Case C-323/05: Action brought on 24 August 2005 by the Commission of the European Communities against the United Kingdom
Date: 2005-10-29
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, United Kingdom, consumer protection, product safety

29.10.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 271/15

Pleas in law and main arguments

Action brought on 24 August 2005 by the Commission of
the European Communities against the United Kingdom

1. The first plea concerns the infringement of the defendant's
right to adduce evidence relevant to the defence, which is
subsumed within the right to a fair hearing enshrined in
Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights; it
also raises a plea concerning the legally erroneous appraisal
of the evidence actually adduced.

That right was alleged to have been infringed by the refusal
to allow various items of documentary evidence which were
essential for substantiating the action for annulment; the
defendant's essential pleas were not upheld precisely because
they were not supported or evidenced. Likewise, The Court
of First Instance is alleged to have distorted or disregarded
the clear sense of evidence essential for underpinning the
application for annulment.

the EC Treaty on the ground that

2. The second plea concerns the infringement of Article 253
of
the statement of
reasons on which the contested Decision was based was, in
regard to essential aspects, inadequate. In particular, in rela-
tion to the essential question raised in the complaints which
gave rise to the aforementioned decision concerning the
lack of any contractual basis for the payments made to
Transmediterránea in order to offset personnel restructuring
costs.

3. The third plea concerns the infringement of Article 88 EC
and Article 19 of Regulation No 659/1999. It is alleged that
the actual measures contained in the Commission Decision
of 3 December 1997 adopted in relation to the contract for
the provision of maritime services entered into between
Transmediterránea and the Kingdom of Spain in 1978
entailed the abolition of the State aid scheme contained
therein and precluded its continuance in relation to the
Canary Isles lines.

4. The fourth plea concerns the infringement of Article 86(2)
of the EC Treaty, in conjunction with the infringement of
Article 173 thereof, inasmuch as the Court of First Instance
exceeded its competences in determining the application for
review and confirming the validity of the contested decision
of its own motion as an appellate court. A plea is also
raised concerning the infringement of Article 263 of the
Treaty.

In fact, in the contested judgment the Court of First Instance
confirmed the validity of certain compensation for the
performance of public service obligations; in doing so, not
only did it disregard the terms of Article 86(2) of the Treaty
and the case-law interpreting that provision (since the
requirements contained in that provision governing the
validity of
it also
exceeded its competences in basing that determination on
justificatory grounds differing from those contained in the
Decision and which, as a result of
the allegations and
evidence put forward, have been shown to be fraught with
uncertainty.

the payments were not

fulfilled) but

(1) OJ 2002, C 96, p. 4

(Case C-323/05)

(2005/C 271/28)

(Language of the case: English)

An action against the United Kingdom was brought before the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 24 August
2005 by the Commission of the European Communities, repre-
sented by Antonio Aresu and Nicola Yerrell, acting as Agents,
with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The Commission claims that the Court should:

1. find that

the United Kingdom has failed its obligations
under the EC Treaty by failing to adopt all the laws, regula-
tions and administrative provisions necessary to comply
with Directive 2001/95/EC of 3 December 2001 on general
product safety (1) and/or by failing to inform the Commis-
sion thereof;

2. condemn the United Kingdom to bear the costs of the

procedure.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period within which the directive had to be transposed
expired on 15 January 2004.

(1) OJ L 11, 15.01.2002, p. 4

Appeal brought on 26 August 2005 by Industrias
Químicas del Vallés, SA against the judgment delivered on
28 June 2005 by the Second Chamber of the Court of First
Instance in Case T-158/03 between Industrias Químicas
the European
del Vallés, SA and the Commission of

Communities

(Case C-326/05 P)

(2005/C 271/29)

(Language of the case: Spanish)

An appeal against the judgment delivered on 28 June 2005 by
the Second Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the Euro-
pean Communities
in Case T-158/03 between Industrias
Químicas del Vallés, SA and the Commission of the European
Communtiies was brought before the Court of Justice of the
European Communities on 26 August 2005 by Industrias
Químicas del Vallés, SA, represented by C. Fernández Vicién, I.
Moreno-Tapia Rivas and J. Sabater Marotias, abogados.