Case C-119/02: Action brought on 3 April 2002 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Hellenic Republic
Date: 2002-06-01
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Greece, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, sensitive area, urban centre, wastewater, water treatment

1.6.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 131/9

Action brought on 27 March 2002 by the Commission of
the European Communities against the French Republic

(Case C-114/02)

(2002/C 131/15)

An action against the French Republic was brought before the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 27 March
2002 by the Commission of the European Communities,
represented by L. Ström, acting as Agent, 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 laws, regulations
and administrative measures necessary in order to comply
with Directive 98/8/EC of the European Parliament and
of the Council of 16 February 1998 concerning the
placing of biocidal products on the market (1), or at any
rate by failing to communicate the same, 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 claims that only a small part of Directive
98/8/EC has been transposed. France has communicated
transposition measures in respect of Article 3(1), (2), (3) and
(6) and Articles 5, 6, 7 and 9 of the directive. The obligations
imposed by the directive which required to be transposed but
have not been transposed or, at any rate, have not been
communicated, therefore include transposition measures in
respect of Article 3(4), (5) and (7) and Articles 4, 8, 11, 12, 14,
17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25 and 26 of the directive. The
time-limit for transposition expired on 13 May 2000.

(1) OJ L 123 of 24.4.1998, p. 1.

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Cour de
cassation, chambre commerciale, financiere et econo-
mique by judgment of that Court of 26 March 2002 in the
case of Administration des Douanes et Droits Indirects
against Rioglass SA and Transremar SL

(Case C-115/02)

(2002/C 131/16)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by judgment of the Cour de cassation,
chambre commerciale, financiere et economique (Court of
Cassation, Commercial, Financial and Economic Chamber) of
26 March 2002, received at the Court Registry on 29 March
2002, for a preliminary ruling in the case of Administration
des Douanes et Droits Indirects against Rioglass SA and
Transremar SL on the following question:

Must Article 30 of the EC Treaty, (now, after amendment,
Article 28 EC) be interpreted as meaning that it precludes
the implementation, pursuant to the Code de la Propriété
Intellectuelle, of procedures for the detention by the customs
authorities of goods lawfully manufactured in a Member State
of the European Community which are intended, following
their transit through French territory, to be placed on the
market in a non-member country, in the present case Poland?

Action brought on 3 April 2002 by the Commission of
the European Communities against the Hellenic Republic

(Case C-119/02)

(2002/C 131/17)

An action against the Hellenic Republic was brought before
the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 3 April
2002 by the Commission of the European Communities,
represented by Gregorio Valero Jordana and Minas Konstantin-
idis, Legal Advisers.

The Commission claims that the Court should:

— declare that, by not adopting measures to instal a
collecting system for urban waste water from the area of
Thriasio Pedio and not subjecting urban waste water from
that area to more stringent secondary treatment before
its discharge into the ‘sensitive area’ of the Bay of Elefsina,
the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations
under Articles 3(1) and 5(2) of Council Directive 91/
271/EEC (1) concerning urban waste-water treatment, as
amended by Commission Directive 98/15/EC (2) of

C 131/10

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

1.6.2002

27 February 1998 which amended Directive 91/271/
EEC with respect specifically to certain requirements
established in Annex I thereto;

Action brought on 5 April 2002 by the Commission of
the European Communities against the Grand Duchy of
Luxembourg

— order the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In order for Article 3(1) of the directive to be properly
implemented, collecting systems must exist for urban waste
water which enters ‘sensitive areas’ within the meaning of
Article 5(1) of the directive. Also, in order for Article 5(2) to
be properly implemented, more stringent secondary treatment
is required for urban waste water before its discharge into
‘sensitive areas’ within the meaning of Article 5(1) of the
directive — by 31 December 1998 at the latest for agglomer-
ations with a population equivalent (‘p.e.’) of more than
10 000.

The Bay of Elefsina was classified as a ‘sensitive area’ by Joint
Ministerial Decision 19661/1982 of 2 August 1999. It is not
disputed that the overall population of the area of Thriasio
Pedio exceeds 10 000 inhabitants. It is also accepted that the
area’s waste water is discharged into the Bay of Elefsina, which
has been defined as a ‘sensitive area’ since 1999.

(Case C-120/02)

(2002/C 131/18)

An action against the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg was
brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communi-
ties on 5 April 2002 by the Commission of the European
Communities, represented by Gregorio Valero Jordana and
Joelle Adda, acting as Agents, with an address for service in
Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— declare that, by failing hitherto to adopt all the laws,
regulations and administrative measures necessary in
order to comply fully with Council Directive 1998/83/
EC of 3 November 1998 on the quality of water intended
for human consumption (1), or at any rate by failing fully
to inform the Commission thereof, the Grand Duchy of
Luxembourg has failed to fulfil its obligations under that
directive;

— order the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to pay the costs.

Consequently,
the Greek authorities were obliged, under
Article 3(1) of the directive, to ensure that there was a collecting
system for that area’s urban waste water by 31 December 1998
at the latest. Nevertheless, as the letter of 8 October 2001
from the Greek Permanent Representation to the European
Union also makes clear, such a system does not exist today.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The time-limit for transposition expired on 25 December
2000 but the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has not adopted
the measures required.

Article 5(2) of the directive obliges the Member States, by
31 December 1998 at the latest, to subject urban waste water
entering collecting systems which is from agglomerations with
a p.e. exceeding 10 000 to more stringent secondary treatment
before its discharge into sensitive areas.

It is not in dispute that today urban waste water from the area
of Thriasio Pedio is discharged without treatment into an area
which has been classified as ‘sensitive’ by the joint ministerial
decision of 2 August 1999, in breach of Article 5(2) of the
directive.

The Greek authorities do not dispute the absence of a treatment
system for urban waste water from the area of Thriasio Pedio.

(1) OJ L 135 of 30.5.1991, p. 40.
(2) OJ L 67 of 7.3.1998, p. 29.

(1) OJ L 330 of 5.12.1998, p. 32.

Action brought on 4 April 2002 by the Commission of
the European Communities against the Grand Duchy of
Luxembourg

(Case C-121/02)

(2002/C 131/19)

An action against the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg was
brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communi-
ties on 4 April 2002 by the Commission of the European
Communities, represented by Mikko Huttunen and Hendrik
van Lier, acting as Agents, with an address for service in
Luxembourg.