CELEX: C1998/234/43
Language: en
Date: 1998-07-25 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 9 June 1998 by the Commission of the European Communities against Ireland (Case C-212/98)

C 234/22              EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                    25.7.98
p. 48) if it serves to secure the repayment of a debt which                   system as described in Question 1(a) to be
the principal debtor did not incur in the course of a trade                   established, where that system and the obligation
or profession already being pursued by him?                                   for waste producers to use the system are based
                                                                              on the interest in promoting recovery of the waste
                                                                              covered by the system, including the interest in
                                                                              ensuring necessary treatment capacity?
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the éstre Landsret            2. Must Article 10 of Directive 75/442/EEC, as amended
by order of 27 May 1998 in the case of FFAD Ð                            by Directive 91/156/EEC (see Articles 13 and 2(j) of
Entreprenùrforeningens Affalds/Miljùsektion, acting on                   Regulation (EEC) No 259/93), be construed as
behalf of Sydhavnens Sten & Grus ApS v The Commune                       meaning that public authorities are under an
of Copenhagen, Fifth Section of the Communal Authority                   obligation to treat equally undertakings which have
                  Ð Environmental Control                                obtained a permit as described in that provision in
                       (Case C-209/98)                                   relation to the conclusion of agreements concerning
                                                                         the receipt and recovery of environmentally non-
                         (98/C 234/42)                                   hazardous building waste?
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by order of 27 May 1998 from                   3. (a) Must Article 7(3) of Directive 75/442/EEC, as
the éstre Landsret (Eastern Regional Court), which was                        amended by Directive 91/156/EEC, be construed
received at the Court Registry on 8 June 1998, for a                          as meaning that that provision and the power it
preliminary ruling in the case of FFAD Ð                                      grants to prevent movements of waste allow a
Entreprenùrforeningens Affalds/Miljùsektion, acting on                        communal system such as that described in
behalf of Sydhavnens Sten & Grus ApS v The Commune                            Question 1(a) and thereby allow the commune to
of Copenhagen, Fifth Section of the Communal Authority                        prevent the movement of environmentally non-
Ð Environmental Control on the following questions:                           hazardous building waste destined for recovery, if
                                                                              such movement is contrary to the waste plan
1. (a) Disregarding possible application of Article 36 of                     drawn up by the commune?
         the Treaty or any other valid considerations (see
         Question 1(c)), must Article 90 of the Treaty, in
                                                                         (b) Must Article 7(3) of Directive 75/442/EEC, as
         conjunction with Articles 34 and 86 thereof, be
                                                                              amended by Directive 91/156/EEC, be construed
         construed as precluding the establishment of a
                                                                              as meaning that measures which a Member State
         communal system which Ð with a view to
                                                                              or a competent authority in that Member State
         ensuring that specially selected undertakings will
                                                                              has adopted, and which are necessary to prevent
         have sufficiently large access to environmentally
                                                                              movements of waste not in accordance with the
         non-hazardous building waste destined for
                                                                              waste plans of the authority, are valid and
         recovery from private builders to enable those
                                                                              enforceable against individuals or undertakings to
         undertakings to exploit that waste on an
                                                                              which the measures are relevant only if the EC
         economically justifiable and rational basis Ð
                                                                              Commission has been notified of those measures?
         excludes other undertakings from collecting and
         receiving the same type of waste from building
         work within the area of the commune in question,           (1) Council Directive of 75/442/EEC 15 July 1975 on waste
         even though these other undertakings have                      (OJ L 194 of 25.7.1975, p. 39).
         obtained a permit to treat the type of waste in            (2) Council Directive of 18 March 1991 (OJ L 78 of 26.3.1991,
                                                                        p. 32).
         question in accordance with Article 10 of
         Directive 75/442/EEC (1), as amended by Directive
         91/156/EEC (2)?
    (b) (If Question 1(a) is answered in the affirmative):
         Would a system such as that described in
         Question 1(a) be contrary to Article 90 of the EC          Action brought on 9 June 1998 by the Commission of the
         Treaty, in conjunction with Articles 34 and 86                         European Communities against Ireland
         thereof, if the communal provision forming the
                                                                                            (Case C-212/98)
         basis of that system provides that waste which is
         exported or imported is not covered by the                                          (98/C 234/43)
         communal system mentioned in Question 1(a)?
    (c) (If Question 1(a) is answered in the affirmative):
                                                                    An action against Ireland was brought before the Court of
         Does Article 36 of the Treaty or any other valid           Justice of the European Communities on 9 June 1998
         considerations, such as the concern that                   by the Commission of the European Communities,
         environmental damage should be rectified at                represented by Karen Banks, a member of its Legal
         source and the establishment of any necessary              Service, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the
         treatment      and     disposal    facilities    (see      office of Mr Carlos Gómez de la Cruz, a member of its
         Article 130r(2) of the Treaty), allow a communal           Legal Service, Centre Wagner, Kirchberg, Luxembourg.
