Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of  15 December 2005  in Case C-344/03: Commission of the European Communities v Republic of Finland (Directive 79/409/EEC — Conservation of wild birds — Spring hunting of certain aquatic birds)
Date: 2006-02-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Finland, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, bird, environmental protection, fishing regulations

25.2.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 48/3

the Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its obligations
under Article 6(3) and Articles 12, 13 and 16 of Directive
92/43.

3. Orders the Commission of European Communities, the European
Parliament and the Council of the European Union to bear their
own costs;

2. Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs.

4. Orders the French Republic,

the Republic of Finland and the
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to bear
their own costs.

(1) OJ C 146 of 21.06.2003.

(1) OJ C 146 of 21.06.2003.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Second Chamber)

of 10 January 2006

in Case C-178/03: Commission of the European Commu-
nities v European Parliament and Council of the European
Union (1)

(Action for annulment — Regulation (EC) No 304/2003 of
the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January
2003 concerning the export and import of dangerous chemi-
cals — Choice of legal basis — Articles 133 EC and 175 EC)

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Second Chamber)

of 15 December 2005

in Case C-344/03: Commission of the European Commu-
nities v Republic of Finland (1)

(Directive 79/409/EEC — Conservation of wild birds —
Spring hunting of certain aquatic birds)

(2006/C 48/05)

(Language of the case: English)

(2006/C 48/06)

(Language of the case: Finnish)

In Case C-178/03, action for annulment under Article 230 EC,
brought on 24 April 2003, Commission of
the European
Communities (Agent: G.zur Hausen, L. Strom van Lier and E.
Righini) v European Parliament (Agents: C. Pennera and M.
Moore and K. Bradley) and Council of the European Union
(Agents: B. Hoff-Nielsen and M. Sims-Robertson, and K.
Michoel),.supported by:French Republic (Agents: G. de Bergues,
F. Alabrune and E. Puisais), Republic of Finland (Agent: T.
Pynnä,), United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
(Agent: R. Caudwell, and A. Dashwood) — the Court (Second
Chamber), composed of C.W.A. Timmermans, President of the
Chamber, J. Makarczyk, C. Gulmann, P. Kūris and J. Klučka,
J. Kokott, Advocate General; L. Hewlett, Principal
Judges;
Administrator,
for the Registrar, gave a judgment on 10
January 2006, in which it:

1. Annuls Regulation (EC) No 304/2003 of the European Parlia-
ment and of the Council of 28 January 2003 concerning the
export and import of dangerous chemicals;

2. Maintains the effects of that regulation until the adoption, within
a reasonable period, of a new regulation founded on appropriate
legal bases;

In Case C-344/03, Commission of the European Communities
(Agents: G. Valero Jordana and P. Aalto) v Republic of Finland
(Agent: T. Pynnä) — action under Article 226 EC for failure to
fulfil obligations, brought on 1 August 2003 — the Court
(Second Chamber), composed of C.W.A. Timmermans, Presi-
dent of the Chamber, C. Gulmann (Rapporteur), R. Schintgen,
G. Arestis and J. Klučka, Judges; D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer, Advo-
cate General; K. Sztranc, Administrator, for the Registrar, gave
a judgment on 15 December 2005, in which it:

1. Declares that, since it has failed to establish that, in the context of
the spring hunting of aquatic birds in mainland Finland and the
province of Åland:

— the condition laid down in Article 9(1)(c) of Council Directive
79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild
birds, as amended by the Act concerning the conditions of
accession of the Republic of Austria, the Republic of Finland
and the Kingdom of Sweden and the adjustments to the Trea-
ties on which the European Union is founded, for the purpose
of a derogation, that there be no satisfactory solution other
than spring hunting, was fulfilled in respect of eider, golden-
eye, red-breasted merganser, goosander, velvet scoter and tufted
duck; and that

C 48/4

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

25.2.2006

— the condition laid down in that same provision for the purpose
of a derogation, relating to the fact that hunting must concern
only the taking of birds in small numbers, was fulfilled in
respect of eider, goosander, red-breasted merganser and velvet
scoter;

the Republic of Finland has failed to fulfil its obligations under
that directive;

2. Dismisses the remainder of the action;

3. Orders the Republic of Finland to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 226 of 20.09.2003.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Grand Chamber)

of 10 January 2006

in Case C-402/03: Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Vestre Landsret in Skov Æg v Bilka Lavprisvarehus A/
S and Bilka Lavprisvarehus A/S v Jette Mikkelsen, Michael
Due Nielsen (1)

(Directive 85/374/EEC — Liability for defective products —
Liability of the supplier of a defective product)

(2006/C 48/07)

(Language of the case: Danish)

In Case C-402/03: reference for a preliminary ruling under
Article 234 EC from the Vestre Landsret (Denmark), made by
decision of 26 September 2003, received at
the Court on
29 September 2003, in the proceedings between Skov Æg and
Bilka Lavprisvarehus A/S and between Bilka Lavprisvarehus A/S
and Jette Mikkelsen, Michael Due Nielsen — the Court (Grand
Chamber),
Jann
(Rapporteur), C.W.A. Timmermans, A. Rosas, K. Schiemann
and J. Makarczyk, Presidents of Chambers, C. Gulmann, J.N.
Cunha Rodrigues, R. Silva de Lapuerta, K. Lenaerts, P. Kūris, E.
Juhász and G. Arestis, Judges; L.A. Geelhoed, Advocate General;
H. von Holstein, Deputy Registrar, for the Registrar, gave a
judgment on 10 January 2006, in which it ruled:

composed of V. Skouris, President, P.

Council Directive 85/374/EEC of 25 July 1985 on the approxima-
tion of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the
Member States concerning liability for defective products must be
interpreted as:

— precluding a national rule under which the supplier is answerable,
beyond the cases listed exhaustively in Article 3(3) of the directive,
for
liability which the directive establishes and
imposes on the producer;

the no-fault

— not precluding a national rule under which the supplier is answer-
able without restriction for the producer's fault-based liability.

(1) OJ C 304 of 13.12.2003.

Judgment of the Court

(First Chamber)

of 15 December 2005

in Case C-26/04: Commission of the European Commu-
nities v Kingdom of Spain (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Directive
76/160/EEC — Quality of bathing waters — Designation as
bathing areas — Directive 79/923/EEC — Quality of shell-
fish waters — Establishment of a pollution reduction
programme)

(2006/C 48/08)

(Language of the case: Spanish)

In Case C-26/04, action under Article 226 EC for failure to
fulfil obligations, brought on 27 January 2004, Commission
of the European Communities (Agent: M.G.Valero Jordana) v
Kingdom of Spain (Agent: M.E. Braquehais Conesa) — the
Court (First Chamber), composed of P. Jann, President of the
J.N. Cunha Rodrigues
Chamber, K. Schiemann, N. Colneric,
Jacobs, Advocate
(Rapporteur) and E. Levits,
General; R. Grass, Registrar, gave a judgment on 15 December
2005, in which it:

Judges; F.G.

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt a pollution reduction programme
for the shellfish waters of the Ría de Vigo, the Kingdom of Spain
has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 5 of Council Direc-
tive 79/923/EEC of 30 October 1979 on the quality required of
shellfish waters;

2. Dismisses the remainder of the action;

3. Orders the Commission of the European Communities and the

Kingdom of Spain to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 71 of 20.03.2004.