CELEX: C2002/233/25
Language: en
Date: 2002-09-28 00:00:00
Title: Case C-274/02: Action brought on 25 July 2002 by the Commission of the European Communities against the French Republic

C 233/16                EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                      28.9.2002
Action brought on 25 July 2002 by the Commission of                      make good that failure. A Member State may not rely on
 the European Communities against the French Republic                    provisions, practices or circumstances existing in its internal
                                                                         legal order to justify its failure to comply with obligations laid
                                                                         down by Community law. Under no circumstances may it
                          (Case C-274/02)                                make its compliance with the judgment subject to any
                                                                         conditions whatsoever. The task given to the AFSSA by the
                                                                         French Government’s new referral, namely a study whether
                          (2002/C 233/25)                                ‘DBES’ products and French products are comparable, amounts
                                                                         to casting doubt on the primacy of Community law. The
                                                                         argument based on the alleged complexity of the judgment of
                                                                         13 December 2001 cannot in any circumstance justify any
An action against the French Republic was brought before the             delay in compliance; moreover, the operative part of the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 25 July                  judgment is very clear, namely that the French Republic is
2002 by the Commission of the European Communities,                      required to permit the marketing of correctly marked or
represented by D. Booss and G. Berscheid, acting as Agents,              labelled ‘DBES’ products in its territory.
with an address for service in Luxembourg.
                                                                         In the alternative: it is not open to a Member State to rely
                                                                         upon the illegality of decisions addressed to it as a defence to
The Commission of the European Communities claims that
                                                                         an action for failure to fulfil its obligations based on its failure
the Court should:
                                                                         to comply with those decisions, either in proceedings under
                                                                         Article 226 EC, or, a fortiori, in proceedings under Article 228
—     declare that, by failing to take the necessary measures to         EC.
      comply with the judgment of the Court of Justice of the
      European Communities of 13 December 2001 in Case
      C-1/00 (1), that the French Republic, by refusing to adopt         So far as the amount of the penalty payment is concerned, the
      the measures necessary to comply with Council Decision             Commission refers to its information notices of 21 August
      98/256/EC of 16 March 1998 concerning emergency                    1996 (5) and 28 February 1997 ( 6) and applies to the basic
      measures to protect against bovine spongiform encepha-             amount of EUR 500 a factor of 15 (maximum possible: 20)
      lopathy, amending Decision 94/474/EC and repealing                 for the seriousness of the infringement, a factor of 1 (maximum
      Decision 96/239/EC ( 2), in the version resulting from             possible: 3) for its duration, and a factor of 21,1 for France’s
      Commission Decision 98/692/EC of 25 November                       ability to pay.
      1998 ( 3), in particular with Article 6 and Annex III, and
      Commission Decision 1999/514/EC of 23 July 1999 (4)
      setting the date on which dispatch from the United                 (1 ) [2001] ECR I-9989.
      Kingdom of bovine products under the date-based export             (2 ) OJ L 113, 15.4.1998, p. 33.
      scheme may commence by virtue of Article 6(5) of                   (3 ) OJ L 328, 4.12.1998, p. 35.
      Decision 98/256, in particular with Article 1, in particu-         (4 ) OJ L 195, 28.7.1999, p. 42.
      lar, by refusing to permit the marketing in its territory          (5 ) OJ C 242, p. 6.
      after 30 December 1999 of products subject to that                 (6 ) OJ C 63, p. 2.
      scheme which are correctly marked or labelled, was in
      breach of its obligations under those two decisions, in
      particular their provisions referred to above, the French
      Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under
      Article 228 of the Treaty establishing the European
      Community,
—     order the French Republic to pay into the Commission’s             Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Court of Appeal
      ‘own resources of the EC’ account, a penalty payment of            (England & Wales) (Civil Division), by order of that court
      EUR 158 250 per day, for each day’s delay in taking the            dated 5 July 2002, in the case of Andrew Owusu against
      measures necessary to comply with the judgment given               1) N. B. Jackson (trading as Villa Holidays Bal-Inn Villas),
      by the Court of Justice in Case C-1/00, calculated from            2) Mammee Bay Resorts Ltd, 3) Mammee Bay Club Ltd,
      the date of delivery of that judgment,                             4) The Enchanted Garden Resorts & Spa Ltd, 5) Consulting
                                                                                 Services Ltd, 6) Town & Country Resorts Ltd
—     order the French Republic to pay the costs.
                                                                                                  (Case C-281/02)
                                                                                                  (2002/C 233/26)
Pleas in law and main arguments
The simple fact that the Court has found that a Member State             Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
has failed to fulfil its obligations obliges the Member State to         European Communities by an order of the Court of Appeal