Case C-19/06: Action brought on  17 January 2006  by the Commission of the European Communities against the French Republic
Date: 2006-03-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, France, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, plant disease, plant health control, plant health legislation, protection of plant life

C 60/28

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

11.3.2006

Pleas in law and main arguments

Action brought on 17 January 2006 by the Commission of
the European Communities against the French Republic

This appeal is based on a single plea: infringement by the CFI
of Community law in paragraphs 26 to 48 of the judgment
under appeal. In particular, the appellant takes the view that
the CFI incorrectly interpreted the term ‘circumstances arising
from work done for another State’ used in the second indent of
Article 4(1)(a) of Annex VII of the Staff Regulations.

(Case C-18/06)

(2006/C 60/53)

(Language of the case: French)

Appeal brought on 9 January 2006 by Rafael De Busta-
mante Tello against the judgment of the Court of First
Instance (First Chamber) of 25 October 2005 in Case T-
368/03 Rafael De Bustamante Tello v Council of the Euro-
pean Union

(Case C-10/06 P)

(2006/C 60/52)

(Language of the case: Spanish)

An appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance
(First Chamber) of 25 October 2005 in Case T-368/03 Rafael
De Bustamante Tello v Council of the European Union was brought
before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 9
January 2006 by Rafael De Bustamante Tello, represented by R.
García-Gallardo Gil-Fournier, D. Domínguez Pérez and A. Saya-
gués Torres, lawyers.

An action against the French Republic was brought before the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 17 January
2006 by the Commission of the European Communities, repre-
sented by Michel Nolin, acting as Agent, with an address for
service in Luxembourg.

The Commission claims that the Court should:

to

1. declare that by not adopting the laws, regulations and
comply with
provisions necessary
administrative
Commission Directive 2004/103/EC of 7 October 2004 on
identity and plant health checks of plants, plant products or
other objects, listed in Part B of Annex V to Council Direc-
tive 2000/29/EC, which may be carried out at a place other
than the point of entry into the Community or at a place
close by and specifying the conditions related to these
checks (1) or, in any event, by not communicating the provi-
sions in question to the Commission, the French Republic
has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

2. order the French Republic to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period prescribed for transposition of the directive expired
on 31 December 2004.

The applicant claims that the Court of Justice should:

(1) OJ L 313 of 12.10.2004, p. 16.

(1) Declare this appeal admissible;

(2) Annul the judgment of the First Chamber of the Court of

First Instance of 25 October 2005;

(3) Order the Council to pay all the costs of the proceedings
before the Court of Justice and of those before the Court of
First Instance.

Pleas in law and main arguments

This appeal is based on a single plea: infringement by the CFI
of Community law in paragraphs 24 to 45 of the judgment
under appeal. In particular, the appellant takes the view that
the CFI incorrectly interpreted the term ‘circumstances arising
from work done for another State’ used in the second indent of
Article 4(1)(a) of Annex VII of the Staff Regulations.

Action brought on 17 January 2006 by the Commission of
the European Communities against the French Republic

(Case C-19/06)

(2006/C 60/54)

(Language of the case: French)

An action against the French Republic was brought before the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 17 January
2006 by the Commission of the European Communities, repre-
sented by Michel Nolin, acting as Agent, with an address for
service in Luxembourg.

11.3.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 60/29

The Commission claims that the Court should:

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period for transposition of Directive 2004/102 expired on
28 February 2005.

(1) OJ 2004 L 309, p. 9

1. declare that by not adopting the laws, regulations and
administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council
Directive 2002/89/EC of 28 November 2002 amending
Directive 2000/29/EC on protective measures against the
introduction into the Community of organisms harmful to
plants or plant products and against their spread within the
Community (1) or, in any event, by not communicating the
provisions in question to the Commission,
the French
Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that direc-
tive;

2. order the French Republic to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period prescribed for transposition of Directive 2002/89
expired on 31 December 2004.

Action brought on 17 January 2006 by the Commission of
the European Communities against the Grand Duchy of
Luxembourg

(1) OJ L 355 of 30.12.2002, p. 45.

Action brought on 17 January 2006 by the Commission of
the European Communities against the Grand Duchy of
Luxembourg

(Case C-20/06)

(2006/C 60/55)

(Language of the case: French)

An action against
the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg was
brought before the Court of Justice of the European Commu-
nities on 17 January 2006 by the Commission of the European
Communities, represented by Michel Nolin, acting as Agent,
with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The Commission claims that the Court should:

to

1. declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and
administrative
comply with
provisions necessary
Commission Directive 2004/102/EC of 5 October 2004
amending Annexes II, III, IV and V to Council Directive
2000/29/EC on protective measures against the introduction
into the Community of organisms harmful to plants or
plant products and against their spread within the Com-
munity (1) or, in any event, by failing to communicate those
provisions to the Commission, the Grand Duchy of Luxem-
bourg has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

2. order the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to pay the costs.

(Case C-21/06)

(2006/C 60/56)

(Language of the case: French)

An action against
the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg was
brought before the Court of Justice of the European Commu-
nities on 17 January 2006 by the Commission of the European
Communities, represented by Michel Nolin, acting as Agent,
with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The Commission claims that the Court should:

to

1. declare that by not adopting the laws, regulations and
comply with
administrative
provisions necessary
Commission Directive 2004/103/EC of 7 October 2004 on
identity and plant health checks of plants, plant products or
other objects, listed in Part B of Annex V to Council Direc-
tive 2000/29/EC, which may be carried out at a place other
than the point of entry into the Community or at a place
close by and specifying the conditions related to these
checks (1) or, in any event, by not communicating the provi-
sions in question to the Commission, the Grand Duchy of
its obligations under that
Luxembourg has failed to fulfil
directive;

2. order the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period prescribed for transposition of the directive expired
on 31 December 2004.

(1) OJ L 313 of 12.10.2004, p. 16.