Case C-179/05: Action brought on 21 April 2005 by the Commission of the European Communities against the French Republic
Date: 2005-06-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, France, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, catch by species, disclosure of information, exchange of information, fishing controls

C 155/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

25.6.2005

or, on the contrary, having regard to the general principle of
equality and non-discrimination, is the inequality in treatment
created by Article 33.2 of the Workers' Statute and by the
interpretation made of that provision by the Tribunal Supremo
not objectively justified and, consequently, must compensation
for dismissal be included where it
is payable to a worker
pursuant to judicial conciliation within the ambit of Council
Directive 80/987/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the
Member States relating to the protection of employees in the
event of
in the version
amended by Directive 2002/74/EC of the European Parliament
and of the Council of 23 September 2002?

the insolvency of

their employer,

(1) OJ L 238 of 28.10.1980, p. 23.
(2) OJ L 270 of 8.10.2002, p. 10.

Action brought on 19 April 2005 by the Commission of
the European Communities against the Hellenic Republic

(Case C-178/05)

(2005/C 155/15)

(Language of the case: Greek)

An action against the Hellenic Republic was brought before the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 19 April
2005 by the Commission of the European Communities, repre-
sented by Dimitrios Triantafillou, with an address for service in
Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

1. declare

its

that, as a result of

legislative provisions
concerning the imposition of duty on the transfer of regis-
tered offices and the transfer of effective centres of manage-
ment and concerning the exemption from that duty of all
cooperative agricultural organisations of whatever level, of
associations and consortia thereof of any kind, of co-owner-
ship of vessels, of shipping consortia, and of shipping
companies of every kind, the Hellenic Republic has failed to
fulfil its obligations under Directive 69/335/EEC; (1)

fied as a capital company in the State of origin, with the result
that duty is not imposed when the Member State of origin does
not consider a company to be a capital company. The Commis-
sion therefore objects to the fact that the Greek legislation
ascribes importance only to whether or not capital duty is
imposed in the State of origin, exempting from duty only the
transfer to Greece of a registered office or effective centre of
management from a Member State which imposes capital duty.
The Commission's view is based on a both literal and systemic
interpretation of the directive, which is related to the nature as
capital companies of the companies liable for duty and is rein-
forced by the
about by Directive
amendment brought
85/303/EEC which moves towards abolition of capital duty.

As regards the exemption of agricultural cooperatives and ship-
ping companies, categories covering entire branches of the
economy are involved; the Greek authorities have not explained
why those categories do not comprise capital companies and
their total exemption is not covered by the power under the
directive to exempt certain transactions. Furthermore, where
the directive intended to exempt whole branches it did so
expressly (for example, public undertakings and organisations).

(1) OJ, English Special Edition 1969 (II), p. 412.

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

(Case C-179/05)

(2005/C 155/16)

(Language of the case: French)

An action against the French Republic was brought before the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 21 April
2005 by the Commission of the European Communities, repre-
sented by M. Nolin, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

2. order the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.

The Commission claims that the Court should:

Pleas in law and main arguments of the Commission

The Commission submits that the relevant criterion for imposi-
tion of duty on the transfer of the registered office or effective
centre of management is whether or not the company is classi-

1. declare that, by failing to provide the Commission with the
information required under Article 18(1) and the first and
third indents of Article 19i of Regulation No 2847/93 (1),
the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under
that regulation;

2. order the French Republic to pay the costs.

25.6.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 155/9

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

— With regard to the information required under Article
18(1) of Regulation No 2847/93, the French authorities
have still not provided this for 1999 or 2000. Moreover,
information has been
for
provided late.

the subsequent years,

that

— With regard to the information required under Article 19i
of Regulation No 2847/93, the French authorities have not
provided this for 1999, 2000, 2001 or 2002. Nor has that
information has been provided for subsequent years.

(1) Council Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 of 12 October 1993 estab-
lishing a control system applicable to the common fisheries policy
(OJ L 261, 20.10.1993, p. 1).

Action brought on 22 April 2005 by Commission of the
European Communities against the Hellenic Republic

(Case C-182/05)

(2005/C 155/17)

(Language of the case: Greek)

1. After the Commission received a complaint on the matter
and on the basis of information from Greece (various letters
from the Ministry of Development and from the Energy
Regulatory Authority) concerning the requirement that sepa-
should be published by the integrated
rate accounts
company ‘Dimosia Epikhirisi Elektrismou’ [Public Electricity
Undertaking] (DEE), in accordance with Article 14 of Direc-
tive 96/92/EC of
the
Council of 19 December 1996 concerning common rules
for the internal market in electricity (OJ 1997 L 27 p. 20),
the Commission formed the view that Greece had infringed
the provisions of that article.

the European Parliament and of

2. The Commission considers that the publication of common
accounts for DEE's activities of electricity production and
lignite mining and the failure to separate those two activities
constitute an infringement of the requirements of Article
14(3) of Directive 96/92/EC,

3. In the Commission's view, despite the existence of DEE's
internal accounting system under which, as is required, its
separated from its electricity
lignite mining activity is
production activity,
such separation needs also to be
reflected in DEE's published accounts. The Commission
points out that the efforts of the Greek authorities have not
so far succeeded in bringing about the requisite result. The
submission of information to the Regulatory Authority as
regards separate accounts does not suffice to satisfy the
requirement of publication.

(1) OJ L 27 of 30.01.1997, p. 20.

An action against the Hellenic Republic was brought before the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 22 April
2005 by the Commission of the European Communities, repre-
sented by Maria Patakia, Legal Adviser in the Commission's
Legal Service and Bernhard Schima, a member of that service,
with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— declare that, by not ensuring publication by the Dimosia
Epikhirisi Elektrismou of separate annual accounts for its
activities of lignite mining and electricity production, the
Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under
Article 14 of Directive 96/92/EC (1)of the European Parlia-
ment and of the Council of 19 December 1996 concerning
common rules for the internal market in electricity;

— order the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.

Action brought on 28 April 2005 by the Commission of
the Portuguese
the European Communities

against

Republic

(Case C-191/05)

(2005/C 155/18)

(Language of the case: Portuguese)

An action against the Portuguese Republic was brought before
the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 28 April
2005 by the Commission of the European Communities, repre-
sented by Michel van Beek and António Caeiros, acting as
Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg.