Case C-548/07: Action brought on 10 December 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Hellenic Republic
Date: 2007-12-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Greece, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, crew, labour law, merchant fleet, national implementing measure, parental leave

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.

26.1.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 22/39

Pleas in law and main arguments

1. The Commission, after examining all the Greek legislation
for the transposition into Greek law of Directive 96/34/EC
on the framework agreement on parental leave concluded by
UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC, found that certain clauses of
that framework agreement confirmed by the directive were
still
transposed deficiently and incorrectly in relation to
workers in the merchant navy.

2. More specifically, the relevant Greek legislation which ratifies
collective agreements in the field has a restricted scope since
it does not apply to workers on all merchant vessels.

3. In addition, in order for the foregoing workers to be recog-
nised as having the right to parental
leave, it is necessary
under the Greek legislation for the following conditions,
which are additional to those set out in the directive, to
apply:

— 12 months' previous service on the same vessel;

— employment of at least 30 persons on that vessel;

— proof that the other parent is working;

— classification of the return from parental leave as a new
seaman's contract and a required new period of work of
a minimum of 6 or 7 months;

— assumption of the costs of the sending of a replacement

by the navy;

— application of the national legislation in question only to
seamen's contracts which commence after the entry into
force of the collective agreements;

— classification of commercial obligations as grounds of
force majeure justifying not granting parental leave.

4. Finally, the Commission states that there is no mention in
either the collective agreements or the ministerial decrees
ratifying them of the question of the protection of workers
from dismissal on the grounds of applying for or taking
parental leave.

5. Therefore,

the Commission considers

the Hellenic
that
Republic has failed to fulfil
its obligations under Directive
96/34/EC and, more specifically, under Clauses 1(2), 2(1),
2(3)(b), 2(3)(e) and (f), 2(4) and 2(6) of the framework agree-
ment on parental leave annexed to that directive.

(1) OJ L 145, 19.6.1996, p. 4.

Order of the President of the Court of 8 October 2007 —
Commission of the European Communities v Ireland

(Case C-20/07) (1)

(2008/C 22/69)

Language of the case: English

The President of
removed from the register.

the Court has ordered that

the case be

(1) OJ C 56, 10.3.2007.

Order of the President of the Court of 8 November 2007
— Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom
of Sweden

(Case C-145/07) (1)

(2008/C 22/70)

Language of the case: Swedish

The President of
removed from the register.

the Court has ordered that

the case be

(1) OJ C 95, 28.4.2007.

Order of the President of the Court of 8 November 2007
— Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom
of Sweden

(Case C-223/07) (1)

(2008/C 22/71)

Language of the case: Swedish

The President of
removed from the register.

the Court has ordered that

the case be

(1) OJ C 140, 23.6.2007.