Case C-332/04: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of  16 March 2006  — Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Spain (Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Directive 85/337/EEC as amended by Directive 97/11/EC — Assessment of the effects of projects on the environment — Inter-action between factors likely to be directly and indirectly affected — Obligation to publish the impact statement — Assessment limited to urban development projects outside urban areas — Construction project for a leisure complex at Paterna)
Date: 2006-06-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Spain, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, environmental impact, leisure park, national implementing measure, project evaluation, town planning

3.6.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 131/17

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 16 March 2006
— Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom
of Spain

of Directive 85/337, as amended by Directive 97/11,
the
Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under that
directive;

(Case C-332/04) (1)

2. The Kingdom of Spain is ordered to pay the costs.

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Direc-
tive 85/337/EEC as amended by Directive 97/11/EC —
Assessment of the effects of projects on the environment —
Inter-action between factors likely to be directly and indir-
ectly affected — Obligation to publish the impact statement
— Assessment limited to urban development projects outside
urban areas — Construction project for a leisure complex at
Paterna)

(1) OJ C 262 of 23.10.2004.

(2006/C 131/29)

Language of the case: Spanish

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 9 March 2006
(reference for a preliminary ruling from the Audiencia
Provincial de Barcelona) — Matratzen Concord AG v
Hukla Germany SA

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: G. Valero Jordana and F. Simonetti, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: M. Muñoz Perez,
acting as Agent)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Incom-
plete/incorrect
transposition of Arts. 3, 9(1) and Paragraph
10(b) of Annex II to Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June
1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and
private projects on the environment (OJ 1985 L 175, p. 40), as
amended by Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997 (OJ
1997 L 73, p. 5) — Failure to apply the transitional scheme
established by Article 3 of Directive 97/11/EC — Failure to
have submitted a construction project for a leisure complex at
Paterna (Valencia) for an assessment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to fully transpose Article 3 of Council
Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the
effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, as
amended by Council Directive 97/11, by failing to transpose
Article 9(1) of Directive 85/337, as amended by Directive
97/11, by failing to comply with the transitional scheme provided
for by Article 3 of Directive 97/11, by failing to correctly trans-
pose the combined provisions of Paragraph 10(b) of Annex II and
Articles 2(1) and 4(2) of Directive 85/337, as amended by
Directive 97/11, and by failing to submit the construction project
for a leisure complex at Paterna to the procedure for the assess-
ment of
the effects on the environment and, consequently, by
failing to apply the provisions of Articles 2(1), 3, 4(2), 8 and 9

(Case C-421/04) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 3(1)(b) and (c)
of Directive 89/104/EEC — Grounds for refusal to register
— Articles 28 EC and 30 EC — Free movement of goods —
Measure having equivalent effect to a quantitative restriction
— Justification — Protection of industrial and commercial
property — National word mark registered in a Member
State — Trade mark consisting of a term borrowed from the
language of another Member State in which it is devoid of
distinctive character and/or descriptive of the goods in respect
of which the trade mark was registered)

(2006/C 131/30)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Audiencia Provincial de Barcelona

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Matratzen Concord AG

Defendant: Hukla Germany SA

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Audiencia Provincial de
Barcelona — Interpretation of Article 30 EC — Protection of
industrial and commercial property — Disguised restriction in
trade between Member States resulting from a national word
mark composed of a word which, in the language of another
Member State,
the products concerned
(‘matratzen’)

is descriptive of