Case C-248/05: Action brought on 14 June 2005 by Commission of the European Communities against Ireland
Date: 2005-08-20
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Ireland, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, environmental protection, groundwater, waste disposal, water pollution

20.8.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 205/9

2. What is the effect on that protection regime if the said sites
already appear on the list of national recommendations
submitted to the Commission under Article 4(1) of Directive
92/43/EEC?

Commission of the European Communities, represented by Ms
Sara Pardo Quintillán and Ms Donatella Recchia, acting as
Agents, assisted by F. Louis of the Brussels bar and C. O'Daly,
Solicitor of the Law Society of Ireland, with an address for
service in Luxembourg.

3. Is a national protection regime for the said sites under
the Bavarian Naturschutzgesetz (Nature
Article 48(2) of
Conservancy Law) sufficient to satisfy the requirements of
Community law under Article 3(1) of Directive 92/43/EEC
in conjunction with the sixth recital in the preamble to that
Directive in the light of the prohibition on frustrating the
objectives of the Treaty laid down in Article 10(2) of the EC
Treaty?

Article 48(2) of the Bavarian Naturschutzgesetz is worded as
follows:

‘Until such time as regulations are brought in under Part III
the institutes for nature conservation having authority under
Article 45 or agencies for the provisional safeguarding of
areas of conservation and objects meriting protection may
bring in general or specific regulations imposing the bans
on changes provided for under Part III for a period of up to
two years if it is feared that the purpose of the intended
protective measure would be adversely affected by changes;
if special circumstances so require,
the period may be
extended for a maximum of one further year. The measure
may not be brought in unless the competent institute for
nature conservation or agency instigates procedure for defi-
nitive protection at the same time or immediately there-
after.’

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

Action brought on 14 June 2005 by Commission of the
European Communities against Ireland

(Case C-248/05)

(2005/C 205/17)

(Language of the case: English)

An action against Ireland was brought before the Court of
Justice of the European Communities on 14 June 2005 by the

The applicant claims that the Court should:

1. declare that, in failing to take all the measures necessary to
comply with Articles 4, 5, 7, 9 and 10 of Council Directive
80/68/EEC (1) on the protection of groundwater against
pollution caused by certain dangerous substances at Bally-
murtagh landfill
Ireland has failed to
comply with this Directive and with its obligations under
the Treaty;

(County Wicklow),

2. declare that, in failing to take all the measures necessary to
comply with Articles 5, 7, 8, 10, 12, and 13 of Council
Directive 80/68/EEC with regard to indirect discharges from
septic tanks, Ireland has failed to comply with this Directive
and with its obligations under the Treaty; and

3. order Ireland to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

On the basis of complaints submitted to it, the Commission
has become aware of widespread breaches of Council Directive
80/68/EEC in Ireland.

First, since 1989 Ireland has permitted a municipal landfill to
operate at Ballymurtagh, Co. Wicklow without formal authori-
zation being granted as required under Article 4(2) of Directive
80/68. As a consequence of not complying with Article 4(2),
Article 9 of the same directive was also breached. In addition,
the waste licence covering the landfill site, granted by Ireland's
Environmental Protection Agency only in 2001, infringes Arti-
cles 4, 5, 7 and 10 of Directive 80/68/EEC.

the Commission has uncovered evidence demon-
Second,
strating that
Ireland has failed to comply with Directive
80/68/EEC in relation to indirect discharges into groundwater
from septic tanks. In this regard, the Commission has investi-
gated circumstances relating to a hotel premises at Creacon
Lodge, Co. Wexford, Ireland's longstanding interpretation of
Article 5(1) of Directive 80/68/EEC and wider breaches of the
same Directive throughout the Irish countryside. Reports on
eutrophication of the Lakes of Killarney, Co. Kerry, Irish official
of Directive
water
80/778/EEC (2) on the quality of water intended for human
consumption demonstrate Ireland's failure to comply with rele-
vant provisions of Directive 80/68/EEC.

pollution

breaches

reports,

and

C 205/10

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

20.8.2005

The Commission therefore considers that Ireland has failed to
fulfil its obligations under Articles 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12 and 13
of Council Directive 80/68/EEC on the protection of ground-
water against pollution caused by certain dangerous substances.

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Court of
Appeal (England and Wales), Civil Division, by order of
that court of 21 July 2004, in Talacre Beach Caravan Sales
Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise

(1) Council Directive 80/68/EEC of 17 December 1979 on the protec-
tion of groundwater against pollution caused by certain dangerous
substances, OJ L 20, 26.01.1980, p. 43.

(2) Council Directive 80/778/EEC of 15 July 1980 relating to the
quality of water intended for human consumption, OJ L 229,
30.08.1980, p. 11.

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht
Dusseldorf by order of that court of 6 June 2005 in Metro
International GmbH v Hauptzollamt Dusseldorf

(Case C-245/05)

(2005/C 205/18)

(Language of the case: German)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the Euro-
pean Communities by order of the Finanzgericht Dusseldorf of
6 June 2005, received at the Court Registry on 10 June 2005,
for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings between Metro
International GmbH and Hauptzollamt Dusseldorf on the
following question:

Is Council Regulation (EC) No 2398/97 invalid since the appli-
cation of the practice of
in determining weighted
‘zeroing’
average dumping margins (1) is referred to neither in the recitals
to Council Regulation (EC) No 2398/97 of 28 November 1997
imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of cotton-
type bed linen originating in Egypt, India and Pakistan nor in
the recitals to the preceding measure, that is to say Commission
Regulation (EC) No 1069/97 of 12 June 1997 imposing a
provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of cotton-type bed
linen originating in Egypt, India and Pakistan?

(1) OJ 1997 L 332, p. 1.

(Case C-251/05)

(2005/C 205/19)

(Language of the case: English)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the Euro-
pean Communities by order of the Court of Appeal (England
and Wales), Civil Division, of 21 July 2004, received at the
Court Registry on 14 June 2005, for a preliminary ruling in
the proceedings between Talacre Beach Caravan Sales Ltd and
Commissioners of Customs and Excise on the following ques-
tion:

Where a Member State has, pursuant to Article 28(2) (a) the
Sixth Council Directive (77/388/EEC) (1), by its domestic legisla-
tion exercised its right of derogation so as to zero-rate a supply
of specified goods but in the same legislation has identified
items that should not be included in the scope of the zero-
rating (‘excluded items’), does the fact that there is a single
supply of goods (together with the excluded items) preclude
the member state from charging VAT at the standard rate on
the supply of the excluded items?

(1) Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmo-
nization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes
– Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment
(OJ L 145, 13.06.1977, p. 1).