CELEX: C1998/278/04
Language: en
Date: 1998-09-05 00:00:00
Title: JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Fifth Chamber) of 18 June 1998 in Case C-266/96 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Genova): Corsica Ferries France SA v. Gruppo Antichi Ormeggiatori del Porto di Genova Coop. arl, Gruppo Ormeggiatori del Golfo di La Spezia Coop. arl, Ministero dei Trasporti e della Navigazione (Freedom to provide services - Maritime transport - Undertakings holding exclusive rights - Mooring services for vessels in ports - Compliance with the competition rules - Tariffs)

C 278/2               EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                       5.9.98
added tax on means of transport which constitute the very            5.7.1985, p. 40) Ð the Court (Sixth Chamber), composed
tool of their trade, the French Republic has failed to fulfil        of: H. Ragnemalm, President of the Chamber, G. F.
its obligations under the Sixth Council Directive 77/388/            Mancini, P. J. G. Kapteyn, J. L. Murray and K. M.
EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of               Ioannou (Rapporteur), Judges; J. Mischo, Advocate-
the Member States relating to turnover taxes Ð Common                General; H. A. Rühl, Principal Administrator, for the
system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment               Registrar, has given a judgment on 18 June 1998, in which
(OJ L 145, 13.6.1977, p. 1), and in particular Article 17(2)         it has ruled:
thereof Ð the Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of: R.
Schintgen, President of the Second Chamber, acting for the
President of the Sixth Chamber, G. F. Mancini, P. J. G.              Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the
Kapteyn, J. L. Murray and G. Hirsch (Rapporteur),                    assessment of the effects of certain public and private
Judges; F. G. Jacobs, Advocate-General; D. Louterman-                projects on the environment is to be interpreted as not
Hubeau, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, has              permitting Member States to waive the obligations
given a judgment on 18 June 1998, in which it:                       regarding environmental assessments in the case of
                                                                     projects listed in Annex I of the Directive where:
1. dismisses the application;                                        Ð the projects have already been the subject of a consent
                                                                          granted prior to 3 July 1988, the date by which the
                                                                          Directive was to have been transposed into national
2. order the Commission of the European Communities                       law,
     to pay the costs;
                                                                     Ð the consent was not preceded by an environmental
                                                                          assessment in accordance with the requirements of the
3. orders the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
                                                                          Directive and no use was made of it, and
     Northern Ireland to bear its own costs.
                                                                     Ð a fresh consent procedure was formally initiated after
(1) OJ C 95, 30.3.1996.
                                                                          3 July 1988.
                                                                     (1) OJ C 133, 4.5.1996.
              JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                       (Sixth Chamber)
                                                                                     JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                        of 18 June 1998
                                                                                             (Fifth Chamber)
in Case C-81/96 (reference for a preliminary ruling from                                     of 18 June 1998
the Nederlandse Raad van State): Burgemeester en wet-
houders van Haarlemmerliede en Spaarnwoude and                       in Case C-266/96 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
    Others v. Gedeputeerde Staten van Noord-Holland (1)              the Tribunale di Genova): Corsica Ferries France SA v.
                                                                     Gruppo Antichi Ormeggiatori del Porto di Genova Coop.
(Council Directive 85/337/EEC Ð New consent for a                    arl, Gruppo Ormeggiatori del Golfo di La Spezia Coop.
