Case C-92/05: Action brought on 21 February 2005 by the Commission of the European Communities against the French Republic
Date: 2005-04-02
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, France, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, bovine spongiform encephalopathy, material of animal origin, pharmaceutical legislation, pharmaceutical product, public health

C 82/26

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

2.4.2005

1. Is Directive 70/156/EEC on type-approval, (1) as amended
by Council Directive 92/53/EEC of 18 June 1992, (2) imple-
mented in German law in the EG-TypV (Verordnung über
die EG-Typgenehmigung für Fahrzeuge und Fahrzeugteile
(Regulation on EC type-approval of vehicles and vehicle
components) of 9 December 1994, most recently amended
on 7 February 2004), to be interpreted as meaning that the
driver of a motor vehicle whose vehicle has been registered
as a passenger car in accordance with a vehicle authorisa-
tion based on EC type-approval is also entitled to use that
vehicle, as an authorised vehicle type, on the public
highway, and in particular is the driver of such a motor
vehicle also subject only to the speed requirements applic-
able to passenger cars?

2. May the authorities responsible for prosecuting road traffic
offences declare that the vehicle authorisations in accord-
ance with EC type-approval issued by the Kraftfahrt-Bunde-
samt (Federal Office for Motor Vehicles) and the registra-
tions issued by the German registration authorities based on
these EC type-approvals are not decisive when establishing
the speed requirements to be complied with by the driver of
such a vehicle type?

(1) Council Directive 70/156/EEC of 6 February 1970 on the approxi-
mation of the laws of the Member States relating to the type-
approval of motor vehicles and their trailers (OJ, English Special
Edition 1970 (I), p. 96).

(2) Council Directive 92/53/EEC of 18 June 1992 amending Directive

70/156/EEC (OJ 1992 L 225, p. 1).

Action brought on 18 February 2005 by the Commission
of the European Communities against the Grand Duchy of
Luxembourg

The Commission of the European Communities

Having put the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg on notice to
submit its observations and having issued a reasoned opinion
on 7 July 2004 and regard being had to the reply of the
government of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, registered at
the Secretariat General on 13 October 2004,

Claims that the Court should:

1. declare that, by not observing the six-month period for
refunds of VAT to taxable persons established within the
country, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to fulfil
its obligations under Article 7(4) of Eighth Council Directive
79/1072/EEC of 6 December 1979, (1)

2. order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

law,

The Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, whilst having correctly
is not in practice
transposed the directive into national
observing the six-month period provided for in Article 7(4) for
the refund of VAT to taxable persons not established within
the country. In fact refunds made by the Luxembourg authori-
ties are systematically paid with considerable delays. Moreover,
Luxembourg legislation does not provide for interest on late
payment to offset damage suffered as a result of those delays.

(1) Eighth Council Directive 79/1072/EEC of 6 December 1979 on the
harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover
taxes – Arrangements for the refund of value added tax to taxable
persons not established in the territory of the country.

(Case C-90/05)

(2005/C 82/52)

(Language of the case: French)

Action brought on 21 February 2005 by the Commission
of the European Communities against the French Republic

(Case C-92/05)

(2005/C 82/53)

(Language of the case: French)

An action against
the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg was
brought before the Court of Justice of the European Commu-
nities on 18 February 2005 by the Commission of the Euro-
pean Communities,
represented by Dimitris Triantafyllou,
acting as Agent, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

An action against the French Republic was brought before the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 21 February
2005 by the Commission of the European Communities, repre-
sented by Bruno Stromsky and Bernhard Schima, acting as
Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

2.4.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 82/27

The Commission claims that the Court should:

3. order the French Republic to pay the costs.

1. declare that by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and
comply with
provisions necessary
administrative
Commission Directive 2003/32/EC of 23 April 2003 intro-
ducing detailed specifications as regards the requirements
laid down in Council Directive 93/42/EEC with respect to
medical devices manufactured utilising tissues of animal
origin, (1) the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obliga-
tions under that directive;

to

2.

in the alternative, declare that by failing to notify the
Commission of those provisions, the French Republic has
failed to fulfil its obligations under Directive 2003/32/EC;

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period for transposition of the directive into national law
expired on 1 January 2004.

(1) OJ No L 105, 26.04.2003, p. 18.