Case C-72/02: Action brought on 4 March 2002 by Commission of the European Communities against Portuguese Republic
Date: 2002-04-20
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Portugal, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, environmental protection, protected area, protected species, protection of animal life, protection of plant life, wildlife

C 97/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

20.4.2002

Action brought on 26 February 2002 by the Commission
of the European Communities against the Republic of
Austria

2002 by the Commission of the European Communities,
represented by Anto´ nio Caeiros, acting as Agent, with an
address for service in Luxembourg.

(Case C-61/02)

(2002/C 97/15)

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— Declare that

An action against
the Republic of Austria was brought
before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on
26 February 2002 by the Commission of
the European
Communities, represented by Gerald Braun, of its Legal Service,
with an address for service in Luxembourg at the office of Luis
Escobar Guerrero, of its Legal Service, Wagner Centre C 254,
Kirchberg.

The Commission claims that the Court should:

1.

declare that, by not adopting within the time-limit laid
down the provisions and measures necessary to comply
with Council Directive 98/58/EC (1) of 20 July 1998
concerning the protection of animals kept for farming
purposes, the Republic of Austria has failed to fulfil its
obligations under the EC Treaty;

2.

order the Republic of Austria to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

By virtue of the binding nature of the third paragraph of
Article 249 EC and the first paragraph of Article 10 EC, the
Member States are obliged to transpose a directive addressed
to them into national law so that it has full effect on expiry of
the period laid down for its transposition. The period for
transposition laid down in Article 10 of the directive expired
on 31 December 1999 without all Länder having as yet
adopted the necessary provisions.

1.

by failing to transpose the following provisions into
its legal system:

— Article 3(3), Article 10, Article 11 and Arti-

cle 12(4) of Directive 92/43/EEC;

— Article 7, Article 8 and Article 12 of Directive

79/409/EEC; and

2.

by failing to transpose correctly

— Article 1,

Article

Article 6(4),
Article 12(1)(d), Article 6(1) and Article 6(2) of
Directive 92/43/EEC,

6(3),

— Article 2, Article 4(1), Article 4(4) and Article 6

of Directive 79/409/EEC,

the Portuguese Republic failed to fulfil its obligations
under Article 23 of Directive 92/43/EEC Council Direc-
tive 92/43/EEC (1) of 21 May 1992 on the conservation
of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora and
Article 18 of Council Directive 79/409/EEC (2) of 2 April
1979 on the conservation of wild birds;

— Order the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.

(1) OJ L 221, 8.8.1998, p. 23.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Action brought on 4 March 2002 by Commission of the
European Communities against Portuguese Republic

(Case C-72/02)

(2002/C 97/16)

An action against the Portuguese Republic was brought before
the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 4 March

The Portuguese Republic has not contested any of the Commis-
sion’s complaints set out in the reasoned opinion. Rather, it
appears from the reply of the Portuguese Government and, in
legislation implementing
particular,
Directives 79/409/EEC and 92/43/EEC is being prepared, that
that Government admits that
those complaints are well
founded.

from the report

that

(1) OJ 1992 L 206, p. 7.
(2) OJ 1979 L 103, p. 1.