CELEX: C2000/063/35
Language: en
Date: 2000-03-04 00:00:00
Title: Case C-1/00: Action brought on 4 January 2000 by the Commission of the European Communities against the French Republic

4.3.2000              EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                         C 63/19
Action brought on 4 January 2000 by the Commission of                   Contrary to what France seems to suggest, the precautionary
 the European Communities against the French Republic                   principle, which guides the actions of the Commission, does
                                                                        not have the effect of imposing on the Commission a rigid
                                                                        obligation to follow a given scientific opinion without having
                          (Case C-1/00)                                 any discretionary power to carry out its own assessment.
                                                                        Article 7 of Commission Decision 97/404/EC (4), by providing
                                                                        from the outset for minority views — a normal corollary of
                         (2000/C 63/35)                                 the independence of the members of the committee concerned
                                                                        (Article 4) — to be taken into account, states that such
                                                                        minority views are always to be included in the opinions of
An action against the French Republic was brought before the            the SSC. The effect of the need for scientific freedom and of
Court of Justice on 4 January 2000 by the Commission of the             the complexity of specific situations must, of necessity, be that
European Communities, represented by Dierk Booss, Principal             minority scientific views may exist on practically any question.
Legal Adviser, and Gérard Berscheid, of its Legal Service, acting       The Commission has followed those precepts.
as Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the
office of Carlos Gómez de la Cruz, of its Legal Service, Wagner
Centre, Kirchberg.
The Commission of the European Communities claims that
the Court should:
                                                                        In addition to infringing the decisions at issue, the imposition
— declare that, by refusing to adopt the measures necessary             of restrictions on the entry of goods from other Member States
    in order to comply with Council Decision 98/256/EC of               constitutes a violation of Article 28 EC. Since, moreover, the
    16 March 1998 concerning emergency measures to protect              veterinary and health requirements applying to products
    against bovine spongiform encephalopathy, amending                  covered by the DBES and their dispatch outside the United
    Decision 94/474/EC and repealing Decision 96/239/EC (1),            Kingdom (like the overwhelming majority of veterinary mat-
    as amended by Commission Decision 98/692/EC Com-                    ters) are subject to a Community-wide harmonisation consti-
    mission Decision amending Decision 98/256/EC, in par-               tuting a coherent and exhaustive system specifically designed
    ticular Article 6 thereof and Annex III thereto, and with           to ensure the protection of human and animal health, the ban
    Commission Decision 1999/514/EC of 23 July 1999                     cannot be justified by France by reference to Article 30 EC.
    setting the date on which dispatch from the United
    Kingdom of bovine products under the date-based export
    scheme may commence by virtue of Article 6(5) of Council
    Decision 98/256/EC (2), in particular Article 1 thereof, and,
    especially, by refusing to permit the marketing within its
    territory of products eligible under that scheme (‘the
    DBES’), as referred to in Article 6 and Annex III aforesaid,
    the French Republic has infringed those two decisions and,
    in particular, the said provisions, and has violated the EC         Lastly, the Commission considers that, by having refused for
    Treaty, in particular Articles 28 and 10 thereof;                   over four and a half months already to comply with the
                                                                        decisions at issue, France has also failed to comply with its
                                                                        cooperation obligations under Article 10 EC.
— order the French Republic to pay the costs.
                                                                        (1) OJ L 113 of 15.4.1998, p. 33.
Pleas in law and main arguments                                         (2) OJ L 195 of 28.7.1999, p. 42.
                                                                        (3) Concerning veterinary and zootechnical checks applicable in
                                                                            intra-Community trade in certain live animals and products with
                                                                            a view to the completion of the internal market, as amended by
Under Article 249 EC, a decision is binding in its entirety upon
                                                                            Council Directive 92/118/EEC of 17 December 1992 laying down
those to whom it is addressed. That is also the case as regards             animal health and public health requirements governing trade in
the decisions at issue, which are binding on all Member                     and imports into the Community of products not subject to the
States. The clear, precise and unconditional wording of those               said requirements laid down in specific Community rules referred
decisions, in particular Article 1 of Decision 1999/514/EC,                 to in Annex A(I) to Directive 89/662/EEC and, as regards
which fixes 1 August 1999 as the date from which shipments                  pathogens, to Directive 90/425/EEC (OJ L 62 of 15.3.1993,
may take place, confers no discretion on the Member States as               p. 49).
to the date from which, and the manner in which, shipments              (4) OJ L 169 of 27.6.1997, p. 85.
under the DBES may commence. A Member State is not
entitled, by relying on the scientific opinion of a national
agency, to substitute its own assessment of the risks for that
carried out by the Commission in accordance with its powers,
which in the present case are those conferred by Article 10(4)
of Council Directive 90/425/EEC (3).