 ---pagebreak--- 25.7.98              EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                  C 234/23
The Applicant claims that the Court should:                         Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
a) find that Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations
    under the EC Treaty by failing to adopt the laws,               Article 189 of the EC Treaty, under which a directive shall
    regulations or administrative provisions necessary to           be binding, as to the result to be achieved, upon each
    comply with Council Directive 93/83/EEC of                      Member State, carries by implication an obligation on the
    27 September 1993 on the coordination of certain                Member States to observe the period for compliance laid
    rules concerning copyright and rights related to                down in the directive. That period expired on 1 January
    copyright applicable to satellite broadcasting and cable        1998 without Ireland having enacted the provisions
    retransmission (1) and/or by failing to inform the              necessary to comply with the directive referred to in the
    Commission thereof;                                             conclusions of the Commission and/or informing the
                                                                    Commission thereof.
    and
b) order Ireland to bear the costs of this procedure.               (1) OJ L 248 of 6.10.1993, p. 15.
                                                   COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
Extension of the composition of the Chambers for the                former officials, retired officials of the Commission of the
                   judicial year 1997/1998                          European Communities, residing in Germany, represented
                        (98/C 234/44)                               by Georges Vandersanden and Laure Levi, of the Brussels
                                                                    Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the
                                                                    offices of Fiduciaire Myson SaÁrl, 30 Rue de Cessange, v
At its Plenary Conference held on 1 July 1998 the Court
                                                                    Commission of the European Communities (Agent:
of First Instance took formal note of the fact that, owing
                                                                    Gianluigi Valsesia), supported by Council of the European
to the judicial vacation, the oath-taking ceremony before
                                                                    Union (Agents: initially, Yves Cretien, Antonio Lucidi and
the Court of Justice for new members of the Court of First
                                                                    Diego Canga Fano and, subsequently, Mr Lucidi and Mr
Instance could not take place until after the judicial
                                                                    Canga Fano alone), Federal Republic of Germany (Agents:
vacation and that consequently, in accordance with the
                                                                    Sabine Maass, Ernst Röder and Bernd Kloke) and
third paragraph of Article 5 of the EC Statute of the
                                                                    Kingdom of the Netherlands (Agents: Marc Fierstra and
Court of Justice, the third paragraph of Article 5 of the
                                                                    Johannes van den Oosterkamp) Ð application, first, for
EAEC Statute of the Court of Justice, and the third
                                                                    annulment of the applicants' pension statements for
paragraph of Article 5 of the ECSC Statute of the Court
                                                                    December 1994, inasmuch as those statements are drawn
of Justice, the decisions of 2 July 1997 (OJ C 271 of
                                                                    up on the basis of Council Regulation (ECSC, EC,
6.9.1997) and 10 March 1998 (OJ C 113 of 11.4.1998)
                                                                    Euratom) No 3161/94 of 19 December 1994 adjusting,
on the designation of the Presidents of Chambers, the
                                                                    with effect from 1 July 1994, the remuneration and
composition of the Chambers and the assignment of cases
                                                                    pensions of officials (OJ L 335 of 23.12.1994, p. 1) and,
to them would continue to apply and that the President of
                                                                    second, for reinstatement of the applicants' pension rights
the Court, Mr Bo Vesterdorf, would continue to exercise
                                                                    in full, weighted, with effect from 3 October 1990, at the
the presidency of the Court of First Instance.
                                                                    rate fixed by reference to the cost of living in Berlin, and
                                                                    for default interest at the annual rate of 10 % Ð the
                                                                    Court of First Instance (Third Chamber), composed of: B.
                                                                    Vesterdorf, President, and C. P. BrieÈt and A. Potocki,
                                                                    Judges; H. Jung, Registrar, has given a judgment on 9 June
                                                                    1998, in which it:
  JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
                        of 9 June 1998
in Joined Cases T-171/95 and T-191/95: Adriaan Al and
99 Others and Franz Becker and 6 Others v Commission                1. Dismisses the applications as inadmissible;
              of the European Communities (1)
(Officials Ð Pensions Ð Weighting Ð Change of capital
Ð Retroactive effect Ð Regulation (ECSC, EC, Euratom)
No 3161/94 Ð Action for annulment Ð Admissibility Ð                 2. Orders the parties to bear their own costs.
             Act adversely affecting an official)
                        (98/C 234/45)
                                                                    (1) OJ C 315 of 25.11.1995.
               (Language of the case: French)
In Joined Cases T-171/95 and T-191/95: Adriaan Al and
99 other former officials and Franz Becker and 6 other