Case C-293/07: Action brought on 18 June 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Hellenic Republic
Date: 2007-08-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Greece, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, application of EU law, bird, degradation of the environment, environmental law, protected area, protection of animal life, wildlife

4.8.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 183/27

The eleventh to thirteenth grounds of appeal relate to substan-
tive legal errors concerning the land.

The eleventh ground of appeal relates to the contested judg-
the conservative valuations in Orléans
ment's dismissal of
Council Minutes of 27.5.1994 as ‘a very brief summary without
detailed explanation’.

The twelfth ground of appeal concerns the method for assessing
the amount of State aid transfers in kind, and is similar to the
ninth ground of appeal. Absent a grant-date valuation or open
tender the Commission is lawfully entitled to use cost as a
proxy for value. This was particularly reasonable in the present
case because the third land purchase was tailored to Scott's
requirements. The contested judgment's reasoning regarding the
alleged tax audit dependent on alleged procedural irregularities
and other legal errors; and is in any event substantively erro-
neous.

The thirteenth ground of appeal concerns supposed errors by
the Commission in the application of the cost-based method.
The contested judgment's findings are dependent on alleged
procedural irregularities and other legal errors. The Commission
used the lowest possible land value as asserted by both France
and Scott. The facts and evidence supporting the Commission
are: the Offer Document; the alleged Galtier and Commissaire
the Orléans Council Minutes of
aux Apports valuations;
27.5.1994; and the average price of
the three land parcel
purchases. There is no basis for annulling the contested decision
on the grounds that the State aid might have been higher.

for

from the
Reference
Regeringsrätten (Sweden)
lodged on 15 June 2007 —
Kollektivavtalsstiftelsen TRR Trygghetsrådet v Skatteverket

preliminary

ruling

a

(Case C-291/07)

(2007/C 183/46)

Language of the case: Swedish

Referring court

Regeringsrätten

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Kollektivavtalsstiftelsen TRR Trygghetsrådet

Defendant: Skatteverket

Question referred

Are Articles 9(2)(e) and 21(1)(b) of the Sixth VAT Directive (1)
and Articles 56(1)(c) and 196 of the Council Directive on a
common system of value added tax (2) to be interpreted as
meaning that a person who purchases consultancy services from
a person liable to tax in another EC country and carries out both
economic activity and also activity which falls outside the scope
of the Directives is to be regarded as a taxable person/person
liable to tax where those articles are applied, even though the
purchase was made solely in respect of the latter activity?

(1) OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1.
(2) OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1.

The fourteenth ground of appeal concerns the information
injunction, particularly with respect to the land, the cost-based
method for assessing the amount of State aid, and the three
land parcel purchases. This is a procedural matter, but is dealt
with at the end because it is linked to thirteenth ground of
appeal.

Action brought on 18 June 2007 — Commission of the
European Communities v Hellenic Republic

By the fifteenth ground of appeal the Commission requests the
Court to quash the contested judgment because of the distortion
by the Court of First Instance of the clear sense of the evidence
before it, in particular because the Court of First Instance has
substituted its own reasoning for that of the contested decision.

(Case C-293/07)

(2007/C 183/47)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: M. Konstantinidis and D. Recchia)

Defendant: Hellenic Republic

C 183/28

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

4.8.2007

Form of order sought

The Court is asked to:

— declare that, by failing to take all the measures necessary to
establish and apply a coherent, specific and integrated legal
regime capable of ensuring viable management and effective
protection of areas designated as Special Protection Areas, in
the light of the conservation objectives of Council Directive
79/409/EEC (1) of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild
birds, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations
under Article 4(1) and (2),
in conjunction with the first
sentence of Article 4(4) of that directive, as amended by
Article 6(2) to (4) of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May
1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild
fauna and flora

— order the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Order of the President of the Court of 10 May 2007 —
the European Communities v Italian
Commission of

Republic

(Case C-61/06) (1)

(2007/C 183/48)

Language of the case: Italian

The President of
removed from the register.

the Court has ordered that

the case be

(1) OJ C 86, 8.4.2006.

Order of the President of the Sixth Chamber of the Court
the European
of 21 May 2007 — Commission of

Communities v Czech Republic

(Case C-140/06) (1)

(2007/C 183/49)

Language of the case: Czech

On the basis of a large number of complaints, Parliamentary
questions and petitions, the Commission maintains that the
Hellenic Republic is not properly applying the provisions of
Directive 79/409/EEC which requires measures to be taken for
the conservation of wild bird habitats and for the avoidance of
their pollution and deterioration.

The President of the Sixth Chamber has ordered that the case be
removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 108, 6.5.2006.

In the Commission's view, the infringement of the directive
consists in the lack of protection for Special Protection Areas
(SPAs) and also the existence of activities which may damage
their integrity and have significant negative consequences for
the objectives of conservation of SPAs and of the species for
which the areas have been defined.

The argument of the Greek authorities that the existing legisla-
tive framework ensures to a satisfactory degree the protection of
all types of wild birds and their respective habitats is countered
by the Commission with the argument that that framework
does not constitute a specific and effective protection framework
for all SPAs.

(1) OJ L 103 of 25.4.1979, p. 1.

Order of the President of the Court of 23 May 2007 —
the European Communities v Hellenic
Commission of

Republic

(Case C-297/06) (1)

(2007/C 183/50)

Language of the case: Greek

The President of
removed from the register.

the Court has ordered that

the case be

(1) OJ C 212, 2.9.2006.