Subdirectorate in the Legal Directorate of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and R. Nadal, Assistant Foreign Affairs Secretary in the same directorate, acting as Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the French Embassy, 9 Boulevard du Prince Henri,

defendant,

APPLICATION for a declaration that, by failing to adopt within the periods prescribed the laws, regulations and administrative measures necessary to comply with

- Council Directive 91/157/EEC of 18 March 1991 on batteries and accumulators containing certain dangerous substances (OJ 1991 L 78, p. 38) and

- Commission Directive 93/86/EEC of 4 October 1993 adapting to technical progress Directive 91/157 (OJ 1993 L 264, p. 51),

or by failing to communicate those measures, the French Republic has failed to comply with its obligations under those directives,

THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber),

composed of: J.C. Moitinho de Almeida, President of the Chamber, C. Gulmann (Rapporteur), D.A.O. Edward, J.-P. Puissochet and P. Jann, Judges,

Advocate General: D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer,

Registrar: R. Grass,

having regard to the report of the Judge-Rapporteur,

after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 27 February 1997,

gives the following

Judgment

Grounds

1 By applications lodged at the Court Registry on 21 August 1996, the Commission of the European Communities brought two actions under Article 169 of the EC Treaty for a declaration that, by failing to adopt within the periods prescribed the laws, regulations and administrative measures necessary to comply with

- Council Directive 91/157/EEC of 18 March 1991 on batteries and accumulators containing certain dangerous substances (OJ 1991 L 78, p. 38) and

- Commission Directive 93/86/EEC of 4 October 1993 adapting to technical progress Directive 91/157 (OJ 1993 L 264, p. 51),

or by failing to communicate those measures, the French Republic has failed to comply with its obligations under those directives.

2 By order of 11 February 1997, the President of the Court joined the two cases for the purposes of the oral procedure and the judgment.

3 Under Article 11 of Directive 91/157 and Article 7 of Directive 93/86, the Member States were to take the measures necessary to comply with those directives before 18 September 1992 and no later than 31 December 1993 respectively, and forthwith to inform the Commission thereof.

4 When those time-limits expired without its having been informed of any measures taken by the French Republic, the Commission initiated procedures under Article 169 of the Treaty in respect of failure to fulfil obligations.

5 By letters of 21 December 1992 in Case C-282/96 and 10 February 1994 in Case C-283/96, it called upon the French Government to submit, within two months, its observations on the absence of any measures transposing the directives in question into national law.

6 In Case C-282/96, the French Government replied by letter of 11 March 1993, stating that a draft decree transposing Directive 91/157 was being examined at interdepartmental ministerial level and would be sent to the Commission as soon as possible. In Case C-283/96, there was no reply to the Commission's letter.

7 Having received no communication of any official measure transposing the directives in issue, the Commission sent reasoned opinions to the French Government, on 25 October 1993 in Case C-282/96 and on 14 November 1994 in Case C-283/96, requesting it to take the necessary measures to comply therewith within two months from the date of notification of those opinions.

8 The French Government did not respond to those opinions, and a telex was sent to it on 18 May 1995, informing it that, unless within twenty days it communicated an approved text or a final draft accompanied by a timetable for its adoption, the Commission would be obliged to pursue the procedure and seek a declaration of failure to fulfil obligations.

9 In response to the reasoned opinions and telex referred to above, the French Government sent to the Commission, by letter of 13 June 1995, a draft decree relating to the marketing of batteries and accumulators and the disposal of spent batteries and accumulators, transposing Directive 91/157, and a draft order transposing Directive 93/86. The French Government also stated in that letter that it expected the matter to be concluded during the course of 1995.

10 By letter of 9 April 1996, the French Government informed the Commission that the draft order for the transposition of Directive 93/86 had been withdrawn and that its contents would be annexed to the decree transposing Directive 91/157. That letter also indicated that the draft decree was at the stage of countersignature.

11 On 20 August 1996, not having received from the French authorities any communication regarding any final measure, the Commission decided to bring the present actions.

12 In its defence, the French Government does not deny that the directives in question were not transposed within the periods prescribed. It merely observes that, in order to ensure the transposition of the directives, it prepared and communicated to the Commission a draft decree relating to the marketing of batteries and accumulators and the disposal thereof. It further states that, as a result of technical problems connected with the preparation of that draft decree, a new draft has been drawn up and is currently the subject of further technical scrutiny.

13 Since the directives in issue have not been transposed within the periods prescribed in them, the actions brought by the Commission must be held well founded.

14 It must therefore be held that, by failing to adopt within the periods prescribed the laws, regulations and administrative measures necessary to comply with the directives in question, the French Republic has failed to comply with its obligations under Article 11 of Directive 91/157 and Article 7 of Directive 93/86.

Decision on costs

Costs

15 Under Article 69(2) of the Rules of Procedure, the unsuccessful party is to be ordered to pay the costs. Since the French Republic has failed in its submissions, it must be ordered to pay the costs.

Operative part

On those grounds,

THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

hereby:

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt within the periods prescribed the laws, regulations and administrative measures necessary to comply with

- Council Directive 91/157/EEC of 18 March 1991 on batteries and accumulators containing certain dangerous substances and

- Commission Directive 93/86/EEC of 4 October 1993 adapting to technical progress Directive 91/157,

the French Republic has failed to comply with its obligations under Article 11 of Directive 91/157 and Article 7 of Directive 93/86;

2. Orders the French Republic to pay the costs.