Judgment of the Court of 18 June 2002 in Case C-60/01: Commission of the European Communities v French Republic (Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Directives 89/369/EEC and 89/429/EEC — Air pollution — Municipal waste incineration plants — Incinerators in France)
Date: 2002-08-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, France, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, national implementing measure, waste incineration

C 191/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

10.8.2002

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Sixth Chamber)

of 18 June 2002

in Case C-398/00: Kingdom of Spain v Commission of the
European Communities (1)

(State aid — Plans notified — No decision by the Com-
mission within the two-month time-limit — Time-limit of
15 working days for initiating the formal investigation
procedure — Calculation of the time-limit — Conditions
governing prior notice by the Member State and notification
of the Commission’s decision — Service by fax)

(2002/C 191/12)

(Language of the case: Spanish)

(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
in the European Court Reports)

In Case C-398/00, Kingdom of Spain (Agent: S. Ortiz Vaamon-
de) v Commission of the European Communities (Agents:
G. Rozet and R. Vidal): Application for annulment of the
Commission’s decision of 17 August 2000, notified to the
Kingdom of Spain by letter SG (2000) D/106322 of 22 August
2000 and published in the Official Journal of the European
Communities of 18 November 2000 (OJ 2000 C 328, p. 19), to
initiate the formal investigation procedure for assessing the
compatibility with the EC Treaty of aid to Santana Motor SA,
in respect of all measures therein referred to, other than the
guarantee granted in June 1998, the Court (Sixth Chamber),
composed of: F. Macken, President of the Chamber, J-P. Puisso-
chet (Rapporteur), and V. Skouris, Judges; S. Alber, Advocate
General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment on 18 June
2002, in which it:

1. Annuls the Commission’s decision of 17 August 2000, notified
to the Kingdom of Spain by letter SG (2000) D/106322 of
22 August 2000, to initiate the formal investigation procedure
for assessing the compatibility with the EC Treaty of aid to
Santana Motor SA, in respect of all measures therein referred
to, other than the guarantee granted in June 1998;

2. Orders the Commission of the European Communities to pay

the costs.

(1) OJ C 28 of 27.1.2001.

of 18 June 2002

in Case C-60/01: Commission of the European Communi-
ties v French Republic (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil
its obligations —
Directives 89/369/EEC and 89/429/EEC — Air pollution —
Municipal waste incineration plants — Incinerators in
France)

(2002/C 191/13)

(Language of the case: French)

(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
in the European Court Reports)

In Case C-60/01, Commission of the European Communities
(Agents: H. Støvlbaek and J. Adda) v French Republic (Agents:
G. de Bergues and D. Colas, and, subsequently, R. Abraham
and D. Colas): Application for a declaration that, by failing to
adopt all the necessary and appropriate measures to ensure
that all incinerators currently operating in France are operated
in accordance with the combustion conditions laid down by
Council Directive 89/369/EEC of 8 June 1989 on the preven-
tion of air pollution from new municipal waste incineration
plants (OJ 1989 L 163, p. 32) and Council Directive 89/429/
EEC of 21 June 1989 on the reduction of air pollution from
existing municipal waste incineration plants (OJ 1989 L 203,
p. 50) or that they ceased to operate by the due date, namely
1 December 1990 as regards new plants and 1 December
1996 as regards existing plants, the French Republic has failed
to fulfil its obligations under Article 4(1) of Directive 89/
369, Articles 2(a) and 4 of Directive 89/429 and the third
paragraph of Article 249 EC,
the Court, composed of:
G.C. Rodrı´guez Iglesias, President, P. Jann, F. Macken, N. Col-
neric and S. von Bahr (Presidents of Chambers), A. La Pergola,
J.-P. Puissochet, M. Wathelet, V. Skouris, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues
and C.W.A. Timmermans (Rapporteur),
Judges; S. Alber,
Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment
on 18 June 2002, in which it:

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt all

the necessary and
appropriate measures to ensure that all incinerators in France
are operated in accordance with the combustion conditions laid
down by Council Directive 89/369/EEC of 8 June 1989 on
the prevention of air pollution from new municipal waste
incineration plants and Council Directive 89/429/EEC of
21 June 1989 on the reduction of air pollution from existing
municipal waste incineration plants or that they ceased to
operate by the due date, namely 1 December 1990 as regards

10.8.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 191/9

new plants and 1 December 1996 as regards existing plants,
the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under
Article 4(1) of Directive 89/369 and Articles 2(a) and 4 of
Directive 89/429;

2. Orders the French Republic to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 108 of 7.4.2001.

1. Declares that, by maintaining a condition relating to duration
of residence in the territory of Luxembourg for the grant of the
guaranteed minimum income provided for by its legislation, the
Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to fulfil its obligations
under Article 7(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 of the
Council of 15 October 1968 on freedom of movement for
workers within the Community and Article 43 EC;

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

(1) OJ C 289 of 13.10.2001.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fourth Chamber)

of 20 June 2002

ORDER OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

of 5 June 2002

in Case C-299/01: Commission of the European Communi-
ties v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (1)

in Case C-204/00 P: Aalborg Portland A/S v Commission
of the European Communities (1)

(Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations —
Article 7(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 — Freedom of
movement for workers — Article 43 EC — Freedom of
establishment — Social advantages — Guaranteed mini-
mum income)

(Appeals — Competition — Cement — Article 85(1) of the
in part
EC Treaty (now, Article 81(1) EC) — Appeal

manifestly unfounded)

(2002/C 191/14)

(Language of the case: French)

(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
in the European Court Reports)

In Case C-299/01, Commission of the European Communities
(Agent: H. Michard) v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (Agent:
N. Mackel): Application for a declaration that, by maintaining
a condition relating to duration of residence in the territory of
Luxembourg for the grant of a guaranteed minimum income,
the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to fulfil
its
obligations under Article 7(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1612/
68 of the Council of 15 October 1968 on freedom of
movement for workers within the Community (OJ, English
Special Edition 1968 (II), p. 475) and Article 43 EC, the Court
(Fourth Chamber), composed of: S. von Bahr, President of the
Chamber, D.A.O. Edward (Rapporteur) and C.W.A. Timmer-
mans, Judges; D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer, Advocate General;
R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment on 20 June 2002, in
which it:

(2002/C 191/15)

(Language of the case: Danish)

(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
in the European Court Reports)

In Case C-204/00 P: Aalborg Portland A/S, established in
Aalborg (Denmark), represented by K. Dyekjær-Hansen and
K. Høegh,
lawyers — appeal against the judgment of the
Court of First Instance of the European Communities, Fourth
Chamber, Extended Composition, of 15 March 2000 in Joined
Cases T-25/95, T-36/95, T-30/95 to T-32/95, T-34/95 to
T-39/95, T-42/95 to T-46/95, T-48/95, T-50/95 to T-65/95,
T-68/95 to T-71/95, T-87/95 to T-88/95 and T-103/95 to
T-104/95 Cimenteries CBR and Others v Commission [2000]
ECR II-491, seeking to have that judgment partially set aside,
the other party to the proceedings being Commission of
the European Communities (Agents: R. Lyal, assisted by
H.P. Hartvig) &mdash the Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of
P. Jann, President of the Chamber, D.A.O. Edward (Rappor-
teur), A. La Pergola, M. Wathelet and A. Rosas, Judges; D. Ruiz-
Jarabo Colomer, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, made
an order on 5 June 2002, the operative part of which is as
follows: