Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 18 November 2004 in Case C-79/04 Commission of the European Communities v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Directive 2002/40/EC — Failure to transpose within the prescribed period)
Date: 2005-01-08
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Luxembourg, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, energy consumption, household electrical appliance

8.1.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 6/19

1. Declares that, by failing:

— completely to transpose the definition of ‘existing installation’
under Article 2(4) of Council Directive 96/61/EC of 24
September 1996 concerning integrated pollution prevention
and control in the Gewerbeordnung 1994 (Crafts, Trade and
Industry Code 1994) in the version brought into force by
Bundesgesetz BGBl.I,88/2000 and which came into effect on
1 September 2000;

— completely to transpose the requirements relating to permit
conditions laid down in Article 9(4) of that directive in the
Gewerbeordnung 1994, as amended, and the requirements
laid down in Article 9(3) to (5) of that directive in the Nieder-
österreichisches Elektrizitätswesengesetz 2001 (‘NÖ EwG
2001’);

— completely to transpose Annex IV to that directive in the
Gewerbeordnung 1994, as amended, and in the NÖ EwG
2001;

— to transpose that directive as regards the combustion installa-
tions referred to in point 1.1 of Annex I to the directive in the
Gewerbeordnung 1994, as amended, and in the Salzburger
Abfallwirtschaftsgesetz 1998;

— completely to transpose Directive 96/61 in the Burgenlän-

disches Elektrizitätswesengesetz 1999, and

— to transpose the provisions of that directive relating to inten-
sive rearing installations referred to in point 6.6. of Annex I
to the directive in the legislation of the Länder of Burgenland,
Salzburg and the Tyrol,

the Republic of Austria has failed to fulfil its obligations under
Articles 2(4), 9(3) to (5) of and Annex IV to the abovementioned
directive, and under Article 1 of that directive, read in conjunction
with points 1.1 and 6.6 of Annex I to the directive;

2. Orders the Republic of Austria to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 94 of 17.4.2004.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

of 18 November 2004

in Case C-79/04 Commission of the European Commu-
nities v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Direc-
tive 2002/40/EC — Failure to transpose within the prescribed
period)

(2005/C 6/36)

(Language of the case: French)

In Case C-79/04 Commission of the European Communities
(Agents: M. Patakia and B. Schima) v Grand Duchy of Luxem-

boug (Agent: S. Schreiner) – action under Article 226 EC for
failure to fulfil obligations, brought on 19 February 2004 – the
Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of: R. Silva de Lapuerta, Presi-
dent of the Chamber, C. Gulmann and J. Makarczyk (Rappor-
teur), Judges; P. Léger, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar,
gave a judgment on 18 November 2004, in which it:

regulations and administrative provisions necessary

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed period, the
laws,
to
comply with Commission Directive 2002/40/EC of 8 May 2002
implementing Council Directive 92/75/EEC with regard to energy
labelling of household electric ovens, the Grand Duchy of Luxem-
bourg has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

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

(1) OJ C 85 of 3.4.2004.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fourth Chamber)

of 18 November 2004

in Case C-116/04 Commission of the European Commu-
nities v Kingdom of Sweden (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Direc-
tive 2001/17/EC — Reorganisation and winding up of insur-
to transpose within the
ance undertakings — Failure

prescribed period)

(2005/C 6/37)

(Language of the case: Swedish)

In Case C-116/04 Commission of the European Communities
(Agents: E. Traversa and K. Simonsson) v Kingdom of Sweden
(Agent: A. Kruse) – action under Article 226 EC for failure to
fulfil obligations, brought on 4 March 2004 – the Court
(Fourth Chamber), composed of: J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, acting
for the President of the Fourth Chamber, M. Ilešič (Rapporteur)
and E. Levits,
Judges; L.A. Gellhoed, Advocate General; R.
Grass, Registrar, gave a judgment on 18 November 2004, in
which it: