Case C-373/01: Action brought on 27 September 2001 by the Commission of the European Communities against the United Kingdom
Date: 2001-11-24
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, United Kingdom, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, dangerous substance, electricity storage device, waste disposal

C 331/14

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

24.11.2001

In so far as the Commission has sought to suggest that
the Netherlands Government had failed to make clear at
an earlier stage that the activities of tug boats were also
intended to be covered by the two measures, which might
have constituted a reason enabling the Commission to
classify that application of the existing measures as ‘new
aid’, the Netherlands Government strenuously denies that
assertion;

— Decision contrary to the principle of the protection of
legitimate expectations and the principle of legal certainty;

— Decision contrary to the principle that reasons must

always be given.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Under Article 249 of the EC Treaty, according to which a
directive is to be binding, as to the result to be achieved, upon
each Member State to which it is addressed, Member States are
required to observe the time limits laid down in directives for
their transposition. Those time limits expired on 30 Avril
2000 and 30 June 2000 respectively without the Italian
Republic having brought into force the necessary provisions
in order to comply with the Directive referred to in the
Commission’s application.

(1) OJ 1999 L 91, p. 29.
(2) OJ 1999 L 139, p. 29.

Action brought on 25 September 2001 by the Com-
mission of the European Communities against the Italian
Republic

Action brought on 27 September 2001 by the Com-
mission of the European Communities against the United
Kingdom

(Case C-370/01)

(2001/C 331/22)

(Case C-373/01)

(2001/C 331/23)

An action against the Italian Republic was brought before the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 25 Septem-
ber 2001 by the Commission of the European Communities,
represented by Antonio Aresu, acting as Agent.

An action against the United Kingdom was brought before the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 27 Septem-
ber 2001 by the Commission of the European Communities,
represented by Richard Wainwright, acting as agent, with an
address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

The Applicant requests that the Court should:

— Declare that, by failing to adopt and bring into force
within the prescribed period the laws, regulations and
administrative provisions necessary to comply with:

(a) Commission Directive 1999/21/EC (1) of 25 March
1999 on dietary foods for special medical purposes;
and

(b) Commission Directive 1999/50/EC (2) of 25 May
1999 amending Directive 91/321/EEC on infant
formulae and follow-on formulae;

or in any event by failing to communicate them to the
Commission, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its
obligations under those directives;

— Order the Italian Republic to pay the costs.

— declare that by failing to adopt and publish before
1 January 2000 the provisions necessary to comply with
Commission Directive 98/101/EC of 22 December 1998
adapting to technical progress Commission Directive
91/157/EEC on batteries and accumulators containing
certain dangerous substances (1), or in any event by failing
to inform the Commission thereof, the United Kingdom
has failed to fulfil its obligations under that Directive, and

— order the United Kingdom to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Article 249 EC under which a directive shall be binding as to
the result to be achieved, upon each Member State, carries by
implication an obligation on the Member States to observe the

24.11.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 331/15

period for compliance laid down in the Directive. That period
expired on 1 January 2000 without the United Kingdom
having enacted the provisions necessary to comply with the
Directive referred to in the conclusions of the Commission.

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Østre Landsret
by order of 26 September 2001 in the case of De Danske
Bilimportører v Skatteministeriet, Told- og Skattesty-
relsen

(1) OJ L 001, 5.1.1999, p. 1-2.

(Case C-383/01)

(2001/C 331/25)

Action brought on 4 October 2001 by the Commission of
the European Communities against the United Kingdom

(Case C-382/01)

(2001/C 331/24)

An action against the United Kingdom was brought before the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 4 October
2001 by the Commission of the European Communities,
represented by Christina Tufvesson, acting as agent, with an
address for service in Luxembourg.

The Applicant requests that the Court should:

— declare that by failing to adopt the laws, regulations or
administrative provisions necessary to comply with the
European Parliament and Council Directive 98/78/EC of
27 October 1998 on the supplementary supervision of
insurance undertakings in an insurance group (1), or, in
any event, by failing to inform the Commission of
those measures, the United Kingdom has failed fulfil its
obligations under that Directive,

— order the United Kingdom to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Article 249 EC under which a directive shall be binding as to
the result to be achieved, upon each Member State, carries by
implication an obligation on the Member States to observe the
period for compliance laid down in the directive. That period
expired on 5 June 2000 without the United Kingdom having
enacted the provisions necessary to comply with the directive
referred to in the conclusions of the Commission.

(1) OJ L 330, 5.12.1998, p. 1-12.

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by order of 26 September 2001 by
the Østre Landsret
(Eastern Regional Court), which was
received at the Court Registry on 5 October 2001, for a
preliminary ruling in the case of De Danske Bilimportører v
Skatteministeriet, Told- og Skattestyrelsen (Duty and Taxation
Authority of the Ministry of Fiscal Affairs), on the following
questions:

1.

2.

Can an indirect duty (registration duty) charged by a
Member State, which in the case of new cars amounts to
105 % of DKK 52 800 and 180 % of the remainder of
the taxable value, be a measure having an effect equivalent
to a quantitative restriction on imports and for that
reason prohibited under Article 28 EC (reference is made
in this connection to the Court’s judgment in Case
C-47/88 Commission v Denmark [1990] ECR I-4509,
paragraph 13)?

If the answer to Question 1 is ‘yes’: can that registration
duty be justified on the grounds that are mentioned in
Article 30 EC or follow from the Court’s case-law on
Article 28 EC (reference is made to Case 120/78 Rewe-
Zentral [1979] ECR 649)?

Action brought on 9 October 2001 by the Commission
of the European Communities against the Kingdom of
Spain

(Case C-392/01)

(2001/C 331/26)

An action against the Kingdom of Spain was brought before
the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 9 Octo-
ber 2001 by the Commission of the European Communities,
represented by Isabel Martı´nez del Peral, of its Legal Service,
acting as Agent, with an address for service in Luxembourg at
the office of Luis Escobar Guerrero, also of the Commission’s
Legal Service, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.