Case C-461/02: Action brought on 20 December 2002 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg
Date: 2003-02-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU programme, European Commission, Luxembourg, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, energy consumption, energy saving, pollution control measures, report

22.2.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 44/15

Action brought on 20 December 2002 by the Commission
of the European Communities against the Grand Duchy
of Luxembourg

23 December 2002 by the Commission of the European
Communities, represented by N. B. Rasmussen and D. Martin,
acting as Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

(Case C-461/02)

(2003/C 44/28)

An action against the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg was
brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communi-
ties on 20 December 2002 by the Commission of the European
Communities, represented by H. Støvlbæk and F. Simonetti,
acting as Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— declare that, by not reporting to the Commission every
two years on the results of the measures taken to
implement the programmes provided for in Council
Directive 93/76/EEC of 13 September 1993 to limit
carbon dioxide emissions by improving energy efficiency
(SAVE) (1), the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to
fulfil its obligations under Article 9 of that directive;

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

Pleas in law and main arguments

In view of the period prescribed for transposing the directive,
a first report on the results of the measures taken to implement
the programmes provided for in the directive should have
been submitted to the Commission on 31 December 1996
and a second report on 31 December 1998. The Luxembourg
authorities’ lack of resources cannot be used to justify breach
of an obligation under a directive.

( 1) OJ L 237 of 22.9.1993, p. 28.

Action brought on 23 December 2002 by the Commission
of the European Communities against the Kingdom of
Denmark

(Case C-464/02)

(2003/C 44/29)

An action against the Kingdom of Denmark was brought
before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— Declare that, in so far as it does not, under its legislation
and administrative practice, allow employees who work
outside Denmark and are resident in Denmark to use for
commercial or private purposes a company car registered
in a neighbouring country where the undertaking of
their employer has its principal office, the Kingdom of
Denmark has failed, within the terms of Article 226 EC,
to fulfil its obligations under the combined provisions of
Articles 39 EC and 10 EC;

— Declare that,

in so far as, under its legislation and
administrative practice, it allows employees who work in
another EU Member State and are resident in Denmark
to use for commercial and/or private purposes a motor
vehicle, in particular a company car, which is registered
in another Member State in which the undertaking of
their employer has its principal office or seat, only subject
to the conditions (i)
the work in the foreign
undertaking is the main activity engaged in by the person
concerned and (ii) that duty is paid on that vehicle, the
Kingdom of Denmark has failed, within the terms of
Article 226 EC, to fulfil its obligations under the com-
bined provisions of Articles 39 EC and 10 EC;

that

— Order the Kingdom of Denmark to pay the costs of the

present proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

the present
The Danish rules which form the basis of
action were amended during the course of the administrative
procedure. According to the ‘previous scheme’ (see Notice
No 18 of the Ministry of Justice of 10 January 1992, which
subsequently became Notice No 592 of the Ministry of
Transport of 24 June 1996), Danish residents who used a
motor vehicle that had been registered by an employer/
undertaking outside Denmark could, as a main rule, do so
only if the vehicle was registered in Denmark or if authorisation
was granted. In the event of registration being required,
registration duty was also payable under the terms of the
Danish Law on registration duty. Under this legislation it was
Danish administrative practice to refuse to issue authorisations
requested for the purpose of ‘commercial trips within Den-
mark, including visits to clients’. Authorisation could, however,
be granted for vehicle use for the purpose of driving directly
between the Danish-German border and the place of residence
of the person concerned, but only with regard to weekends or
holidays. Under no circumstances was it permitted to use
company cars for private purposes, for example, outside of
working time.