Case C-444/06: Action brought on 26 October 2006 — Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Spain
Date: 2006-12-30
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Spain, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, award of contract, supplies contract, works contract

C 326/36

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.12.2006

Action brought on 26 October 2006 — Commission of the
European Communities v Kingdom of Spain

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgericht-
shof (Germany) lodged on 6 November 2006 — Danske
Slagterier v Federal Republic of Germany

(Case C-444/06)

(2006/C 326/76)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: X. Lewis, acting as Agent, C. Fernandez Vicién and I.
Moreno-Tapia Rivas, lawyers)

Defendan: Kingdom of Spain

Form of order sought

— declare that, by failing to provide for a mandatory period
within which the contracting authority has to notify the
decision on the award of the contract to all the bidders, by
failing to provide for a mandatory waiting period between
the decision on the award of the contract and its perfor-
mance and by allowing an annulled contract to continue to
have legal effect, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its
obligations under Article 2(1)(a) and (b) of Council Directive
89/665/EEC (1) of 21 December 1989 on the coordination
of
regulations and administrative provisions
relating to the application of review procedures to the award
of public supply and public works contracts

the laws,

— order Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The Commission considers that the Spanish rule on the review
of public contracts is not consistent with Directive 89/665
according to the interpretation given by the Court of Justice in
Case C-81/98 Alcatel Austria and Others [1999] ECR I-7671.

In particular, the Spanish legislation:

does not provide for a mandatory period within which the
contracting authority has to notify the decision on the award of
the contract to all the bidders,

does not provide for a mandatory waiting period between the
decision on the award of the contract and its performance and,

allows an annulled contract to continue to have legal effect.

(1) OJ 1989 L 395, p.33.

(Case C-445/06)

(2006/C 326/77)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Danske Slagterier

Defendant: Federal Republic of Germany

Questions referred

1. Do Article 5(1)(o) and Article 6(1)(b)(iii) of Council Directive
64/433/EEC (1) of 26 June 1964 on health problems
affecting intra-Community trade in fresh meat, as reenacted
by Council Directive 91/497/EEC (2) of 29 July 1991,
in
conjunction with Article 5(1), Article 7 and Article 8 of
Council Directive 89/662/EEC (3) of 11 December 1989
concerning veterinary checks in intra-Community trade with
a view to the completion of the internal market place produ-
cers and distributors of pigmeat in a legal position which can
give rise to a claim seeking to establish State liability under
Community law in the event of errors of transposition or
application?

2. May the producers and distributors of pigmeat — irrespec-
tive of the answer to the first question — rely on an infrin-
gement of Article 30 of the EC Treaty (Article 28 EC) in
order to substantiate a claim seeking to establish State liabi-
lity under Community law where the transposition and
application of the abovementioned directives are contrary to
Community law?

3. Does Community law require the limitation period for a
claim seeking to establish State liability under Community
law to be interrupted in the light of Treaty infringement
proceedings under Article 226 EC or
to be suspended
pending the end of those proceedings at least where there is
no effective domestic legal remedy to compel the Member
State to transpose a directive?