Case C-293/05: Action brought on 20 July 2005 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Italian Republic
Date: 2005-09-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Italy, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, wastewater, water treatment

17.9.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 229/9

ment debtor (= the defendant in the original proceedings)
on notice not only of the existence of that judgment but
also of the availability of a legal remedy under the legal
order of the State in which the judgment was delivered, so
that it would be aware as a result of the possibility of chal-
lenging the judgment which is a prior condition for the
applicability of
the exception to the bar to recognition
under Article 34(2) of the Regulation?

latter is required only to repay the wrongly granted aid
within the meaning of Article 4(1) of that Regulation?

(1) OJ L 312, p. 1.

(1) OJ 2001 L 12, p. 1.

Action brought on 20 July 2005 by the Commission of the
European Communities against the Italian Republic

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungs-
gerichtshof Baden-Württemberg by order of that court of
30 June 2005 in Reinhold Haug v Land Baden-Württem-
berg

(Case C-293/05)

(2005/C 229/19)

(Language of the case: Italian)

(Case C-286/05)

(2005/C 229/18)

An action against the Italian Republic was brought before the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 20 July 2005
by the Commission of the European Communities, represented
by Sara Pardo Quintillan and Donatella Recchia, of its Legal
Service.

(Language of the case: German)

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the Euro-
the Verwaltungsgerichtshof
pean Communities by order of
Baden-Württemberg of 30 June 2005, received at the Court
Registry on 18 July 2005,
for a preliminary ruling in the
proceedings between Reinhold Haug and Land Baden-Württem-
berg on the following question:

1. Does the second sentence of Article 2(2) of Council Regu-
lation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/1995 apply even if in the
context of an irregularity within the meaning of Article 1(2)
that Regulation only the reimbursement of wrongly
of
granted aid is sought
(Article 4(1) of Regulation (EC,
Euratom) No 2988/1995 (1) and, because of a provision of
Community law that later comes into force, the amount of
wrongly granted aid to be reimbursed would be lower than
under the provisions of Community law in force at the time
that the irregularity was committed?

If the answer to the first question should be in the affirma-
tive:

1. declare that, by failing to take measures to ensure that, as
from 31 December 1998, urban waste water from the
agglomeration of several communes of
the Province of
Varese situated in the basin of the River Olona is subject to
more stringent treatment than the secondary treatment or
equivalent treatment provided for in Article 4 of Directive
91/271/EEC, (1) the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its
obligations under Article 5(2) of that directive, referred to in
Article 5(5) thereof;

2. order the Italian Republic to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The Commission does not challenge the failure to designate the
basin which drains the southern Lambro-Olona area as a sensi-
tive area,
inasmuch as appropriate infringement proceedings
are pending for that purpose. However, that drainage basin is
part of an area situated within the Po basin, which has been
officially designated a sensitive area.

2. Does the second sentence of Article 2(2) of Council Regu-
lation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/1995 also apply with regard
to the rules governing payment of interest if no administra-
tive penalties within the meaning of Article 5(1) of that
Regulation are imposed on the farmer concerned and the

Accordingly, pursuant
to Article 5(5) of Directive 91/271,
which refers to Article 5(2) thereof, water from the agglomera-
tion in the Province of Varese situated in the basin of the River
Olona should have been subject to more stringent treatment
than secondary treatment since 31 December 1998.

C 229/10

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

17.9.2005

Despite the passing of that time-limit, the agglomeration of the
Varese area has, up to the present day, still not been provided
with purification plants to ensure that the waste water from
that agglomeration is treated in accordance with Article 5(2) of
Directive 91/271/EEC.

(1) Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning urban

waste-water treatment (OJ L 135 of 30.05.1991, p. 40).

Article 11(3) of Legislative Decree No 231/2002 (the measure
implementing Directive 2000/35/EC in Italian law) provides
that the retention of title clause will be enforceable against
creditors of the purchaser only if that clause is confirmed on
individual
for successive supplies bearing a date
certain prior
to the attachment and duly entered in the
accounting records.

invoices

Action brought on 28 July 2005 by the Commission of the
European Communities against Italian Republic

(Case C-302/05)

(2005/C 229/20)

(Language of the case: Italian)

An action against the Italian Republic was brought before the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 28 July 2005
by the Commission of the European Communities, represented
by B. Schima and D. Recchia, of its Legal Service.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

1. Find that, by providing that the retention of title clause
invoices for successive
must be confirmed on individual
supplies bearing a date certain prior to the attachment and
duly entered in accounting records in order to be enforce-
able against creditors of the purchaser, the Italian Republic
has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 4(1) of Direc-
tive 2000/35/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 29 June 2000 on combating late payment in
commercial transactions;

2. Order the Italian Republic to pay the costs.

Enforceability against creditors of the purchaser constitutes an
essential element of the agreement for retention of title. The
conditions laid down by Article 11(3) of Decree No 231/2002
create a series of additional obligations for the vendor over and
above
those provided for by Article 4(1) of Directive
2000/35/EC. The Commission therefore considers that those
of Directive
conditions
2000/35/EC.

to Article

contrary

4(1)

are

(1) OJ L 200 of 8.8.2000, p. 35.

Action brought on 29 July 2005 by Commission of the
European Communities against the Italian Republic

(Case C-304/05)

(2005/C 229/21)

(Language of the case: Italian)

An action against the Italian Republic was brought before the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 29 July 2005
by Commission of the European Communities, represented by
M. van Beek and D. Recchia, of its Legal Service.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Pleas in law and main arguments

Article 4(1) of Directive 2000/35/EC provides that, to ensure
retention of title to goods until they are fully paid for, the
buyer and the seller must make an agreement to that effect
before the delivery of the goods.

1. Declare that, in relation to the project for the extension and
improvement of the Santa Caterina Valfurva ski area (the
‘Bucaneve’ and ‘Edelweiss’ pistes) and for provision of the
corresponding ski facilities, with a view to the holding of
the 2005 world Alpine ski championships in SPA IT
2040044 Parco Nazionale dello Stelvio, by having: