Case C-67/04: Action brought on 13 February 2004 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Hellenic Republic
Date: 2004-04-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Greece, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, air quality, combustion gases, environmental protection, industrial pollution, pollution control, public health

17.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 94/21

— to order the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern

Ireland to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments:

Article 5(3) of the Directive, concerning the prior information
of the population likely to be affected in the event of a radiolo-
gical emergency, requires that
information be
communicated to this population without any request being
made.

the relevant

The circumstances that gave rise to the Commission's inquires
(repair operations of the nuclear submarine ‘Tireless’) high-
lighted that no prior information had been communicated in
the past to the Gibraltar population likely to be affected in the
event of a radiological emergency. The mere public availability
of the Gibraltar Public Safety Scheme (GIBPUBSAFE)
in the
public library cannot be considered to meet the requirements
of Article 5(3) of the Directive, which requires active communi-
cation of such information.

(1) OJ 1989 L 357, p. 31

Action brought on 16 February 2004 by the United
Kingdom against the European Parliament and the Council
of the European Union

(Case C-66/04)

(2004/C 94/44)

An action against the European Parliament and the Council of
the European Union was brought before the Court of Justice of
the European Communities on 16 February 2004 by the
United Kingdom, represented by Rosemary Caudwell, acting as
agent; Lord Goldsmith QC, Her Majesty's Attorney-General;
Nicholas Paines QC; and Tim Ward, with an address for service
in Luxembourg.

The Applicant claims that the Court should:

1) declare that Regulation (EC) No. 2065/2003 of the Euro-
pean Parliament and of the Council of 10 November 2003
on smoke flavourings used or intended for use in or on
foods (1) is invalid;

2) order the European Parliament and the Council of the Euro-

pean Union to pay the United Kingdom's costs.

does not harmonise national law, but instead sets up a proce-
dure at Community level
for the authorisation of smoke
flavourings in foods; it requires that such smoke flavourings
may only be placed on the market if authorised by further
Regulations to be adopted by the Commission on the basis of
the European Food Safety Authority (‘the
an opinion of
Authority’) as to their safety.

Those provisions are at the heart of the Regulation; it does not
establish any harmonised standards in national law at all, but
purports to entrust the task of establishing a list of authorised
smoke flavourings
entirely to the Commission and the
Authority.

that

the legislative power
The United Kingdom submits
conferred by Article 95 EC is a power to harmonise national
laws;
it is not a power to set up Community bodies or to
confer tasks upon such bodies, nor to set up procedures under
which lists of approved products are drawn up by the Commis-
sion on the basis of an evaluation by a Community agency.
Conferring tasks upon Community bodies or upon the
Commission is a matter outside the scope of national law, and
doing so cannot be described as harmonising national
law
within the meaning of Article 95.

The provisions of
the Regulation therefore fall outside the
power of harmonisation conferred on the Parliament and
Council by Article 95 and the only appropriate legal basis for
such a measure could be Article 308 EC.

(1) OJ L 309, 26.11.2003, p. 1 - 8

Action brought on 13 February 2004 by the Commission
the Hellenic
of

against

the European Communities
Republic

(Case C-67/04)

(2004/C 94/45)

An action against the Hellenic Republic was brought before the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 13 February
2004 by the Commission of the European Communities, repre-
sented by Gregorio Valerio Jordana and Minas Konstantinidis,
of its Legal Service.

Pleas in law and main arguments:

The Commission claims that the Court should:

The contested Regulation was adopted on the basis of Article
95 EC, which empowers the Parliament and the Council to
adopt measures for the approximation of the provisions laid
down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member
States which have as their object the establishment and func-
tioning of the internal market.

The United Kingdom does not object to the substantive content
of the Regulation, but submits that Article 95 EC does not
provide a proper legal basis for its adoption. The Regulation

necessary

— declare that, by failing to adopt, or in any event to notify to
the Commission, the laws, regulations and administrative
Directive
provisions
2001/80/EC (1) of
the
Council of 23 October 2001 on the limitation of emissions
of certain pollutants into the air from large combustion
plants, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obliga-
tions under that directive;

the European Parliament and of

comply

with

to

— order the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.

C 94/22

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

17.4.2004

Pleas in law and arguments

The period for transposition of the directive into national law
expired on 27 November 2002.

(1) OJ No L 309, 27.11.2001, p. 1.

(Case C-69/04)

(2004/C 94/47)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the Euro-
pean Communities by order of the Tribunale di Civitavecchia
(District Court, Civitavecchia) of 12 January 2004, received at
the Court Registry on 16 February 2004, for a preliminary
ruling in the case of Fallimento LIGABUE Gate Gourmet Roma
s.p.a. against LSG Sky Chefs s.p.a. on the following questions:

Action brought on 13 February 2004 by the Commission
the Hellenic
of

against

the European Communities
Republic

(Case C-68/04)

(2004/C 94/46)

An action against the Hellenic Republic was brought before the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 13 February
2004 by the Commission of the European Communities, repre-
sented by Gregorio Valerio Jordana and Minas Konstantinidis,
of its Legal Service.

The Commission claims that the Court should:

— declare that, by failing to adopt, or in any event to notify to
the Commission, the laws, regulations and administrative
Directive
provisions
2001/81/EC (1)of
the
Council of 23 October 2001 on national emission ceilings
for certain atmospheric pollutants, the Hellenic Republic
has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

comply
the European Parliament and of

necessary

with

to

— order the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.

Does Article 18 of Council Directive 96/97/EC (1) of 15
October 1996, considered in conjunction with the principles of
Community law, and in particular
those of Article 49
(previously 59) of the Treaty, constitute an obstacle to the
application of Article 14 of Legislative Decree No 18 of 13
January 1999, in so far as it imposes on providers of airport
services the obligation to take on staff, thereby restricting their
strategies
power
of
concerning
of
employees?

decision
the

entrepreneurial

remuneration

regarding

number

choice,

and

(1) OJ L 272 of 25.10.1996, p. 36.

Action brought on 16 February 2004 by the Swiss Confed-
eration against the Commission of the European Commu-
nities

(Case C-70/04)

(2004/C 94/48)

Pleas in law and arguments

The period for transposition of the directive into national law
expired on 27 November 2002.

(1) OJ No L 309, 27.11.2001, p. 22.

An action against the Commission of the European Commu-
nities was brought before the Court of Justice of the European
Communities on 16 February 2004 by the Swiss Confedera-
tion, represented by Simon Hirsbrunner and Ulrich Soltész,
Rechtsanwälte, Brussels (Belgium).

The applicant claims that the Court should:

1. annul, in accordance with Article 231(1) EC, the Decision of
the Commission of 5 December 2003 (Case TREN/AMA/11/
03 – German measures relating to the approaches to Zurich
Airport); (1)

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunale di
Civitavecchia by order of that Court of 12 January 2004 in
the case of Fallimento LIGABUE Gate Gourmet Roma
s.p.a. against LSG Sky Chefs s.p.a.

2. order the Commission to pay the applicant's costs in accord-
ance with Article 69(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the
Court of Justice.