Case C-330/02: Action brought on 19 September 2002 by the Commission of the European Communities against Ireland
Date: 2002-11-09
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Ireland, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, environmental monitoring, industrial pollution, national implementing measure, organic chemical, pollution control measures, solvent

C 274/20

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

9.11.2002

tember 2002 by the Commission of the European Communi-
ties, represented by Gregorio Valero Jordana, of its Legal
Service, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court of Justice should:

— declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations
and administrative provisions necessary to comply with
Council Directive 1999/13/EC (1) of 11 March 1999 on
the limitation of emissions of volatile organic compounds
due to the use of organic solvents in certain activities and
installations or, in any event, by failing to communicate
such provisions to the Commission, the Kingdom of
Spain has failed to fulfil
its obligations under that
directive;

— order the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The binding nature of the third paragraph of Article 249 EC
and the first paragraph of Article 10 EC requires the Member
States to adopt the measures necessary to implement the
directives addressed to them before the expiry of the period
prescribed for that purpose. The period in question expired on
1 April 2001 without Spain’s having introduced the necessary
measures.

( 1) OJ L 85, 29.3.1999, p. 1.

1. Must the answer given by the Court to question 4 in its
judgment of 27 November 2001 in Case C-257/99
is
Barkoci and Malik be interpreted to mean that it
incompatible with Article 45(1) in conjunction with
Article 59(1) of the Association Agreement with Bulgaria,
Article 44(3)
in conjunction with Article 58 of the
Association Agreement with Poland and Article 45(3) in
conjunction with Article 59 of the Association Agreement
with the Slovak Republic for the competent authority,
when assessing an application submitted in the Nether-
lands for a full residence permit with a view to establish-
ment in accordance with the Association Agreement, to
refrain from examining the contents of the application
solely on the ground that the applicant does not have a
temporary residence permit? Does the fact
that the
substantive entry requirements are clearly and manifestly
satisfied make any difference to the answer to this
question?

2.

Is it relevant for the purposes of answering the first
question, and if so how, whether the person applying for
a full residence permit is legally resident in the Nether-
lands at the time of the application, whether or not on
the basis of an entitlement other than a temporary
residence permit, such as the ‘free period’ referred to in
Article 8 of the Vreemdelingenwet?

Action brought on 19 September 2002 by the Com-
mission of the European Communities against Ireland

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Rechtbank te
s’-Gravenhage by decision of that Court of 16 September
2002 in the case of Lili Georgieva Panayotova, Radostina
Markova Kalcheva, Izabella Malgorzata Lis, Lubica Sopo-
va, Izabela Leokadia Topa and Jolanta Monika Rusiecka
against Minister voor Vreemdelingenzaken en Integratie

(Case C-330/02)

(2002/C 274/35)

(Case C-327/02)

(2002/C 274/34)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by decision of
the Rechtbank te
s’-Gravenhage (District Court, The Hague) of 16 September
2002, received at
the Court Registry on 18 September
2002, for a preliminary ruling in the case of Lili Georgieva
Panayotova, Radostina Markova Kalcheva, Izabella Malgorzata
Lis, Lubica Sopova, Izabela Leokadia Topa and Jolanta Monika
Rusiecka against Minister voor Vreemdelingenzaken en Inte-
gratie (Minister for Alien Affairs and Integration) on the
following questions:

An action against Ireland was brought before the Court of
Justice of the European Communities on 19 September 2002
by the Commission of the European Communities, represented
by Mr X. Lewis, acting as agent, with an address for service in
Luxembourg.

The Applicant claims that the Court should:

— declare that by failing to adopt the laws, regulations
and administrative provisions necessary to comply with
Council Directive 1999/13/EC (1) of 11 March 1999 on
the limitation of emissions of volatile organic compounds
due to the use of organic solvents in certain activities and

9.11.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 274/21

installations or, in any event, by failing to notify such
provisions to the Commission, Ireland has failed to fulfil
its obligations under Article 15 of this Directive;

Pleas in law and main arguments

— order Ireland to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Article 249 EC, under which a directive shall be binding as to
the result to be achieved, upon each Member State, carries by
implication an obligation on the Member States to observe the
period for compliance laid down in the directive. That period
expired on 1 April 2001 without Ireland havthe conclusions
of the Commission.ing enacted the provisions necessary to
comply with the directive referred to in

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 and brought into force to comply
with the directive concerned for Gibraltar and since the
Commission is in possession of no other information enabling
it to conclude that the United Kingdom has adopted and
brought into force 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 85, 29.3.1999, p. 1.

(1) OJ L 163, 29.6.1999, p. 41.

Action brought on 19 September 2002 by the Com-
mission of the European Communities against the United
Kingdom

Action brought on 19 September 2002 by the Com-
mission of the European Communities against the United
Kingdom

(Case C-331/02)

(2002/C 274/36)

(Case C-332/02)

(2002/C 274/37)

An action against the United Kingdom was brought before the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 19 Septem-
ber 2002 by the Commission of the European Communities,
represented by Mr X. Lewis, acting as agent, with an address
for service in Luxembourg.

An action against the United Kingdom was brought before the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 19 Septem-
ber 2002 by the Commission of the European Communities,
represented by Mr X. Lewis, acting as agent, with an address
for service in Luxembourg.

The Applicant claims that the Court should:

The Applicant claims that the Court should:

1)

declare that by failing to adopt and bring into force
for Gibraltar the laws, regulations and administrative
provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive
1999/30/EC (1) of 22 April 1999 relating to limit values
for sulphur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and oxides of
nitrogen, particulate matter and lead in ambient air or, in
any event, by failing to notify such provisions to the
Commission, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Northern Ireland has failed to fulfil fully its obligations
under this Directive.

1)

declare that by failing to adopt the laws, regulations
and administrative provisions necessary to comply with
Council Directive 1999/13/EC (1) of 11 March 1999 on
limitation of emissions of volatile organic compounds
due to the use of organic solvents in certain activities and
installations or, in any event, by failing to notify such
provisions to the Commission, the United Kingdom of
Great Britain and Northern Ireland has failed to fulfil fully
its obligations under Article 15 of this Directive;

2)

order the United Kingdom to pay the costs.

2)

order the United Kingdom to the pay the costs.