Case C-221/02: Action brought on 14 June 2002 by the Commission of the European Communities against the French Republic
Date: 2002-07-27
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: France, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, application of EU law, consumer credit, exchange of information

27.7.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 180/17

2. Do Directive 79/112/EEC or Articles 28 and 30 EC
preclude a national provision which, on the placing into
circulation of foodstuffs, permits health-related infor-
mation such as that described in Question (1) to be
affixed thereto only after prior authorisation by the
competent
federal minister, whereby a condition of
authorisation is that the health-related information is
consistent with protecting the consumer from being
misled?

(1) OJ L 33, p. 1.

The obligation on the part of the United Kingdom to take
measures in order to comply with the directive for the entirety
of its territory is not disputed.

Since the United Kingdom has not informed the Commission
of the provisions adopted to comply with the directive with
regard to Gibraltar, and since the Commission is in possession
of no other information enabling it to conclude that the United
Kingdom has adopted the necessary provisions, it is compelled
to assume that the United Kingdom has not yet adopted such
provisions and has thus failed to fulfil its obligations under the
directive.

(1) OJ L 159 of 29.6.1996, p. 1.

Action brought on 12 June 2002 by the Commission of
the European Communities against the United Kingdom
of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

(Case C-218/02)

(2002/C 180/28)

An action against the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Northern Ireland was brought before the Court of Justice of
the European Communities on 12 June 2002 by the Com-
mission of the European Communities, represented by Thomas
Cusack, acting as agent, with an address for service in
Luxembourg.

The Applicant claims that the Court should:

(1) declare that by failing to adopt for Gibraltar all the laws,
regulations or administrative provisions necessary to
comply with Council Directive 96/29/Euratom (1) of
13 May 1996 laying down basic safety standards for the
protection of the health of workers and the general public
against the dangers arising from ionizing radiation in its
whole territory, or in any event by failing to communicate
them to the Commission, the United Kingdom has failed
fully to fulfil its obligations under that Directive.

(2) order the United Kingdom to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

According to Article 192(1) of the Treaty, Member States shall
take all appropriate measures, whether general or particular,
to ensure fulfilment of the obligations arising out of the Treaty
or resulting from action taken by the institutions of the
Community.

Action brought on 14 June 2002 by the Commission of
the European Communities against the French Republic

(Case C-221/02)

(2002/C 180/29)

An action against the French Republic was brought before the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 14 June
2002 by the Commission of the European Communities,
represented by D. Martin and M. França, acting as Agent, with
an address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims 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
Directive 98/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 16 February 1998 amending Directive 87/
102/EEC for the approximation of the laws, regulations
and administrative provisions of
the Member States
concerning consumer credit (1), or, in any event, by failing
to communicate such provisions to the Commission, the
French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under
that directive;

C 180/18

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

27.7.2002

— Order the French Republic to pay the costs.

Action brought on 18 June 2002 by the Commission of
the European Communities against the Grand Duchy of
Luxembourg

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period prescribed for transposition expired on 21 August
2001.

(1) OJ L 101, 1.4.1998, p. 17.

Action brought on 18 June 2002 by the Commission of
the European Communities against the Grand Duchy of
Luxembourg

(Case C-227/02)

(2002/C 180/30)

An action against the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg was
brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communi-
ties on 18 June 2002 by the Commission of the European
Communities, represented by Denis Martin and Miguel França,
of its Legal Service, acting as Agent, with an address for service
in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

1. Declare that, by failing to bring into force the laws,
regulations and administrative provisions needed in order
to comply with Directive 97/55/EC (1) of the European
Parliament and of
the Council of 6 October 1997
amending Directive 84/450/EEC (2) concerning mislead-
ing advertising so as to include comparative advertising,
or,
in any event, by failing to have informed the
Commission of any such laws, regulations or administrat-
ive provisions, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has
failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive.

2. Order the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period prescribed for transposition expired on 23 April
2000.

(1) OJ L 290, 23.10.1997, p. 18.
(2) OJ L 250, 19.9.1984, p. 17.

(Case C-228/02)

(2002/C 180/31)

An action against The Grand Duchy of Luxembourg was
brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communi-
ties on 18 June 2002 by the Commission of the European
Communities, represented by Denis Martin and Miguel França,
acting as Agent, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— Declare that, by failing to adopt and bring into force the
laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary
to comply with Directive 97/7/EC of
the European
Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 1997 on
the protection of consumers in respect of distance
contracts (1), or, in any event, by failing to communicate
to the Commission the adoption of such provisions, the
Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to fulfil
its
obligations under that directive;

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

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period prescribed for transposition expired on 4 June
2000.

(1) OJ 1997 L 144, p. 19.

Action brought on 21 June 2002 by French Republic
against Commission of the European Communities

(Case C-233/02)

(2002/C 180/32)

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of Justice of the European
Communities on 21 June 2002 by the French Republic,
represented by R. Abraham, G. de Bergues and P. Boussaroque,
acting as Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg.