Case C-185/05: Action brought on 26 April 2005 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Italian Republic
Date: 2005-07-23
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Italy, accident prevention, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, dangerous substance, environmental risk prevention, exchange of information, industrial hazard, infringement of EU law, management audit, safety standard

23.7.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 182/23

Pleas in law and main arguments

The Commission maintains that Ireland has failed to comply
with Directive 92/43/EEC on the following grounds:

under which the operator of an establishment where
dangerous substances are present may commence activity
without the authority which has to give its views on the
safety report having expressly communicated the conclu-
sions of its examination of the safety report to the operator,

— The transposition of Article 12(2) of Directive 92/43/EEC
(the Habitats Directive) in Irish law is incomplete in so far
as it prohibits the keeping, transport and sale or exchange,
and offering for sale or exchange of species listed in Annex
IV(a) of
those animal
species that occur in Ireland.

the Directive only in respect of

by maintaining in force legislation such as that contained in
Article 21(3) of legislative decree No 344 of 1999, under
which, where the measures the operator plans to adopt for
the prevention and mitigation of major accidents are
seriously deficient, the competent authority is not required
to prohibit commencement of activity;

— The implementation of Article 12(1) of the Directive in
Ireland is incomplete in so far as Ireland has not adopted all
the specific measures necessary to effectively establish a
system of strict protection for the animal species listed in
Annex IV(a) that are found in Ireland.

— The transposition of Articles 12(1) and 16 of the Directive
is incorrect because there exists a parallel regime of deroga-
tions that is incompatible with the scope of and the condi-
tions for the application of Article 16 and which leads to a
violation by Ireland of its obligation under Article 12(1) to
establish and maintain a system of strict protection for
animal species listed in Annex IV(a) of the Directive.

(1) OJ L 206, 22.07.1992, p. 7

by failing to adopt binding legislation providing for inspec-
tions which allow a planned and systematic examination of
technical, organisational and management systems applied
in the establishment in question, so as to ensure that the
operator can demonstrate that he has adopted adequate
measures in the light of the activities carried out by the
establishment,
to prevent any relevant accidents and to
ensure that the operator can demonstrate that he has appro-
priate means of limiting the consequences of accidents on
and off site,

by failing to adopt
legislation providing for inspections
which ensure that the data and information contained in the
safety report or any other report submitted adequately
reflect the conditions in the establishment,

the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under
Article 9(4), Article 17(1) and the first, second and third
indents of Article 18(1) of Directive 96/82. (1)

Action brought on 26 April 2005 by the Commission of
the European Communities against the Italian Republic

2. order the Italian Republic to pay the costs.

(Case C-185/05)

(2005/C 182/43)

(Language of the case: Italian)

An action against the Italian Republic was brought before the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 26 April
2005 by the Commission of the European Communities, repre-
sented by B. Schima and F. Amato, of its Legal Service.

The Commission claims that the Court should:

1. declare that:

by maintaining in force legislation such as that contained in
Article 9(3) and (4) of legislative decree No 344 of 1999,

Pleas in law and main arguments

Council Directive 96/82/EC of 9 December 1996 on the
control of major-accident hazards
dangerous
involving
the operator of an establishment
substances provides that
where dangerous substances are present is required to submit a
safety report to the competent authority. The Italian Republic
transposed that directive by legislative decree No 334 of 17
August 1999.

The Commission takes the view, first, that under Article 9(4) of
the directive the operator may not commence activity in the
absence of express authorisation from the competent authority.

the

legislative decree

to
However,
commence activity without the competent authority having
expressly communicated the conclusions of its examination of
the safety report to the operator.

the operator

allows

C 182/24

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

23.7.2005

Then, according to Article 17(1) of the directive, the competent
authority is
the activity where the
measures the operator plans to adopt for the prevention and
mitigation of major accidents are seriously deficient.

required to prohibit

However, the legislative decree appears not to impose that
requirement on the competent authority.

(Higher Social Security Court) (Netherlands) of 22 April 2005,
received at the Court Registry on 29 April 2005, for a preli-
minary ruling in the proceedings between K. Tas-Hagen and
R.A. Tas and Raadskamer WUBO van de Pensioen- en Uitker-
ingsraad (Pension and Benefits Board Advisory Chamber on the
Law on Benefits for Civilian War Victims) on the following
question:

Finally, under Article 18(1) of the directive, the Member States
must adopt binding legislation providing for inspections which
allow a planned and systematic examination of technical, orga-
nisational and management systems applied in the establish-
ment in question, so as to ensure that the operator can demon-
strate that he has adopted adequate measures in the light of the
to prevent any
activities carried out by the establishment,
major accidents and to ensure that the operator can demon-
strate that he has appropriate means of limiting the conse-
quences of accidents on and off site. Under Article 18(1) of the
directive, again,
legislation
providing for inspections which ensure that the data and infor-
mation contained in the safety report or any other report
submitted adequately reflects the conditions in the establish-
ment.

the Member States must adopt

the legislative decree has not

However,
implemented those
provisions but merely referred to a later implementing decree
which to date has not yet been adopted.

the foregoing,

In the light of
the Commission
submits that the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obliga-
tions under Article 9(4), Article 17(1) and the first, second and
third indents of Article 18(1) of the directive.

therefore,

legislation under which,

in particular Article 18 EC, preclude
Does Community law,
national
in circumstances such as
those in the main proceedings, the grant of a benefit for civilian
war victims is refused solely on the ground that the person
concerned, who holds the nationality of the relevant Member
State, was resident, not in the territory of that Member State,
but in the territory of another Member State at the time when
the application was submitted?

Action brought on 2 May 2005 by the Commission of the
European Communities against the the Italian Republic

(Case C-194/05)

(2005/C 182/45)

(1) OJ 1997 L 10, 14. 1. 1997, p. 13

(Language of the case: Italian)

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Centrale Raad
van Beroep by order of that court of 22 April 2005 in K.
Tas-Hagen and R.A. Tas v Raadskamer WUBO van de
Pensioen- en Uitkeringsraad

(Case C-192/05)

(2005/C 182/44)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

An action against the Italian Republic was brought before the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 2 May 2005
by the Commission of the European Communities, represented
by M. Konstantinidis, of its Legal Service, and G. Bambara, of
the Milan Bar.

The Commission claims that the Court should:

1. declare that the Italian Republic, in so far as Article 10 of
Law No 93 of 2001 and Article 1(17) and (19) of Law No
443 of 2001 exclude excavated earth and rocks intended for
re-use for re-filling, infilling, embanking and grinding, with
the exception of materials from polluted sites and reclaimed
land with a concentration of pollutants above the acceptable
limits laid down by the applicable rules, from the scope of
national rules on waste, has failed to fulfil its obligations
under Article 1(a) of Council Directive 75/442/EEC (1) on
waste, as amended by Council Directive 91/156/EEC. (2)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the Euro-
pean Communities by order of the Centrale Raad van Beroep

2. order the the Italian Republic to pay the costs.