Case C-541/07: Action brought on 30 November 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Hellenic Republic
Date: 2007-11-30
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Greece, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, free movement of goods, glass, marketing restriction, motor vehicle, technical regulations, vehicle parts

C 22/38

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

26.1.2008

Second, the CFI has erred in law by interpreting the investiga-
tions exception to the effect that the Commission must consider
requests for access to written pleadings in infringement proceed-
ings under Article 226 EC on a case by case basis as from the
date of
including actions which have been
decided but not yet been resolved, thus weakening the ability of
the Commission as guardian of the Treaties to ensure respect by
Member States of their obligations under Community law.

the judgement,

Third,
the CFI has erred in law by interpreting the court
proceedings exception to the effect that the institutions must
consider requests for access to their written pleadings on a case
by case basis in actions which have been decided but which are
related to pending actions,
thus weakening their ability to
defend their interests before the Community Courts and weak-
ening the ability of the Commission as guardian of the Treaties
to seek to enforce Community law.

(1) OJ L 145, p. 43.

Action brought on 30 November 2007 — Commission of
the European Communities v Hellenic Republic

(Case C-541/07)

(2008/C 22/67)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: M. Patakia)

Defendant: Hellenic Republic

fall within the

2. The Commission takes the view that that prohibition does
not
application of Directive
field of
92/22/EEC, as amended by Directive 2001/92/EC, and must
be examined in the context of Articles 28 and 30 in the
absence of harmonisation at Community level.

3. That prohibition constitutes a measure having equivalent
effect to a quantitative restriction on the free movement of
goods that is contrary to Article 28 EC, given that it consti-
tutes in practice an obstacle to trade in Greece in such films
which are lawfully manufactured and in circulation in other
Member States.

4. The Commission also observes that the Greek authorities
have not succeeded in adducing sufficient evidence as to the
justification for the measure and as to the simultaneous
observance of proportionality.

5. More specifically, it has not been proved that criteria exist for
establishing, on the carrying out of checks, whether the films
in question meet certain minimum conditions, in accordance
with the submissions of the Greek authorities.

6. Consequently, the Commission considers that the legislation
in question constitutes an infringement of Article 28 EC that
cannot be justified on the basis of Article 30 EC or by over-
riding reasons relating to the public interest within the
meaning of the Court of Justice's case-law.

Action brought on 10 December 2007 — Commission of
the European Communities v Hellenic Republic

(Case C-548/07)

(2008/C 22/68)

Language of the case: Greek

Form of order sought

Parties

— declare that, by prohibiting in Decree 12078/1343 of
3 March 2004 of the Minister for Transport, as interpreted
on the basis of Circular 45007/4795 of 28 July 2004 issued
by the Directorate for Road Safety and the Environment,
window films which are manufactured and/or sold lawfully
on the market of other Member States of the European
Union from being placed on vehicle windows generally, the
Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil
its obligations under
Articles 28 and 30 of the EC Treaty;

— order the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

1. Following a complaint, the Commission examined the Greek
legislation which prohibits the placing of window films on
vehicle windscreens and on their windows generally.

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: M. Patakia and M. van Beek)

Defendant: Hellenic Republic

Form of order sought

— declare that the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obli-
gations under Directive 96/34/EC (1) on the framework
agreement on parental leave concluded by UNICE, CEEP and
the ETUC and, more specifically, under Clauses 1(2), 2(1),
the agreement
2(3)(b), 2(3)(e) and (f), 2(4) and 2(6) of
annexed to that directive;

— order the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.