Case C-383/02: Action brought on 24 October 2002 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Italian Republic
Date: 2002-12-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Italy, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, environmental protection, storage of waste, waste disposal, waste management, waste recycling

7.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 305/17

could harm the environment, and in particular without risk to
water, air, soil and plants and animals, without causing a
nuisance through noise or odours and without adversely
affecting the countryside or places of special interest.

2002, received at the Court Registry on 23 October 2002, for
a preliminary ruling in the case of Association Comité
économique régional agricole fruits et légumes de Bretagne
(CERAFEL) against François Faou and GAEC de Kerlidou on
the following question:

In the present case, the Italian Republic has not adopted any
appropriate measure to ensure that waste deposited in the Via
Granciara disposal site in Castelliri is recovered or disposed
of without endangering human health and without using
procedures or methods which could harm the environment.
its obligations under
Consequently,
Article 4 of the directive.

it has failed to fulfil

Article 8 of the directive provides that Member States are to
ensure that any holder of waste has it handled by a private or
public waste collector or by an undertaking which carries out
the operations listed in Annex II A or B of the directive, or
recovers or disposes of it himself in accordance with the
the owners or
provisions of the directive. To that end,
managers of disposal sites are regarded as holders within the
meaning of Article 8.

The Italian Republic has failed to adopt the necessary measures
to ensure that the holder of waste deposited in the disposal
site at Castelliri
(Frosinone) has such waste handled by a
private or public collector or an undertaking carrying out the
operations provided for in Annex II A or II B to the directive.
Consequently,
its obligations under
Article 8 of the directive.

it has failed to fulfil

( 1) OJ L 194 of 25.7.1975, p. 39.
( 2) OJ L 78 of 26.3.1991, p. 32.

Can a Member State, without infringing the principle of non-
discrimination, apply Article 15b(1) and (8) of Regulation
(EEC) No 1035/72 of the Council of 18 May 1972 (1) by
making certain production and marketing rules mandatory for
producers who are established in the district of a Board and
who are not members of it and by making them liable for all
or part of the fees paid by member producers, without
distinguishing according to whether or not those non-member
producers are part of a production sector regulated by law,
which, as in the case of the organic production sector, would
make the Board’s measures irrelevant or of merely occasional
and marginal interest for them.

(1) Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 of the Council of 18 May 1972 on
the common organization of the market in fruit and vegetables
(OJ L 118 of 20.5.1972, p. 1).

Action brought on 24 October 2002 by the Commission
of the European Communities against the Italian Republic

(Case C-383/02)

(2002/C 305/32)

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Cour d’appel de
Caen, chambres réunies by judgment of that Court of
17 October 2002 in the case of Association Comité
économique régional agricole fruits et
légumes de
Bretagne (CERAFEL) against François Faou and GAEC de
Kerlidou

An action against the Italian Republic was brought before the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 24 October
2002 by the Commission of the European Communities,
represented by Minas Konstantinidis and Roberto Amorosi,
acting as Agents.

(Case C-381/02)

(2002/C 305/31)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by judgment of the Cour d’appel de
Caen (Court of Appeal, Caen) chambres réunies of 17 October

The applicant claims that the Court should:

1.

declare that, by failing to adopt the necessary measures
to ensure that waste deposited in the disposal sites at
Rodano (Milan)
is recovered or disposed of without
endangering human health and without using procedures
or methods which could harm the environment, and by
failing to adopt the measures necessary to ensure that the
holder of waste deposited in the disposal sites at Rodano
(Milan) has such waste handled by a private or public
collector or an undertaking carrying out the operations

C 305/18

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

7.12.2002

provided for in Annex II A or II B to Directive 75/442/
EEC (1), as amended by Directive 91/156/EEC (2), or
himself recovers or disposes of such waste, the Italian
Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 4
and 8 of that directive;

Removal from the register of Case C-246/99 (1)

(2002/C 305/33)

2.

order the Italian Republic to pay the costs.

By order of 11 September 2002 the President of the Court of
Justice of the European Communities ordered the removal
from the register of Case C-246/99: Commission of the
European Communities v Kingdom of Denmark.

Pleas in law and main arguments

(1) OJ C 246 of 28.8.1999.

The first paragraph of Article 4 of the directive provides that
Member States are to adopt the necessary measures to ensure
that waste is recovered or disposed of without endangering
human health and without using processes or methods which
could harm the environment, and in particular without risk to
water, air, soil and plants and animals, without causing a
nuisance through noise or odours and without adversely
affecting the countryside or places of special interest.

In the present case, the Italian Republic has not adopted any
appropriate measure to ensure that waste deposited in the
Rodano disposal site is recovered or disposed of without
endangering human health and without using procedures or
methods which could harm the environment. Consequently, it
has failed to fulfil
its obligations under Article 4 of the
directive.

In addition, Article 8 of the directive provides that Member
States are to ensure that any holder of waste has it handled by
a private or public waste collector or by an undertaking which
carries out the operations listed in Annex II A or B of the
directive, or recovers or disposes of it himself in accordance
with the provisions of the directive. To that end, the owners
or managers of disposal sites are regarded as holders within
the meaning of Article 8.

The Italian Republic has failed to adopt the necessary measures
to ensure that the holder of waste deposited in the Rodano
disposal site has such waste handled by a private or public
the operations
collector or an undertaking carrying out
provided for in Annex II A or II B to the directive. Conse-
quently, it has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 8 of
the directive.

Removal from the register of Case C-434/00 (1)

(2002/C 305/34)

By order of 24 September 2002 the President of the Court of
Justice of the European Communities ordered the removal
from the register of Case C-434/00 (Reference for a preliminary
ruling by the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden): G. Cuomo.

(1) OJ C 28 of 27.1.2001.

Removal from the register of Case C-120/01 (1)

(2002/C 305/35)

By order of 9 September 2002 the President of the Court of
Justice of the European Communities ordered the removal
from the register of Case C-120/01: Commission of the
European Communities v Ireland.

( 1) OJ L 194 of 25.7.1975, p. 39.
( 2) OJ L 78 of 26.3.1991, p. 32.

(1) OJ C 150 of 19.5.2001.