Case C-378/04: Action brought on 2 September 2004 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Republic of Austria
Date: 2004-10-23
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Austria, European Commission, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, carcinogenic substance, dangerous substance, health risk, national implementing measure, occupational health, occupational safety, safety standard

23.10.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 262/23

Action brought on 2 September 2004 by the Commission
against Kingdom of
of

the European Communities
Belgium

(Case C-376/04)

(2004/C 262/40)

Justice of

An action against the Kingdom of Belgium was brought before
the Court of
the European Communities on 2
September 2004 by the Commission of the European Commu-
nities, represented by M. Shotter, acting as Agent, with an
address for service in Luxembourg.

1. declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and
administrative provisions necessary to implement
fully
Directive 1999/92/EC of the European Parliament and of
the Council of 16 December 1999 on minimum require-
ments for improving the safety and health protection of
workers potentially at risk from explosive atmospheres (1) or
to inform the Commission of those measures, the Republic
of Austria has failed to fulfil its obligations under that direc-
tive;

2. order the Republic of Austria to pay the costs

Pleas in law and main arguments

The Commission of the European Communities claims that the
Court should:

The period prescribed for
1999/92/EC expired on 30 June 2003.

implementation of Directive

— Declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and
administrative provisions necessary to comply with Direc-
tive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of
personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic
communications sector (Directive on privacy and electronic
communications) (1) or, in any event, by failing to notify
such provisions
the Kingdom of
to the Commission,
Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under that direc-
tive.

— Order the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.

The Commission has found that, with the exception of imple-
mentation in the Länder of Lower Austria and Tyrol, that direc-
tive has not yet been implemented fully at either Federal level
or the level of the remaining Länder.

(1) OJ 2000 L 23, p. 57.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period for the transposition of the directive into national
law expired on 31 October 2003.

Action brought on 2 September 2004 by the Commission
of the European Communities against the Republic of
Austria

(1) OJ L 201 of 31.7.2002, p. 37.

Action brought on 2 September 2004 by the Commission
of the European Communities against the Republic of
Austria

(Case C-377/04)

(2004/C 262/41)

Justice of

An action against the Republic of Austria was brought before
the Court of
the European Communities on 2
September 2004 by the Commission of the European Commu-
nities, represented by D. Martin and H. Kreppel, with an
address for service in Luxembourg.

(Case C-378/04)

(2004/C 262/42)

Justice of

An action against the Republic of Austria was brought before
the Court of
the European Communities on 2
September 2004 by the Commission of the European Commu-
nities, represented by Denis Martin and Horstpeter Kreppel,
with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

1. Declare that the Republic of Austria has failed to fulfil its
obligations under Council Directive 1999/38/EC of 29 April
1999 amending for the second time Directive 90/394/EEC
on the protection of workers from the risks related to expo-
sure to carcinogens at work and extending it to mutagens
(OJ 1999 L 138, p. 66) by not adopting the necessary legis-
lative and administrative measures for the full implementa-
tion on that directive, or by failing to communicate such
measures to the Commission.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

2. Order the Republic of Austria to bear the costs.

C 262/24

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

23.10.2004

Pleas in law and main arguments

The prescribed period for implementing Directive 1999/38/EC
expired on 29 April 2003.

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Retten i
Hørsholm (Denmark) by order of that court of 4 June
2004 in the case of Anklagemyndigheden against Steffen
Ryborg

(Case C-279/04)

(2004/C 262/43)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the Euro-
pean Communities by the Retten i Hørsholm (Denmark), by
order of 4 June 2004, which was received at the Court Registry
on 28 June 2004, for a preliminary ruling in the case of Ankla-
gemyndigheden against Steffen Ryborg.

The Retten i Hørsholm asks the Court of Justice to give a preli-
minary ruling on the following questions:

1.a. Are Article 39 EC, Article 49 EC and Article 10 EC to be
interpreted as precluding a Member State from requiring
registration of a motor vehicle when the vehicle belongs
to an employer established in a neighbouring Member
State and is used by an employee who is resident in the
first-mentioned Member State for work purposes and
during his free time in both Member States?

1.b If

in the assessment for question 1.a weight

is to be
accorded to whether any private use of the vehicle is ancil-
lary to business use, which criteria should be used by the
national court in determining whether the non-business
use of the vehicle is ancillary to the business use, when it
can be assumed that
the vehicle is used for business
purposes, see Case C-127/86 Yves Ledoux [1988] ECR
3741, paragraph 18?

Action brought on 6 September 2004 by the Commission
of the European Communities against Grand Duchy of
Luxembourg

(Case C-382/04)

(2004/C 262/44)

The Commission of the European Communities claims that the
Court should:

1. Declare that by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and
administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council
Directive 2002/11/EC of 14 February 2002 amending
Directive 68/193/EEC on the marketing of material for the
vegetative propagation of the vine and repealing Directive
74/649/EEC (1) and, in any event, by failing to notify such
provisions to the Commission, the Grand Duchy of Luxem-
bourg has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive.

2. Order the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period for the transposition of the directive into national
law expired on 23 February 2003.

(1) OJ L 53, of 23.2.2002, p. 20.

Action brought on 6 September 2004 by the Commission
of the European Communities against the Grand Duchy of
Luxembourg

(Case C-383/04)

(2004/C 262/45)

An action against
the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg was
brought before the Court of Justice of the European Commu-
nities on 6 September 2004 by the Commission of the Euro-
pean Communities, represented by A. Bordes, acting as Agent,
with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The Commission of the European Communities claims that the
Court should:

1. Declare that by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and
administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council
Directive 1999/105/EC of 22 December 1999 on the
marketing of
in any
event, by failing to notify such provisions to the Commis-
sion, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to fulfil its
obligations under that directive.

forest reproductive material (1) and,

2. Order the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments:

The period for the transposition of the directive into national
law expired on 1 January 2003.

An action against
the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg was
brought before the Court of Justice of the European Commu-
nities on 6 September 2004 by the Commission of the Euro-
pean Communities, represented by A. Bordes, acting as Agent,
with an address for service in Luxembourg.

(1) OJ L 11 of 15.1.2000, p. 17.