Case C-377/06: Action brought on 14 September 2006 — Commission of the European Communities v Republic of Finland
Date: 2006-10-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Finland, access to EU information, access to the courts, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, environmental protection, national implementing measure, transparency in decision-making

28.10.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 261/17

Action brought on 14 September 2006 — Commission of
the European Communities v Republic of Finland

Parties to the main proceedings

(Case C-377/06)

(2006/C 261/31)

Applicant: Clear Channel Belgium S.A.

Defendant: City of Liège

Language of the case: Finnish

Intervener: J.-C. Decaux Belgium S.A.

Parties

Questions referred

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: I. Koskinen and J.-B. Laignelot, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Republic of Finland

Form of order sought

— declare that, by failing to adopt, in respect of the province
of Åland, the laws, regulations and administrative provi-
sions necessary to comply with Directive 2003/35/EC of
the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 May
2003 providing for public participation in respect of the
drawing up of certain plans and programmes relating to the
environment and amending with regard to public participa-
tion and access to justice Council Directives 85/337/EEC
and 96/61/EC (1), or in any event, by failing to inform the
Commission thereof, the Republic of Finland has failed to
fulfil its obligations under that directive.

— order the Republic of Finland to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

the

exclude

1. Does a contract classified as a ‘licence in respect of public
land’
of Council Directive
application
92/50/EEC (1) of 18 June 1992 relating to the coordination
of procedures for the award of public service contracts,
where, notwithstanding the
award by the municipal
authority to the contractor of the exclusive right to exploit
for profit advertising space on street furniture supplied to
the municipal authority, the contract requires the contractor
the
to supply a number of services for the benefit of
authority (provision of street furniture, and of space for
municipal posters)?

2. Where there is no price in the classic sense of that term,
may the valuable consideration for the services supplied to
the municipal authority consist
in the waiver by the
authority of advertising revenue from which the financial
payments and contributions
in kind and display fees
provided for in the contract are, as in this case, to be
deducted?

3. Does the principal or ancillary nature of the various obliga-
tions provided for in the contract have any relevance to the
application of the aforementioned directive?

The period prescribed for transposing the directive expired on
25 June 2005.

(1) OJ L 209, 24.07.1992, p. 1.

(1) OJ 2003 L 156, p. 17

Action brought on 15 September 2006 — Commission of
the European Communities v Hellenic Republic

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d'Etat
(Belgium) lodged on 15 September 2006 — Clear Channel
Belgium S.A. v City of Liège

(Case C-378/06)

(2006/C 261/32)

Language of the case: French

Parties

(Case C-381/06)

(2006/C 261/33)

Language of the case: Greek

Referring court

Conseil d'Etat (Belgium)

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: M. Patakia and J. Enegren)

Defendant: Hellenic Republic