Case C-398/02: Action brought on 11 November 2002 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Kingdom of Spain
Date: 2002-12-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Spain, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, degradation of the environment, exchange of information, infringement of EU law, waste management

21.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 323/27

Action brought on 8 November 2002 by the Commission
of the European Communities against the Portuguese
Republic

The applicant claims that the Court should :

(Case C-393/02)

(2002/C 323/39)

An action against the Portuguese Republic was brought
before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on
8 November 2002 by the Commission of the European
Communities, represented by C. Tufvesson and M. França,
acting as Agents.

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 1999/42/EC of the European Parliament and of
the Council of 7 June 1999 establishing a mechanism
for the recognition of qualifications in respect of the
professional activities covered by the Directives on liberal-
isation and transitional measures and supplementing the
general systems for the recognition of qualifications (1),
the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations
under that directive; and

— Order the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period prescribed for transposing the directive expired on
31 July 2001.

( 1) OJ 1999 L 201, p. 77.

Action brought on 11 November 2002 by the Com-
the
mission of

the European Communities against

Kingdom of Spain

(Case C-398/02)

(2002/C 323/40)

An action against the Kingdom of Spain was brought before
the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 11 No-
vember 2002 by the Commission of the European Communi-
ties, represented by G. Valero Jordana and M. Konstantinidis,
acting as Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

1. Declare that, by failing to adopt and bring into force
within the prescribed period the laws, regulations and
administrative provisions necessary to comply with
Articles 4, 9 and 13 of Council Directive 75/442/EEC (1)
of 15 July 1975 on waste, as amended by Council
Directive 91/156/EEC of 18 March 1991 (2), the Kingdom
of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under that
directive;

2. Order the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

— Infringement of Article 9 of Directive 75/442/EEC:
Although the Spanish authorities in their reply to the
formal notice and the reasoned opinion respectively
claimed that the disposal site at La Bañeza had been
authorised in 1979 to 1980 and that it complied with
the requisite conditions, they have not forwarded any
copies of such authorisation. Accordingly, the Com-
mission takes the view that, in the absence of any such
information, there was no authorisation or, if it exists,
that it cannot be in conformity with the requirements of
Article 9 of Directive 75/442/EEC.

Moreover, the obligation to obtain authorisation is dis-
charged only when the waste disposal site is finally closed
or sealed, but when the period prescribed by the reasoned
opinion expired the disposal site at La Bañeza was
still open pending the construction of the Centro de
Tratamiento de Residuos (waste disposal processing cen-
tre) at San Román de la Vega.

— Infringement of Article 4 of Directive 75/442/EEC:
Although the Spanish authorities claim to have carried
out a range of work to ‘improve’ the deficient conditions
at the waste disposal site in question,
it continues to
operate and it is still
in its deficient state, entailing a
steady deterioration in the environment and causing
serious problems for the local population.

— Infringement of Article 13 of Directive 75/442/EEC:
Although, according to Article 14 of Directive 1999/31/
EC (3), Annex II to that directive is not immediately
applicable to existing waste disposal sites, its provisions
make clear the type of regular inspections to which
Article 13 of Directive 75/442/EEC refers. The Spanish
authorities have not responded to the request for detailed
information on the inspections carried out nor have they

C 323/28

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

21.12.2002

provided evidence in that respect, so much so that in
their reply to the reasoned opinion they make no mention
whatever of that matter.

nition of diplomas obtained in other Member States, as
provided by those two directives.

( 1) OJ 1975 L 194, p. 39.
( 2) OJ 1991 L 78, p. 32.
( 3) OJ 1999 L 182, p. 1.

Action brought on 12 November 2002 by the Com-
mission of the European Communities against the French
Republic

(Case C-402/02)

(2002/C 323/41)

An action against the French Republic was brought before the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 12 Novem-
ber 2002 by the Commission of the European Communities,
represented by M. Patakia and D. Martin, acting as Agents,
with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should :

— Declare that, by failing to bring into force, in order to
grant access to the profession of teacher specialising in
the hospital public service or, on the other hand, in the
national public service, a procedure for the mutual
recognition of diplomas and by retaining national legis-
lation and practice of the committee for the assimilation
of diplomas which takes no account of the professional
experience of migrant workers, the French Republic has
failed to fulfil its obligations under Directives 89/48/
EEC (1) and 92/51/EEC (2) and Article 39 EC Treaty; and

— Order the French Republic to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

thereof

A profession is a regulated profession in a Member State
within the meaning of Directives 89/48 and 92/51 where it is
authorised in that Member State and access thereto or the
pursuit
is reserved to persons who, directly or
indirectly, meet the statutory conditions governing the rules of
that profession. The fact that access to a similar profession in
the private or associative sector is not subject to the same
condition is irrelevant in that regard. Likewise, the statement
made by the French authorities in their reply to the reasoned
opinion that a profession is not ‘regulated’ unless it is subjected
to a condition regarding the conferment of a diploma arising
from a legislative provision of general application is erroneous
in law. Since Directives 89/48 and 92/51 are applicable
inasmuch as they concern access to the regulated profession
of teachers specialising in the hospital public service and in
the national civil service,
is incumbent on the French
authorities to provide for a procedure for the mutual recog-

it

The arrangements for assimilation under decrees, which do
not take account of Directives 89/48 and 92/51, rely only on
the examination of diplomas submitted by candidates who are
holders of such diplomas and make no provision for the taking
into account of any experience acquired in the course of
pursuing the profession to make up for any difference with
respect to duration or content of training leading to the award
of such diplomas. However, Member States are obliged to take
into account any professional experience which candidates
may possess for the purposes of assimilating a diploma
obtained in another Member State and access to the regulated
profession in question.

(1) Council Directive 89/48/EEC of 21 December 1988 on a general
system for the recognition of higher-education diplomas awarded
on completion of professional education and training of at least
three years’ duration (OJ 1988 L 19, p. 16) .

(2) Council Directive 92/51/EEC of 18 June 1992 on a second general
system for the recognition of professional education and training
to supplement Directive 89/48/EEC (OJ 1992 L 209, p. 25) .

Action brought on 12 November 2002 by the Com-
mission of the European Communities against the United
Kingdom

(Case C-405/02)

(2002/C 323/42)

An action against the United Kingdom was brought before the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 12 Novem-
ber 2002 by the Commission of the European Communities,
represented by Maria Patakia and Karen Banks, acting as
agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The Applicant claims that the Court should:

(1) declare that, by failing to adopt all the laws, regulations
and administrative provisions necessary to comply with
Directive 1999/42/EC of the European Parliament and of
the Council of 7 June 1999 on the establishment of a
mechanism for the recognition of qualifications in respect
of the professional activities covered by the Directives on
liberalisation and transitional measures
and sup-
plementing the general systems for the recognition of
qualifications (1), or in any event by failing to communi-
cate them to the Commission, the United Kingdom has
failed to fulfil its obligations under the Directive;

(2) order the United Kingdom to pay the costs of this action.