Case C-303/05: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 3 May 2007 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Arbitragehof, Belgium) — Advocaten voor de Wereld VZW v Leden van de Ministerraad (Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Articles 6(2) EU and 34(2)(b) EU — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — European arrest warrant and surrender procedures between Member States — Approximation of national laws — Removal of verification of double criminality — Validity)
Date: 2007-06-23
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU police cooperation, European arrest warrant, criminal law, extradition, interpretation of the law, judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the EU

23.6.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 140/3

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Declares that the Republic of Austria has failed to fulfil its obliga-
tions under Article 1(e), (g) and (i), Article 6(1) and (2), Articles
12 and 13, Article 16(1) and Article 22(b) of Council Directive
92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habi-
tats and of wild fauna and flora;

2. Dismisses the remainder of the action;

3. Orders the Republic of Austria to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 45, 19.02.2005.

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 10 May 2007
(reference for a preliminary ruling from the High Court of
Justice (England & Wales) Queen's Bench Division (Admin-
istrative Court) United Kingdom — Thames Water Utilities
Ltd, The Queen v South East London Division, Bromley
Magistrates' Court

(Case C-252/05) (1)

(Waste — Directives
91/156/EEC and
91/271/EEC — Waste water which escapes from a sewerage
network — Classification — Scope of Directives 75/442/EEC
and 91/271/EEC)

75/442/EEC,

(2007/C 140/04)

Language of the case: English

Directive 91/156/EEC of 18 March 1991 (OJ 1991 L 78, p. 32)
— Concept of waste — Effluent from leaks in sewage pipes

Operative part of the judgment

1) Waste water which escapes from a sewerage network maintained by
to Council Directive
a statutory sewerage undertaker pursuant
91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning urban waste water
treatment and the legislation enacted to transpose that directive
constitutes waste within the meaning of Council Directive
75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste, as amended by Council
Directive 91/156/EEC of 18 March 1991;

2) Directive 91/271 is not ‘other legislation’ within the meaning of
Article 2(1)(b) of Directive 75/442, as amended by Directive
in
91/156. It falls to the national court to ascertain whether,
accordance with the criteria set out in the present judgment, the
national rules may be regarded as being ‘other legislation’ within
the meaning of that provision. Such is the case if those national
rules contain precise provisions organising the management of the
waste in question and if they are such as to ensure a level of protec-
tion of the environment equivalent to that guaranteed by Directive
75/442, as amended by Directive 91/156, and, more particularly,
by Articles 4, 8 and 15.

3) Directive 91/271 cannot be considered, as regards the management
of waste water which escapes from a sewerage network,
to be
special legislation (a lex specialis) vis-à-vis Directive 75/442, as
amended by Directive 91/156, and cannot therefore be applied
pursuant to Article 2(2) of Directive 75/442.

(1) OJ C 205, 20.08.2005.

Referring court

High Court of Justice (England & Wales) Queen's Bench Division
(Administrative Court)

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 3 May 2007
(reference for a preliminary ruling from the Arbitragehof,
Belgium) — Advocaten voor de Wereld VZW v Leden van
de Ministerraad

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Thames Water Utilities Ltd, The Queen

Defendant: South East London Division, Bromley Magistrates'
Court

Intervener in support of the applicant: Environment Agency

(Case C-303/05) (1)

(Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Articles
6(2) EU and 34(2)(b) EU — Framework Decision
2002/584/JHA — European arrest warrant and surrender
procedures between Member States — Approximation of
national laws — Removal of verification of double criminality
— Validity)

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — High Court of Justice
(England and Wales), Queen's Bench Division (Administrative
Court) — Interpretation of Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21
May 1991 concerning urban waste-water treatment (OJ 1991
L 135, p. 40) and of Council Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July
1975 on waste (OJ 1975 L 194, p. 39), as amended by Council

Referring court

Arbitragehof

(2007/C 140/05)

Language of the case: Dutch

C 140/4

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

23.6.2007

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Advocaten voor de Wereld VZW

Defendant: Leden van de Ministerraad

which the Court of First Instance partially dismissed the action
seeking annulment of Commission Decision C(2002) 5083 final
of 17 December 2002 relating to a proceeding under Article 81
EC — Cartel in the specialty graphite market

Re:

Preliminary ruling — Arbitragehof — Interpretation of Council
Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA of 13 June 2002 on the
European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between
Member States (OJ 2002 L 190, p. 1) — Whether compatible
with Article 34(2)(b) EU — Removal of the requirement of
double criminality in respect of the offences listed in Article 2
(2) of the Decision — Whether compatible with Article 6(2) EU

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders SGL Carbon AG to pay the costs

(1) OJ C 281, 12.11.2005.

affecting

Examination of the questions submitted has revealed no factor capable
of
Framework Decision
2002/584/JHA of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant
and the surrender procedures between Member States.

Council

validity

the

of

(1) OJ C 271, 29.10.2005.

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 10 May 2007
the European
— SGL Carbon AG v Commission of

Communities

(Case C-328/05 P) (1)

(Appeals — Competition — Agreements, decisions and
concerted practices — Guidelines on the method of setting
fines — Leniency Notice — Principle non bis in idem)

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 3 May 2007
(reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster
Gerichtshof — Austria) — Color Drack GmbH v Lexx
International Vertriebs GmbH

(Case C-386/05) (1)

(Jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judg-
ments in civil and commercial matters — Regulation (EC) No
44/2001 — Special jurisdiction — First indent of Article 5(1)
(b) — Court for the place of performance of the contractual
obligation in question — Sale of goods — Goods delivered in
different places within a single Member State)

(2007/C 140/07)

Language of the case: German

(2007/C 140/06)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberster Gerichtshof

Parties

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Color Drack GmbH

Appellant: SGL Carbon AG (represented by M. Klusmann and F.
Wiemer, Rechtsanwälte)

Defendant: Lexx International Vertriebs GmbH

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of
Communities
Schneider, W. Mölls and H. Gading, Agents,)

the European
(represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre, M.

Re:

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of
the Court of First Instance
(Second Chamber) of 15 June 2005 in SGL Carbon v Commission
in
(Joined Cases T-71/03, T-74/03, T-87/03 and T-91/03),

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Oberster Gerichtshof —
Interpretation of Article 5(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No
44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recogni-
tion and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial
matters (OJ 2001 L 12, p. 1) — Special jurisdiction — Place to
which goods were delivered under a contract of sale — Multiple
places of delivery