CELEX: C1998/278/08
Language: en
Date: 1998-09-05 00:00:00
Title: JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Sixth Chamber) of 25 June 1998 in Case C-203/96 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Nederlandse Raad van State): Chemische Afvalstoffen Dusseldorp BV and Others v. Minister van Volkshuisvesting, Ruimtelijke Ordening en Milieubeheer (Shipments of waste for recovery - Principles of self-sufficiency and proximity)

5.9.98                EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                     C 278/5
2a. The reference to the storage of materials in point R 13          (Netherlands Council of State) for a preliminary ruling in
      of Annex II B to Council Directive 75/442/EEC of               the proceedings pending before that court between Chemi-
      15 July 1975 on waste, as amended by Directive 91/             sche Afvalstoffen Dusseldorp BV and Others and Minister
      156/EEC of 18 March 1991, must be interpreted as               van Volkshuisvesting, Ruimtelijke Ordening en Milieube-
      covering not only cases in which storage takes place           heer Ð on the interpretation of Articles 34, 86, 90 and
      in the undertaking in which the other operations               130t of the EC Treaty, of Council Directive 75/442/EEC
      mentioned in that Annex must be carried out but also           of 15 July 1975 on waste (OJ L 194, 25.7.1975, p. 39), as
      cases in which storage precedes transport to such an           amended by Directive 91/156/EEC of 18 March 1991 (OJ
      undertaking, regardless of whether the latter is               L 78, 26.3.1991, p. 32), and of Council Regulation (EEC)
      established inside or outside the Community.                   No 259/93 of 1 February 1993 on the supervision and
                                                                     control of shipments of waste within, into and out of the
                                                                     European Community (OJ L 30, 6.2.1993, p. 1) Ð the
                                                                     Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of: H. Ragnemalm
2b. The information listed in Article 11(1) of Regulation            (Rapporteur), President of the Chamber, G. F. Mancini,
      (EEC) No 259/93 constitutes the minimum evidence               P. J. G. Kapteyn, J. L. Murray and G. Hirsch, Judges;
      which the competent authority may, in the absence of           F. G. Jacobs, Advocate-General; H. A. Rühl, Principal
      notification, require in order to establish that green        Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on
      waste' is intended for recovery.                               25 June 1998, in which it has ruled:
3.    Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 must be interpreted as
      meaning that the Member State of destination may
      not unilaterally return waste to the Member State of           1. Council Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on
      dispatch without prior notification to the latter; the             waste, as amended by Directive 91/156/EEC of
      Member State of dispatch may not oppose its return                 18 March 1991 and Council Regulation (EEC)
      where the Member State of destination produces a                   No 259/93 of 1 February 1993 on the supervision and
      duly motivated request to that effect.                             control of shipments of waste within, into and out of
                                                                         the European Community cannot be interpreted as
(1) OJ C 233, 10.8.1996.                                                 meaning that the principles of self-sufficiency and
                                                                         proximity are applicable to shipments of waste for
                                                                         recovery. Article 130t of the EC Treaty does not
                                                                         permit Member States to extend the application of
                                                                         those principles to such waste when it is clear that
                                                                         they create a barrier to exports which is not justified
                                                                         either by an imperative measure relating to protection
                                                                         of the environment or by one of derogations provided
                                                                         for by Article 36 of that Treaty.
               JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                       (Sixth Chamber)
                        of 25 June 1998
in Case C-203/96 (reference for a preliminary ruling from            2. Article 90 of the EC Treaty, in conjunction with
the Nederlandse Raad van State): Chemische Afvalstoffen                  Article 86, precludes rules such as the long-term plan
Dusseldorp BV and Others v. Minister van Volkshuis-                      whereby a Member State requires undertakings to
     vesting, Ruimtelijke Ordening en Milieubeheer (1)                   deliver their waste for recovery, such as oil filters, to a
                                                                         national undertaking on which it has conferred the
(Shipments of waste for recovery Ð Principles of self-
                                                                         exclusive right to incinerate dangerous waste unless
                  sufficiency and proximity)
                                                                         the processing of their waste in another Member State
                         (98/C 278/08)                                   is of a higher quality than that performed by that
                                                                         undertaking if, without any objective justification and
                                                                         without being necessary for the performance of a task
                                                                         in the general interest, those rules have the effect of
                (Language of the case: Dutch)                            favouring the national undertaking and increasing its
                                                                         dominant position.
  (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be       (1) OJ C 247, 24.8.1996.
          published in the European Court Reports)
In Case C-203/96: reference to the Court under Article 177
of the EC Treaty from the Nederlandse Raad van State