                          zoning plan)                                     arl, Ministero dei Trasporti e della Navigazione (1)
                         (98/C 278/03)                               (Freedom to provide services Ð Maritime transport Ð
                                                                     Undertakings holding exclusive rights Ð Mooring services
                                                                     for vessels in ports Ð Compliance with the competition
                (Language of the case: Dutch)                                                rules Ð Tariffs)
                                                                                              (98/C 278/04)
  (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be
         published in the European Court Reports)                                     (Language of the case: Italian)
                                                                       (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be
In Case C-81/96: reference to the Court under Article 177                       published in the European Court Reports)
of the EC Treaty from the Nederlandse Raad van State
(Netherlands), for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings
pending before that court between Burgemeester en                    In Case C-266/96: reference to the Court under Article 177
wethouders van Haarlemmerliede en Spaarnwoude and                    of the EC Treaty from the Tribunale di Genova (District
Others and Gedeputeerde Staten van Noord-Holland Ð                   Court, Genoa) (Italy), for a preliminary ruling in the
on the interpretation of Council Directive 85/337/EEC of             proceedings pending before that court between Corsica
27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain             Ferries France SA and Gruppo Antichi Ormeggiatori del
public and private projects on the environment (OJ L 175,            Porto di Genova Coop. arl., Gruppo Ormeggiatori del
 ---pagebreak--- 5.9.98               EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                      C 278/3
Golfo di La Spezia Coop. arl, Ministero dei Trasporti e                             JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
della Navigazione Ð on the interpretation of Articles 3, 5,
30, 59, 85, 86 and Article 90(1) of the EC Treaty and of                                     (Sixth Chamber)
Council Regulation (EEC) No 4055/86 of 22 December                                           of 18 June 1998
1986 applying the principle of freedom to provide services
to maritime transport between Member States and                      in    Case   C-183/97: Commission of the European
between Member States and third countries (OJ L 378,                            Communities v. Portuguese Republic (1)
31.12.1986, p. 1) Ð the Court (Fifth Chamber),
composed of: C. Gulmann, President of the Chamber, M.                (Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations Ð
Wathelet (Rapporteur), J. C. Moitinho de Almeida, J.-P.                        Failure to transpose Directive 80/68/EEC)
Puissochet and L. Sevón, Jugdes; N. Fennelly, Advocate-
General; D. Louterman-Hubeau, Principal Administrator,                                        (98/C 278/05)
for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 18 June 1998,
in which it has ruled:
                                                                                   (Language of the case: Portuguese)
1. Article 30 of the EC Treaty does not preclude
    legislation of a Member State, such as that at issue in
    this case, which requires shipping companies which
    are established in other Member States and whose                   (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be
    vessels make port stops in the first-mentioned Member                      published in the European Court Reports)
    State to have recourse to the services of local mooring
    groups holding exclusive concession, for a charge
    higher than the actual cost of the service provided.
                                                                     In Case C-183/97: Commission of the European
                                                                     Communities (Agents: Francisco de Sousa Fialho and
2. The combined provisions of Articles 5, 85, 86 and
                                                                     Nicholas Khan) v. Portuguese Republic (Agents: Luís
    Article 90(1) of the EC Treaty do not preclude
                                                                     Fernandes and JoaÄo Lopes Fernandes) Ð application for a
    legislation of a Member State, such as that at issue in
                                                                     declaration that, by failing to adopt all the laws,
    this case,
                                                                     regulations and administrative provisions necessary to
                                                                     comply fully and properly with Council Directive 80/68/
    Ð which confers on undertakings established in that              EEC of 17 December 1979 on the protection of
        State an exclusive right to provide a mooring                groundwater against pollution caused by certain
        service,                                                     dangerous substances (OJ L 20, 26.1.1980, p. 43), in
                                                                     particular with Articles 8, 9, 10, 11 and 15 thereof, and,
    Ð which requires the service to be used at a price               in the alternative, by failing to inform the Commission of
        which, in addition to the actual cost of the service         such measures forthwith, the Portuguese Republic has
        provided, includes a supplement to cover                     failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 21(1) of that
        maintenance of universal mooring service, and                Directive Ð the Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of: H.
                                                                     Ragnemalm, President of the Chamber, R. Schintgen, G. F.
                                                                     Mancini, G. Hirsch and K. M. Ioannou (Rapporteur),
    Ð which provides for tariffs that vary from one port
                                                                     Judges; A. La Pergola, Advocate-General; R. Grass,
        to another in order to take into account each
                                                                     Registrar, has given a judgment on 18 June 1998, in which
        port's particular characteristics.
                                                                     it:
3. The provisions of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4055/
    86 of 22 December 1986 applying the principle of
    freedom to provide services to maritime transport                1. declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed
    between Member States and between Member States                       period, all the laws, regulations and administrative
    and third countries and Article 59 of the EC Treaty do                provisions necessary to comply fully and properly with
    not preclude legislation of a Member State, such as                   Council Directive 80/68/EEC of 17 December 1979
    that at issue in this case, which requires shipping                   on the protection of groundwater against pollution
    companies established in another Member State, when                   caused by certain dangerous substances, in particular
    their vessels make port stops in the first Member State,              with Articles 8, 9, 10, 11 and 15 thereof, the
    to have recourse to the services which local mooring                  Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations
    groups holding exclusive concessions supply for a                     under Article 21(1) of the Directive;
    charge. Such legislation, even if it constituted an
    impediment to freedom to provide maritime transport
    services, would, in fact, be justified by considerations
                                                                     2. orders the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.
    of public security within the meaning of Article 56 of
    the EC Treaty.
                                                                     (1) OJ C 199, 28.6.1997.
( ) OJ C 336, 9.11.1996.
 1