Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 8 March 2001 in Case C-97/00: Commission of the European Communities v French Republic (Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Failure to transpose Directive 97/52/EC)
Date: 2001-06-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, France, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, award of contract, public contract, single market

16.6.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 173/17

National legislation such as Article C.11.1(1) of the Besluit radio-
elektrische inrichtingen, which prohibits commercial advertising for
transmitting equipment of a non-approved type, does not constitute,
for the purposes of Council Directive 83/189/EEC of 28 March
1983 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in
the field of technical standards and regulations, a technical regulation
which should have been notified to the Commission prior to its
adoption.

(1) OJ C 265 of 18.9.1999.

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed periods,
all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary
to comply with the provisions referred to in the first subpara-
graph of Article 4(1) of Council Directive 96/43/EC of 26 June
1996 amending and consolidating Directive 85/73/EEC in
order to ensure financing of veterinary inspections and controls
on live animals and certain animal products and amending
Directives 90/675/EEC and 91/496/EEC, the Federal Repub-
lic of Germany has failed to fulfil its obligations under that
subparagraph;

2. Dismisses the remainder of the action;

3. Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 299 of 16.10.1999.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(First Chamber)

of 8 March 2001

in Case C-316/99: Commission of the European Communi-
ties v Federal Republic of Germany(1)

(Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations —
Directive 96/43/EC — Failure to transpose within the
prescribed period)

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fourth Chamber)

of 8 March 2001

in Case C-97/00: Commission of the European Communi-
ties v French Republic (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Failure
to transpose Directive 97/52/EC)

(2001/C 173/28)

(2001/C 173/29)

(Language of the case: German)

(Language of the case: French)

(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
in the European Court Reports)

In Case C-316/99: Commission of the European Communities
(Agent: K.-D. Borchardt) v Federal Republic of Germany
(Agents: W.-D. Plessing and C.-D. Quassowski) — application
for declaration that, by failing to adopt within the prescribed
period all the measures necessary to comply with Council
Directive 96/43/EC of 26 June 1996 amending and consolidat-
ing Directive 85/73/EEC in order to ensure financing of the
veterinary inspections and controls on live animals and certain
animal products and amending Directives 90/675/EEC and
91/496/EEC (OJ 1996 L 162, p. 1), the Federal Republic of
Germany has failed to fulfil its obligations under the EC Treaty
and that directive — the Court (First Chamber), composed of:
M. Wathelet, President of the Chamber, P. Jann (Rapporteur)
and L. Sevo´ n, Judges; A. Tizzano, Advocate General; R. Grass,
Registrar, has given a judgment on 8 March 2001, in which it:

(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
in the European Court Reports)

In Case C-97/00: Commission of the European Communities
(Agent: M. Nolin) v French Republic (Agents: K. Rispal-
Bellanger and S. Pailler) — application for a declaration
that, by failing to communicate the laws, regulations and
administrative provisions necessary to comply with all the
provisions of European Parliament and Council Directive
97/52/EC of 13 October 1997 amending Directives
92/50/EEC, 93/36/EEC and 93/37/EEC concerning the coordi-
nation of procedures for the award of public service contracts,
public supply contracts and public works contracts respectively
(OJ 1997 L 328, p. 1), or by failing to adopt the measures
necessary to comply therewith, the French Republic has failed
to fulfil its obligations under that directive — the Court (Fourth
Chamber), composed of: A. La Pergola, President of
the
Chamber, D.A.O. Edward and S. von Bahr (Rapporteur),
Judges; J. Mischo, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has
given a judgment on 8 March 2001, in which it:

C 173/18

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

16.6.2001

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed period,
the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to
comply with European Parliament and Council Directive
97/52/EC of 13 October 1997 amending Directives
92/50/EEC, 93/36/EEC and 93/37/EEC concerning the
coordination of procedures for the award of public service
contracts, public supply contracts and public works contracts
respectively, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obli-
gations under that directive;

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt all the laws, regulations and
administrative provisions necessary in order to comply with the
laid down in Article 5(4) and (6), and
obligations
Article 10(1), in conjunction with Annex II A, Annex III 1,
point 3, and Annex V 4(e), to Council Directive 91/676/EEC
of 12 December 1991 concerning the protection of waters
against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources,
its
the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to fulfil
obligations under that directive;

2. Orders the French Republic to pay the costs.

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

(1) OJ C 176 of 24.6.2000.

(1) OJ C 247 of 26.8.2000.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Third Chamber)

of 8 March 2001

in Case C-266/00: Commission of the European Communi-
ties v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (1)

(Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations —
Directive 91/676/EEC)

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

of 13 March 2001

in Case C-379/98 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Landgericht Kiel, Germany): PreussenElektra AG v
Schleswag AG (1)

(Electricity — Renewable sources of energy — National
legislation requiring electricity supply undertakings to pur-
chase electricity at minimum prices and apportioning the
resulting costs between those undertakings and upstream
network operators — State aid — Compatibility with the
free movement of goods)

(2001/C 173/30)

(2001/C 173/31)

(Language of the case: French)

(Language of the case: German)

(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
in the European Court Reports)

(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
in the European Court Reports)

In Case C-266/00: Commission of the European Communities
(Agents: M. Nolin) v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (Agents:
P. Steinmetz) — application for a declaration that, by failing
to adopt all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions
necessary to comply with Article 5(4) and (6) and Article 10(1),
in conjunction with Annex II A, Annex III 1, point 3, and
Annex V 4(e) to Council Directive 91/676/EEC of 12 December
1991 concerning the protection of waters against pollution
caused by nitrates from agricultural sources (OJ 1991 L 375,
p. 1), the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to fulfil its
obligations under that directive — the Court (Third Chamber),
composed of: C. Gulmann, President of
the Chamber,
J.-P. Puissochet and F. Macken (Rapporteur), Judges; L.A. Geel-
hoed, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a
judgment on 8 March 2001, in which it:

In Case C-379/98: reference to the Court under Article 177 of
the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) from the Landgericht Kiel,
Germany, for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending
before that court between PreussenElektra AG and Schleswag
AG in the presence of Windpark Reussenköge III GmbH and
Land Schleswig-Holstein — on the interpretation of Article 30
of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 28 EC),
Article 92 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 87
EC) and Article 93(3) of the EC Treaty (now Article 88(3) EC),
— the Court, composed of: G.C. Rodriguez Iglesias, President,
C. Gulmann, M. Wathelet and V. Skouris (Presidents of
Chambers), D.A.O. Edward, J.-P. Puissochet, P. Jann, L. Sevo´ n
and R. Schintgen (Rapporteur), Judges; F.G. Jacobs, Advocate
General; H.A. Rühl, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar,
has given a judgment on 13 March 2001, in which it has ruled: