CELEX: C1999/188/30
Language: en
Date: 1999-07-03 00:00:00
Title: Case C-123/99: Action brought on 13 April 1999 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Hellenic Republic

3.7.1999              EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                           C 188/13
2. order the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.                      — Failure to provide an adequate statement of reasons for the
                                                                           judgment: the Court of First Instance was unable, without
                                                                           running up against the appellant’s arguments, to reject the
Pleas in law and main arguments                                            plea concerning the unique nature of a person’s status,
                                                                           which is a separate plea from that of breach of the principle
                                                                           of equal treatment.
The Member States are required by the binding character of
the third paragraph of Article 189 and of Article 5 of the EC         — Disregard of the principle of conferred powers: neither the
Treaty to adopt the measures needed to transpose directives                Community legislature nor the Community institutions
into national law before the expiry of the period laid down for            may fix, alter or interpret the civil status of officials in their
that purpose and to communicate those measures immediately                 service.
to the Commission. That period expired on 31 July 1997
without the Hellenic Republic having communicated to the
Commission the provisions transposing the directive at issue          — Breach of the principle of the unique nature of the personal
into national law.                                                         status of Community nationals: the appellant’s personal
                                                                           status is governed by Swedish law, according to which a
                                                                           registered partner is to be regarded as a married person.
(1) OJ No L 169, 27.6.1997, p. 72.
                                                                      — Breach of the principles of freedom of movement for
                                                                           workers, equal treatment and non-discrimination.
                                                                      — Infringement of Article 8 of the European Convention on
                                                                           Human Rights: the protection of a person’s private life
                                                                           entails recognition of the existence and effects of a lawfully
                                                                           acquired civil status. The Court of First Instance was wrong
                                                                           to refer to the judgment in Grant (1), since that case
Appeal brought on 13 April 1999 by D against the                           concerned a relationship which was not formally recog-
judgment delivered on 28 January 1999 by the Second                        nised.
Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European
Communities in Case T-264/97 between D, supported by
the Kingdom of Sweden, and the Council of the European
                                                                      (1) Jugdment of the Court of Justice of 17 February 1998 in Case
                             Union                                        C-249/96.
                       (Case C-122/99 P)
                        (1999/C 188/29)
An appeal against the judgment delivered on 28 January 1999
by the Second Chamber of the Court of First Instance of
the European Communities in Case T-264/97 between D,                  Action brought on 13 April 1999 by the Commission of
supported by the Kingdom of Sweden, and the Council of the            the European Communities against the Hellenic Republic
European Union was brought before the Court of Justice of the
European Communities on 13 April 1999 by D, represented by
Jean-Noël Louis, Gréta-Françoise Parmentier and Véronique                                       (Case C-123/99)
Peere, lawyers, with an address for service in Luxembourg at
the offices of Fiduciaire Myson SARL, 30 Rue de Cessange.
                                                                                               (1999/C 188/30)
The appellant claims that the Court should:
                                                                      An action against the Hellenic Republic was brought before
— set aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the        the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 13 April
    European Communities (Second Chamber) of 28 January               1999 by the Commission of the European Communities,
    1999 in Case T-264/97 D, supported by the Kingdom of              represented by Maria Kondou-Durande, of its Legal Service,
    Sweden, v Council of the European Union                           with an address for service in Luxembourg at the office of
                                                                      Carlos Gómez de la Cruz, of its Legal Service, Wagner Centre,
— order the respondent to pay the costs of both sets of               Kirchberg.
    proceedings.
