Case C-116/07: Action brought on 27 February 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Czech Republic
Date: 2007-04-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Czechia, European Commission, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, legal code, national implementing measure, pharmaceutical legislation, veterinary drug

28.4.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 95/29

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants:
Gómez

José Manuel Blanco Pérez, Maria del Pilar Chao

Defendant: Principado de Asturias

Question referred

Should Articles 2, 3, 4 and 5 of Decree 72/2001 of 19 July
regulating Pharmacies and Pharmaceutical Dispensaries and the
First Section of Chapter II of said Decree, pursuant to the provi-
sions of Article 103 of Law 14/1986 (General Health) and of
Article 88 of Law 25/1990 of 20 December (on medicinal
products), be considered to be in breach of Article 43 of the
Treaty establishing the European [Community]?

Action brought on 27 February 2007 — Commission of
the European Communities v Czech Republic

(Case C-115/07)

(2007/C 95/54)

Language of the case: Czech

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by B. Stromsky and M. Šimerdová, Agents)

Defendant: Czech Republic

Form of order sought

The Court is asked to:

Action brought on 27 February 2007 — Commission of
the European Communities v Czech Republic

(Case C-114/07)

(2007/C 95/53)

Language of the case: Czech

the European Parliament and of

— declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and
administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive
2004/27/EC (1) of
the
Council of 31 March 2004 amending Directive 2001/83/EC
on the Community code relating to medicinal products for
human use, or in any event by not communicating such
measures to the Commission, the Czech Republic has failed
to fulfil its obligations under Article 3 of that directive;

— order the Czech Republic to pay the costs.

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by B. Stromsky and M. Šimerdová, Agents)

Pleas in law and main arguments

Defendant: Czech Republic

Form of order sought

The Court is asked to:

the European Parliament and of

— declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and
administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive
2004/24/EC (1) of
the
Council of 31 March 2004 amending, as regards traditional
herbal medicinal products, Directive 2001/83/EC on the
Community code relating to medicinal products for human
use, or in any event by not communicating such measures
to the Commission, the Czech Republic has failed to fulfil its
obligations under Article 2(1) of that directive;

— order the Czech Republic to pay the costs.

The period prescribed for transposing the directive into national
law expired on 30 October 2005.

(1) OJ 2004 L 136, p. 34.

Action brought on 27 February 2007 — Commission of
the European Communities v Czech Republic

(Case C-116/07)

(2007/C 95/55)

Language of the case: Czech

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period prescribed for transposing the directive into national
law expired on 30 October 2005.

Parties

(1) OJ 2004 L 136, p. 85.

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by B. Stromsky and M. Šimerdová, Agents)

Defendant: Czech Republic

C 95/30

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

28.4.2007

Form of order sought

The Court is asked to:

the European Parliament and of

— declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and
administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive
2004/28/EC (1) of
the
Council of 31 March 2004 amending Directive 2001/82/EC
on the Community code relating to veterinary medicinal
products, or in any event by not communicating such
measures to the Commission, the Czech Republic has failed
to fulfil its obligations under Article 3 of that directive;

— order the Czech Republic to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period prescribed for transposing the directive into national
law expired on 29 October 2006.

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

Pleas in law and main arguments

Action brought on 27 February 2007 — Commission of
the European Communities v Republic of Finland

The period prescribed for transposing the directive into national
law expired on 30 October 2005.

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

(Case C-118/07)

(2007/C 95/57)

Language of the case: Finnish

Action brought on 27 February 2007 — Commission of
the European Communities v Czech Republic

Defendant: Republic of Finland

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by M. Huttunen, H. Støvlbæk and B. Martenczuk, acting
as Agents)

(Case C-117/07)

(2007/C 95/56)

Language of the case: Czech

Parties

Form of order sought

— declare that, by failing to take the appropriate steps in
accordance with the second paragraph of Article 307 EC to
eliminate the incompatibilities relating to provisions on
transfers
agreements
concluded between it and the Russian Federation (the
former Soviet Union), Belarus, China, Malaysia, Sri Lanka
and Uzbekistan, the Republic of Finland has failed to fulfil
its obligations under Article 307 EC;

international

investment

in the

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by B. Stromsky and M. Šimerdová, Agents)

— order the Republic of Finland to pay the costs.

Defendant: Czech Republic

Pleas in law and main arguments

Form of order sought

The Court is asked to:

to

necessary

provisions

— declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and
comply with
administrative
Commission Directive 2005/28/EC (1) of 8 April
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, or in
any event by not communicating such measures to the
Commission, the Czech Republic has failed to fulfil its obli-
gations under Article 31(1) of that directive;

— order the Czech Republic to pay the costs.

The present case concerns international investment agreements
made by the Republic of Finland with the Russian Federation,
Belarus, China, Malaysia, Sri Lanka and Uzbekistan before it
acceded to the European Union. Provisions contained in those
agreements concern the transfer of capital and payments in
connection with investments. The Commission submits that
those provisions in the agreements are incompatible with Com-
munity law, since as a result of those provisions Finland is
unable to comply with measures taken by the EC institutions
under Articles 57(2) EC, 59 EC and 60(1) EC. Since the agree-
ments in question were made before Finland's accession to the
EU, Finland is obliged to take all appropriate steps to eliminate
the incompatibilities in the agreements in accordance with the
second paragraph of Article 307 EC.