Case C-508/04: Action brought on 8 December 2004 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Republic of Austria
Date: 2005-02-19
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Austria, European Commission, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, environmental protection

19.2.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 45/17

In the view of the Commission, the following were not fully
and/or not correctly implemented for the territory of individual
federal Länder: the provisions concerning the scope of Directive
79/409 (Article 1(1) and (2) of the Directive); the general rules
governing the protection of bird species (Article 5 of the Direc-
tive); the ban on trade (Article 6(1) of the Directive); the provi-
sions governing hunting of
the species listed in Annex II
(Article 7(1) of the Directive); the rules governing the preserva-
tion of populations (Article 7(4) of the Directive); the rules
governing prohibited methods and equipment for hunting and
capturing wild birds (Article 8 of the Directive); the criteria
governing derogations from Articles 5 to 8 (Article 9(1) and (2)
of the Directive); and the provisions on the introduction of
wild bird species (Article 11 of the Directive).

(1) OJ 1979 L 103, p. 1.

Action brought on 8 December 2004 by the Commission
of the European Communities against the Republic of
Austria

(Case C-508/04)

(2005/C 45/31)

(Language of the case: German)

Justice of

An action against the Republic of Austria was brought before
the European Communities on 8
the Court of
December 2004, by the Commission of
the European
Communities, represented by M. Van Beek and B. Schima
acting as Agents, assisted by M. Lang, lawyer, with an address
for service in Luxembourg.

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

1. Declare that the Republic of Austria has failed to fulfil its
obligation to transpose, correctly and completely, Council
Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 (1) on the conserva-
tion of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora by not
transposing, correctly and completely, Articles 1, 6(1) to (4),
7, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16(1) and 22(b) of that directive into
Austrian law.

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

Pleas in law and main arguments

means of the relevant legal provisions of the provinces of
Carinthia, Niederösterreich, Oberösterreich, Salzburg, Steier-
mark, Tyrol and Vorarlberg notified to the Commission or to
its knowledge adopted.

In the Commission's view, the following provisions concerning
federal provinces have not been completely or
individual
correctly transposed: Definitions (Article 1 of the directive);
necessary conservation measures (Article 6(1)); prohibition on
deterioration (Article 6(2)); plans or projects which could have
serious implications for special areas of conservation (Article
6(3) and (4)); in regard to the system of protection under the
‘wild birds’ Directive 79/409/EEC (Article 7); surveillance of
conservation status (Article 11); system of protection for
animal species listed in Annex 1V(a) (Article 12); system of
protection for plant species listed in Annex IV(b) (Article 13);
prohibited means of capture and killing (Article 15); criteria for
derogation from Articles 12 to 15 (Article 16(1)); deliberate
introduction of non-native species (Article 22(b)).

(1) OJ 1992 L 206, p. 7.

Action brought on 14 December 2004 by the Commission
the Portuguese
of

the European Communities against

Republic

(Case C-511/04)

(2005/C 45/32)

(Language of the case: Portuguese)

Justice of

An action against the Portuguese Republic was brought before
the Court of
the European Communities on 14
December 2004 by the Commission of the European Commu-
nities, represented by R. Vidal Puig, acting as Agent, with an
address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— Declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and
administrative provisions needed to implement Commission
Directive 2000/56/EC (1) of 14 September 2000, which
amends Council Directive 91/439/EEC on driving licences,
and in any event by failing to give notice thereof to the
Commission, the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its
obligations under that directive;

By this application the Commission is challenging the defective
transposition into Austrian law of Directive 92/43/EEC by

— Order the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.