                                                                      The Commission claims that the Court should:
Pleas in law and main arguments                                       1. declare that, by not communicating the laws, regulations
                                                                           and administrative provisions necessary to comply with
— The Court of First Instance unlawfully altered the subject-              European Parliament and Council Directive 94/62/EC (1)
    matter of the action by confining itself to an examination             of 20 December 1994 on packaging and packaging waste,
    of the question whether it was legally open to the Council,            or by not adopting the necessary measures to comply
    by way of an autonomous interpretation, to treat a                     therewith, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its
    registered partnership as equivalent to a marriage.                    obligations under the Treaty and that directive;
 ---pagebreak--- C 188/14              EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                       3.7.1999
2. order the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.                      Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster
                                                                      Gerichtshof (Supreme Court), Austria, by order of that
                                                                      court of 30 March 1999 in the case of Johann Kappel v
Pleas in law and main arguments                                                 Pensionsversicherungsanstalt der Arbeiter
The Member States are required by the binding character of                                     (Case C-128/99)
the third paragraph of Article 189 and of Article 5 of the EC
Treaty to adopt the measures needed to transpose directives
into national law before the expiry of the period laid down for                                (1999/C 188/32)
that purpose and to communicate those measures immediately
to the Commission. That period expired on 30 June 1996
                                                                      Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
without the Hellenic Republic having communicated to the
                                                                      European Communities by an order of the Oberster Gerichtsh-
Commission the provisions transposing the directive at issue
                                                                      of (Supreme Court), Austria, of 30 March 1999, which was
into national law.
                                                                      received at the Court Registry on 15 April 1999, for a
                                                                      preliminary ruling in the case of Johann Kappel v Pensionsver-
(1) OJ No L 365, 31.12.1994, p. 10.                                   sicherungsanstalt der Arbeiter, on the following questions:
                                                                      1. Is Article 7(1)(a) of Directive 79/7/EEC (1) to be interpreted
                                                                           as allowing Member States to determine different pension-
                                                                           able ages only for pension rights which are granted
                                                                           exclusively on the basis of the risk of old age, or is that
                                                                           derogation applicable also to pension rights which are
                                                                           granted only from a specified age but in addition are
Appeal brought on 15 April 1999 by the Kingdom of                          granted only on account of invalidity (reduced capacity for
Sweden against the judgment delivered on 28 January                        work)?
1999 by the Second Chamber of the Court of First
Instance of the European Communities in Case T-264/97
between D, supported by the Kingdom of Sweden, and                    2. Is Article 7(1)(a) and (2) of Directive 79/7/EEC to be
              the Council of the European Union                            interpreted as allowing a Member State to alter a previously
                                                                           existing identical provision on pensionable age (in this case
                                                                           completion of the 55th year for men and women) after the
                       (Case C-125/99 P)                                   end of the transposition period, in such a way that a
                                                                           different pensionable age for men and women (in this case
                        (1999/C 188/31)                                    completion of the 57th year for men and the 55th year for
                                                                           women) is now determined?
An appeal against the judgment delivered on 28 January 1999
by the Second Chamber of the Court of First Instance of
the European Communities in Case T-264/97 between D,                  (1) OJ 1979 L 6, p. 24.
supported by the Kingdom of Sweden, and the Council of the
European Union was brought before the Court of Justice of
the European Communities on 15 April 1999 by the Kingdom
of Sweden, represented by Lotty Nordling, Legal Adviser, with
an address for service in Luxembourg at the Swedish Embassy,
2 Rue Heinrich Heine.
The appellant claims that the Court should:                           Action brought on 15 April 1999 by the Federal Republic
                                                                      of Germany against the Commission of the European
— set aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance and                                     Communities
    declare void the decision of the Council refusing to grant
    the benefits claimed by D;
                                                                                               (Case C-129/99)
— order the Council to reimburse the costs incurred by
    Sweden in the proceedings before the Court of Justice.
                                                                                               (1999/C 188/33)
Pleas in law and main arguments                                       An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
                                                                      ties was brought before the Court of Justice of the European
Disregard of Article 1 of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations, in      Communities on 15 April 1999 by the Federal Republic of
that a meaning has been applied to the expressions ‘married’          Germany, represented by Wolf-Dieter Plessing and Claus-
and ‘spouse’ which does not take into account the family              Dieter Quassowski, Bundesministerium der Finanzen, Postfach
situation and civil status of officials under the national            13 08, D-53003 Bonn.
legislation applicable to them, and inasmuch as officials living
in a situation of registered partnership are not treated in the
                                                                      The applicant claims that the Court should:
same way as married officials.
                                                                      •    annul the Commission Decision of 3 February 1999 —
                                                                           C(99)209 final — on the clearance of the accounts