Case C-101/02: Action brought on 19 March 2002 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Italian Republic
Date: 2002-05-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Italy, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, professional sport, recognition of vocational training qualifications, vocational training

C 118/20

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

18.5.2002

Action brought on 19 March 2002 by the Commission of
the European Communities against the Italian Republic

The Commission therefore concludes that the Italian Govern-
ment has failed to implement Directive 92/51 in respect of
access to those professions.

(Case C-101/02)

(2002/C 118/32)

(1) OJ L 209 of 24.7.1992, p. 25.
(2) OJ L 19 of 24.1.1989, p. 16.

An action against the Italian Republic was brought before the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 19 March
2002 by the Commission of the European Communities,
represented by Maria Patakia and Antonio Aresu, acting as
Agents.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— declare that, by not having implemented the provisions
of Council Directive 92/51/EEC (1) of 18 June 1992 on a
second general system for the recognition of professional
education and training to supplement Directive 89/48/
EEC (2) in relation to the professional activities of athletes,
coaches, technical and sporting directors and athletics
trainers, the Italian Republic has failed to comply with its
obligations under that directive.

— order the Italian Republic to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

It is apparent from an examination of the provisions of Law
No 91/81 that the activities of athlete, coach, technical and
sporting director and athletics trainer are regulated professions
in Italy within the meaning of Directive 92/51. Consequently,
when the competent Italian authorities receive an application
for recognition of professional education and training in
respect of those activities they are required to examine that
application in accordance with the rules laid down by that
directive.

is competent

Article 13 of Decree-Law No 319/94 lists the authorities
responsible for the recognition of professional education and
training, providing in particular at subparagraph (a) that the
minister responsible for supervising the professions referred to
in Article 2(a)
to rule on applications for
recognition in accordance with annex C of that decree. The
relevant annex lists a number of professions and the ministers
competent to examine applications for recognition of qualifi-
cations concerning those professions. However the only sport-
ing professions listed are those of ski
instructor, sailing
instructor, mountain guide and potholing guide with no
reference to athlete, coach, technical and sporting director and
athletics trainer.

Action brought on 20 March 2002 by the Commission of
the European Communities against the Italian Republic

(Case C-103/02)

(2002/C 118/33)

An action against the Italian Republic was brought before the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 20 March
2002 by the Commission of the European Communities,
represented by Richard Wainwright and Roberto Amorosi,
acting as Agents.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— declare that, by adopting the decree of 5 February 1998
on the identification of non-hazardous waste covered by
the simplified recovery procedures under Articles 31 and
33 of Legislative Decree No 55 of 5 February 1997
which,

a.

b.

contrary to the first and second indents of the first
paragraph of Article 11 and Article 10 of Directive
75/442/EEC (1), as amended, exempts establishments
and undertakings which recover non-hazardous
waste from seeking authorisation, without such
exemption being subject to the following require-
ments: (1) prior setting of a maximum quantity of
waste; (2) compliance with the conditions laid down
in Article 4 of Directive 75/442/EEC, as amended,
regarding the quantity of waste processed by the
establishments exempt from authorisation,

contrary to the first indent of Article 11(1) of
Directive 75/442/EEC, as amended, does not define
precisely the kinds of waste covered by the exemp-
tion from authorisation and thus, also contrary to
Article 3 of Directive 91/689/EEC (2),
in certain
cases, as a result of the lack of clarity and precision,
allows
establishments or undertakings which
recover certain kinds of hazardous waste to be
exempted from seeking authorisation on the basis
of the less stringent requirements provided for in
respect of non-hazardous waste,