Case C-76/07: Action brought on 12 February 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg
Date: 2007-04-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Luxembourg, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, experiment on humans, medical research, national implementing measure, pharmaceutical industry

C 95/20

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

28.4.2007

c) disclosed onward on CD-ROM to be used for commercial

Form of order sought

purposes, and

d) processed for the purposes of a text messaging service
whereby mobile phone users can, by indicating an indivi-
dual's name and home municipality and texting to a
given number,
receive in reply data on the earned
income, income from capital and wealth of the individual
indicated, to be regarded as the processing of personal
data within the meaning of Article 3(1) of Directive
95/46/EC (1)?

2. Is Directive 95/46/EC to be interpreted as meaning that the
various operations listed in Question 1(a)
to (d) can be
regarded as the processing of personal data carried out solely
for journalistic purposes within the meaning of Article 9 of
the Directive, having regard to the fact that data on over one
million taxpayers has been collected from data which are in
the public domain under national legislation on the right of
public access? Does the fact that publication of those data is
the principal aim of the operation have any bearing on the
assessment in this case?

3. Is Article 17 of Directive 95/46/EC to be interpreted in
conjunction with the principles and purpose of the Directive
as precluding the publication of data collected for journalistic
purposes
commercial
purposes?

and its onward disclosure

for

— declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and
administrative provisions necessary to comply with Direc-
tive 2004/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 31 March 2004 amending Directive 2001/82/EC
on the Community code relating to veterinary medicinal
products (1), the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obli-
gations under Article 3 of that directive;

in the alternative:

declare that, by failing to communicate to the Commission
the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary
to comply with Directive 2004/28/EC of
the European
Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 amending
Directive 2001/82/EC on the Community code relating to
veterinary medicinal products, the French Republic has failed
to fulfil its obligations under Article 3 of that directive;

— order the French Republic to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period for transposing Directive 2004/28/EC expired on
30 October 2005.

4. Can Directive 95/46/EC be interpreted as meaning that
personal data files containing, solely and in unaltered form,
material that has been published in the media fall altogether
outside its scope?

(1) OJ 2004 L 136, p. 58.

(1) Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council
of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to
the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such
data, OJ 1995 L 281, p. 31.

Action brought on 12 February 2007 — Commission of
the European Communities v Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg

(Case C-76/07)

(2007/C 95/36)

Language of the case: French

Action brought on 12 February 2007 — Commission of
the European Communities v French Republic

Parties

(Case C-75/07)

(2007/C 95/35)

Language of the case: French

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: B. Stromsky, Agent)

Defendant: Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg

Form of order sought

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: B. Stromsky, Agent)

Defendant: French Republic

to

necessary

provisions

— declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and
administrative
comply with
Commission Directive 2005/28/EC of 8 April 2005 laying
down principles and detailed guidelines for good clinical
practice as regards investigational medicinal products for
human use, as well as the requirements for authorisation of
the manufacturing or importation of such products (1), the
Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to fulfil its obliga-
tions under Article 31 of that directive;

28.4.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 95/21

in the alternative:

declare that by failing to communicate to the Commission
the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary
to comply with Commission Directive 2005/28/EC of
8 April 2005 laying down principles and detailed guidelines
for good clinical practice as regards investigational medicinal
products for human use, as well as the requirements for
authorisation of the manufacturing or importation of such
products, the Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to
fulfil its obligations under Article 31 of that directive;

— order the Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period for transposing Directive 2005/28/EC expired on
29 January 2006.

(1) OJ 2005 L 91, p. 13.

basis of a franchise agreement is not relevant for the purposes
of
its recognition by the Greek authorities. Directive 92/51
makes no such distinction. The Commission also states that the
present dispute does not concern Articles 149 and 150 EC, or
Article 16 of the Greek Constitution, in that the diplomas have
been lawfully issued by Italian educational establishments, not
by Greek establishments with which the former have concluded
franchise agreements for the award of qualifications.

the refusal of

the Greek authorities to
On those grounds,
consider and to recognise those Italian diplomas constitutes an
infringement of Articles 3 and 12 of Directive 92/51. Further-
in the Commission's submission, and as is clear from
more,
the Greek authorities required the
substantiated complaints,
the optical
complainants who applied for
diploma obtained in Italy to undergo a conversion course. The
Commission maintains that such a course infringes Article 4(1)
(b) of Directive 92/51, pursuant to which the Greek authorities
must allow foreign applicants to choose between the conversion
course and an aptitude test.

recognition of

(1) OJ L 209, 24.7.1992, p. 25.

Action brought on 15 February 2007 — Commission of
the European Communities v Hellenic Republic

(Case C-84/07)

(2007/C 95/37)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: G. Zavvos and H. Støvlbæk, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Hellenic Republic

Form of order sought

Action brought on 15 February 2007 — Commission of
the European Communities v Italian Republic

(Case C-85/07)

(2007/C 95/38)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: S. Pardo Quintillán and D. Recchia, acting as Agents)

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Defendant: Italian Republic

— declare that, by the acts specified hereunder, the Hellenic
Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 3,
4(1)(b) and 12 of Council Directive 92/51/EEC of 18 June
1992 on a second general system for the recognition of
professional education and training to supplement Directive
89/48/EEC (1);

— order the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

According to the Commission, the Hellenic Republic refuses to
consider and to recognise certain optical diplomas issued by an
Italian educational establishment on the basis of a franchise
agreement concluded with a Greek educational establishment.

The Commission states that
the Greek
authorities can determine is whether or not the diploma gives
the question
access to the profession concerned and that
whether or not the diploma in question has been issued on the

the basic issue that

Forms of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— declare that, in respect of the pilot river basin district of the
River Serchio and the river basin districts of the Eastern
Alps and the Northern, Central and Southern Appennines,
the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under
Articles 5(1) and 15(2) of Directive 2000/60/EC of
the
European Parliament and of
the Council of 23 October
2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the
field of water policy (1), in so far as it has failed:

— to submit summary reports of

the analyses required
under Article 5, as provided for in Article 15(2) of
Directive 2000/60/EC, and

— to undertake the analyses and the review provided for in

Article 5(1) of that Directive;