Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 12 June 2003 in Case C-229/00: Commission of the European Communities v Republic of Finland (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Directive 89/105/EEC — Failure to apply the procedure prescribed in Article 6 of that directive to decisions determining the categories of medicinal products qualifying for higher-rate cover — Failure to provide objective and verifiable grounds for negative decisions)
Date: 2003-08-02
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Finland, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, fixing of prices, health insurance, medicinal product

2.8.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 184/1

I

(Information)

COURT OF JUSTICE

COURT OF JUSTICE

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

of 12 June 2003

that

The fact
the authorities of a Member State did not ban a
demonstration in circumstances such as those of the main case is not
incompatible with Articles 30 and 34 of the EC Treaty (now, after
amendment, Articles 28 EC and 29 EC), read together with Article 5
of the EC Treaty (now Article 10 EC).

in Case C-112/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Oberlandesgericht
Innsbruck): Eugen Schmidberger,
Internationale Transporte und Planzüge v Republic of
Austria (1)

(1) OJ C 163, 10.6.2000.

(Free movement of goods — Restriction resulting from
actions of individuals — Obligations of the Member States
— Decision not
to prohibit a demonstration by environ-
mental protesters which resulted in the complete closure of
the Brenner motorway for almost 30 hours — Justification
rights — Freedom of
— Fundamental
expression and
freedom of assembly — Principle of proportionality)

(2003/C 184/01)

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Sixth Chamber)

of 12 June 2003

(Language of the case: German)

in Case C-229/00: Commission of the European Commu-
nities v Republic of Finland (1)

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

In Case C-112/00: Reference to the Court under Article 234
EC by the Oberlandesgericht Innsbruck (Austria) for a preli-
minary ruling in the proceedings pending before that court
between Eugen Schmidberger,
Internationale Transporte und
Planzüge and Republic of Austria, on the interpretation of
Articles 30, 34 and 36 of the EC Treaty (now, after amend-
ment, Articles 28 EC, 29 EC and 30 EC) read together with
Article 5 of the EC Treaty (now Article 10 EC), and on the
conditions for liability of a Member State for damage caused to
the Court,
individuals by a breach of Community law,
composed
President,
Iglesias,
J.-P. Puissochet, M. Wathelet and R. Schintgen (Rapporteur)
(Presidents of Chambers), C. Gulmann, D.A.O. Edward,
P.
J.
Jann, V. Skouris, F. Macken, N. Colneric, S. von Bahr,
N. Cunha Rodrigues and A. Rosas, Judges; F.G. Jacobs, Advo-
cate General; H.A. Rühl (Principal Administrator), Registrar, has
given a judgment on 12 June 2003, in which it has ruled:

Rodríguez

G.C.

of:

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Directive
89/105/EEC — Failure to apply the procedure prescribed in
that directive to decisions determining the
Article 6 of
categories of medicinal products qualifying for higher-rate
cover — Failure to provide objective and verifiable grounds
for negative decisions)

(2003/C 184/02)

(Language of the case: Finnish)

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

In Case C-229/00, Commission of the European Communities
(Agents:
I. Koskinen et H. Støvlbæk) v Republic of Finland
(Agents: T. Pynnä and E. Bygglin): Application for a declaration
that, by not adopting the laws, regulations and administrative

C 184/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

2.8.2003

provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 89/105/
EEC of 21 December 1988 relating to the transparency of
measures regulating the prices of medicinal products for human
use and their inclusion in the scope of national health insurance
systems (OJ 1989 L 40, p. 8), in particular by not applying the
prescribed procedure to decisions determining a category of
special cover and, with regard to the prescribed obligations, by
not providing the applicant with a sufficient statement of
reasons based on objective and verifiable criteria in the case of
negative decisions, the Republic of Finland has failed to fulfil its
obligations under that directive and in particular Article 6
thereof,
of:
(Sixth
J.-P. Puissochet, President of
the Chamber, C. Gulmann,
V. Skouris, F. Macken (Rapporteur) and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues,
Judges; A. Tizzano, Advocate General; H. von Holstein, Deputy
Registrar, has given a judgment on 12 June 2003, in which it:

Chamber),

composed

Court

the

1. Declares

laws,

that, by not adopting the

regulations and
administrative provisions necessary
to comply with Council
Directive 89/105/EEC of 21 December 1988 relating to the
transparency of measures
regulating the prices of medicinal
products for human use and their inclusion in the scope of
the decisions
national health insurance
establishing the categories of medicinal products subject
to a
higher rate of health insurance cover, the Republic of Finland
has failed to fulfil
its obligations under the first and second
subparagraphs of Article 6 of that directive;

systems as

regards

(Agents: initially J.-F. Dobelle and D. Colas, and, subsequently,
the latter and G. de Bergues): Application for a declaration
that, by failing correctly to transpose Articles 2(a) and 3(2), (3)
and (4) of Council Directive 90/313/EEC of 7 June 1990 on
the freedom of access to information on the environment (OJ
1990 L 158, p. 56), the French Republic has failed to fulfil its
obligations under that directive and under the third paragraph
of Article 189 of the EC Treaty (now the third paragraph of
(Sixth Chamber), composed of:
Article 249 EC),
J.-P. Puissochet, President of
the Chamber, R. Schintgen
(Rapporteur), V. Skouris, F. Macken and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues,
Judges; C. Stix-Hackl, Advocate General; M.-F. Contet, Principal
Administrator,
the Registrar, has given a judgment on
26 June 2003, in which it:

the Court

for

1. Declares that:

to

environment

by restricting the obligation to supply information relating to
‘administrative documents’ within the
the
meaning of Law No 78-753 of 17 July 1978 establishing
various measures to improve relations between the administrative
authorities and the public and various administrative, social and
fiscal provisions;

2. Dismisses the remainder of the action;

3. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 247, 26.8.2000.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Sixth Chamber)

of 26 June 2003

by providing, as one of the grounds for refusing to supply such
information, that the consultation or provision of the document
would prejudice, ‘generally, secrets protected by legislation’;

by failing to include in the national
legislation a provision
under which information relating to the environment is to be
supplied in part where it is possible to separate out information
on items concerning the interests referred to in Article 3(2) of
Council Directive 90/313/EEC of 7 June 1990 on the freedom
environment, which may
of access
accordingly justify a refusal, and

to information on the

in Case C-233/00: Commission of the European Commu-
nities v French Republic (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Directive
90/313/EEC — Freedom of access to information on the
environment — Incomplete or incorrect transposition)

in the case of an implied refusal of a
by failing to provide,
request
the
for information relating to the environment,
public authorities are required to provide the reasons for that
refusal automatically and at the latest within two months of the
submission of the initial request, the French Republic has failed
its obligations under Articles 2(a) and 3(1), (2) and
to fulfil
(4) of that directive;

that

(2003/C 184/03)

(Language of the case: French)

2. Dismisses the remainder of the application;

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

3. Orders the French Republic to pay the costs.

In Case C-233/00, Commission of the European Communities
(Agents: G. zur Hausen and J.-F. Pasquier) v French Republic

(1) OJ C 233, 12.8.2000.