Case C-412/00: Action brought on 10 November 2000 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Portuguese Republic
Date: 2001-01-27
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Portugal, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, animal nutrition, food inspection, third country

27.1.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 28/15

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Bundesverga-
beamt, by a decision of that Court of 29 September 2000
in the case of Felix Swoboda against the Austrian National
Bank

the contracting authority to separate off non-priority part
services and to award contracts for them separately in
order to preserve the priority nature of the service?

(Case C-411/00)

(2001/C 28/26)

(1) OJ 1992 L 209, p. 1.

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by a decision of the Bundesvergabeamt
on 29 September 2000, which was received at the Court
Registry on 10 November, for a preliminary ruling in the case
of Felix Swoboda GmbH against the Austrian National Bank,
on the following questions:

— Must a service which serves a single purpose, but which
could be subdivided into part services, be classified as a
single service consisting of a main service and accessory,
supporting services in accordance with the scheme of
Directive 92/50/EEC (1),
in particular of the types of
services contained in Annex I A and I B, and treated as a
service listed in Annex I A or I B of the directive according
to its main object, or must each part service instead be
considered separately to establish whether the service is
subject to the directive in full as a priority service or to
only individual provisions thereof as a non-priority
service?

— How far may a service which describes a specific type of
service (e.g. transport services) be broken down into
individual services in accordance with the scheme of
Directive 92/50/EEC without infringing the provisions
on the award of service contracts or undermining the
effet utile of the directive on services?

— Must the services referred to in this case (having regard
to Article 10 of Directive 92/50/EEC) be classified as
services listed in Annex I A of Directive 92/50/EEC
(Category 2, land transport services) and contracts which
have as their object such services thus be awarded in
accordance with the provisions of Titles III to VI of the
directive, or must they be classified as services listed
in Annex I B of Directive 92/50/EEC (in particular
Category 20, Supporting and auxiliary transport services,
and Category 27, Other services) and contracts which
have as their object such services thus be awarded in
accordance with Articles 14 and 16, and under which
CPC reference number must they be subsumed?

— In the event that consideration of the part services leads
to the conclusion that a part service listed in Annex I A
of the directive which per se is subject in full to the
provisions of Directive 92/50/EEC is, by way of an
exception, not subject in full to the provisions of the
directive on account of the principle of predominance
laid down in Article 10 thereof, is there an obligation on

Action brought on 10 November 2000 by the Com-
mission of the European Communities against the Portu-
guese Republic

(Case C-412/00)

(2001/C 28/27)

the Portuguese Republic was brought
An action against
before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on
10 November 2000 by the Commission of the European
Communities, represented by Ana Maria Alves Vieira, of its
Legal Service, acting as Agent, with an address for service in
Luxembourg at the office of Carlos Go´ mez de la Cruz, of its
Legal Service, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— Declare that, by failing to bring into force within the
prescribed period all the provisions necessary to comply
with:

(a) Commission Directive 98/54/EC (1) of 16 July 1998
amending Directives 71/250/EEC, 72/199/EEC,
73/46/EEC and repealing Directive 75/84/EEC;

(b) Commission Directive 98/68/EC (2) of 10 September
1998 laying down the standard document referred
to in Article 9(1) of Council Directive 95/53/EC and
certain rules for checks at the introduction into the
Community of feedingstuffs from third countries;

(c) Commission Directive 98/82/EC (3) of 27 October
1998 amending the Annexes to Council Directives
86/362/EEC, 86/363/EEC and 90/642/EEC on the
fixing of maximum levels for pesticide residues in
and on cereals, foodstuffs of animal origin and
certain products of plant origin, including fruit and
vegetables respectively;

the Portuguese Republic failed to fulfil its obligations
under the Treaty.

— Order the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.

C 28/16

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

27.1.2001

Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those
relied on in Case C-407/00 (4); the time-limit for transposition
expired on 13 February 1999, 31 March 1999 and 30 April
1999 respectively.

(1) OJ 1998 L 208, p. 49.
(2) OJ 1998 L 261, p. 32.
(3) OJ 1998 L 290, p. 25.
(4) See p. 13 of this Official Journal.

Action brought on 9 November 2000 by the Commission
of the European Communities against the Kingdom of the
Netherlands

(Case C-413/00)

(2001/C 28/28)

An action against the Kingdom of the Netherlands was brought
before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on
9 November 2000 by the Commission of the European
Communities, represented by B. Mongin and H. M. H. Speyart,
of its Legal Service, acting as Agents, with an address for
service in Luxembourg at the office of C. Go´ mez de la Cruz, of
its Legal Service, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.

Action brought on 10 November 2000 by the Com-
mission of the European Communities against the Portu-
guese Republic

(Case C-414/00)

(2001/C 28/29)

An action against
the Portuguese Republic was brought
before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on
10 November 2000 by the Commission of the European
Communities, represented by Ana Maria Alves Vieira, of its
Legal Service, acting as Agent, with an address for service in
Luxembourg at the office of Carlos Go´ mez de la Cruz, of its
Legal Service, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— Declare that, by failing to bring into force within the
prescribed period all the provisions necessary to comply
with Council Directive 97/78/EC (1) of 18 December
1997 laying down the principles governing the organis-
ation of veterinary checks on products entering the
Community from third countries, the Portuguese Repub-
lic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 10
and 249 of the EC Treaty; and

— Order the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those
relied on in Case C-407/00 (2); the time-limit for transposition
of the directive expired on 1 June 1999.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

(1) OJ 1998 L 24, p. 9.
(2) See p. 13 of this Official Journal.

1. Declare that, by not adopting the laws, regulations
and administrative provisions necessary to comply with
Council Directive 98/41/EC (1) of 18 June 1998 on the
registration of persons sailing on board passenger ships
operating to or from ports of the Member States of the
Community, or in any event by not
informing the
Commission of such measures,
the Kingdom of the
Netherlands has failed to fulfil its obligations under that
directive.

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

Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those in
Case C-407/00 (2); the period for transposition expired on
1 January 1999.

(1) OJ 1998 L 188, p. 35.
(2) See p. 13 of this Official Journal.

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Unabhängiger
Verwaltungssenat Salzburg by order of that court of
9 November 2000 in the appeal concerning (1) Dr Herbert
Pflanzl, (2) Bürgermeister der Landeshauptstadt Salzburg,
(3) Grundverkehrsbeauftragter des Landes Salzburg and
(4) Grundverkehrslandeskommission des Landes Salzburg

(Case C-415/00)

(2001/C 28/30)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by order of the Unabhängiger Verwal-
tungssenat Salzburg of 9 November 2000, received at the
Court Registry on 13 November 2000, for a preliminary
ruling in the appeal concerning (1) Dr Herbert Pflanzl, (2)
Bürgermeister der Landeshauptstadt Salzburg, (3) Grundver-
kehrsbeauftragter des Landes Salzburg and (4) Grundver-
kehrslandeskommission des Landes Salzburg on the following
question: