Case C-242/01: Action brought on 22 June 2001 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg
Date: 2001-07-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Luxembourg, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, application of EU law, national implementing measure, package travel

C 212/20

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

28.7.2001

of
the project but also did not comply with Directive
85/337/EEC, since Articles 5(2) and 6(2) of that directive were
not observed. First, in the procedure preceding the adoption
of the Study the file did not take account of the information
referred to in Article 5(2) of the directive (inter alia, the non-
technical summary of
the
information gathered was not made available to the public
before the Study was adopted, as required, in order to give
those concerned the opportunity to express an opinion.

the information) and, second,

(1) OJ L 175 of 5.7.1985, p. 40.

Action brought on 22 June 2001 by the Commission of
the European Communities against the French Republic

(Case C-244/01)

(2001/C 212/36)

An action against the French Republic was brought before the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 22 June
2001 by the Commission of the European Communities,
represented by D. Martin and M. França, acting as Agents, with
an address for service in Luxembourg.

The Commission of the European Communities claims that
the Court should:

— Declare that, by failing to transpose in full Article 4(2) of
Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair
terms in consumer contracts (1), the French Republic has
failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

— Order the French Republic to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The Commission points out that Article L-132-1, subpara-
graph 7, of the French Code de la Consommation (Consumer
Affairs Code) does not contain the condition under which, in
order to be excluded from assessment as to their potentially
unfair nature, fundamental terms must be ‘in plain intelligible
language’. The Commission takes the view that reference to
the actual concept of unfair terms is not a sufficient guarantee
to prevent application of certain unfair terms which define the
main subject-matter of the contract but which are drafted in
unclear or unintelligible language.

(1) OJ L 95 of 21.4.1993, p. 29.

Action brought on 22 June 2001 by the Commission of
the European Communities against the Grand-Duchy of
Luxembourg

(Case C-242/01)

(2001/C 212/35)

the Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg was
An action against
brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communi-
ties on 22 June 2001 by the Commission of the European
Communities, represented by D. Martin and M. França, acting
as Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The Commission of the European Communities claims that
the Court should:

— Declare that, by failing to adopt all the measures necessary
to implement fully and properly the provisions required
to transpose Article 4(3) of Council Directive 90/314/EEC
of 13 June 1990 on package travel, package holidays and
package tours (1) in the Luxembourg legal system, the
its
Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to fulfil
obligations under that directive;

— Order the Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The Commission takes the view that the directive was incor-
rectly transposed by Article 4 of the Grand-Ducal Regulation
of 4 November 1997 inasmuch as, by laying down a 21-day
period prior to departure, that article imposes unjustified
limitations on the right of transfer set out in Article 4(3) of the
directive.

(1) OJ L 158 of 23.6.1990, p. 59.