CELEX: 61999CJ0395
Language: en
Date: 2000-12-07
Title: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 7 December 2000. # Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic. # Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Directives 96/51/EC and 96/93/EC - Failure to transpose directives within the prescribed periods. # Case C-395/99.

Avis juridique important

|

61999J0395

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 7 December 2000.  -  Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic.  -  Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Directives 96/51/EC and 96/93/EC - Failure to transpose directives within the prescribed periods.  -  Case C-395/99.  

European Court reports 2000 Page I-11155

PartiesGroundsDecision on costsOperative part
Keywords

Member States Obligations Implementation of directives Failure to fulfil obligations not contested(Art. 226 EC) 

Parties

In Case C-395/99,Commission of the European Communities, represented by F.P. Ruggeri Laderchi, of its Legal Service, acting as Agent, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the office of C. Gómez de la Cruz, also of its Legal Service, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg,applicant,vItalian Republic, represented by Professor U. Leanza, Head of the Legal Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, acting as Agent, assisted by P.G. Ferri, Avvocato dello Stato, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Italian Embassy, 5 Rue Marie Adélaïde,defendant,APPLICATION for a declaration that, by not adopting or, in any event, not communicating the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 96/51/EC of 23 July 1996 amending Directive 70/524/EEC concerning additives in feedingstuffs (OJ 1996 L 235, p. 39) and with Council Directive 96/93/EC of 17 December 1996 on the certification of animals and animal products (OJ 1997 L 13, p. 28), the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under the EC Treaty and those directives,THE COURT (First Chamber),composed of: M. Wathelet, President of the Chamber, P. Jann (Rapporteur) and L. Sevón, Judges,Advocate General: S. Alber,Registrar: R. Grass,having regard to the report of the Judge-Rapporteur,after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 14 September 2000,gives the followingJudgment 

Grounds

1 By application lodged at the Court Registry on 12 October 1999, the Commission of the European Communities brought an action under Article 226 EC for a declaration that, by not adopting or, in any event, not communicating the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 96/51/EC of 23 July 1996 amending Directive 70/524/EEC concerning additives in feedingstuffs (OJ 1996 L 235, p. 39) and with Council Directive 96/93/EC of 17 December 1996 on the certification of animals and animal products (OJ 1997 L 13, p. 28), the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under the EC Treaty and those directives.2 Directive 96/51 provides, in Article 2(1):Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with:(a) the following provisions provided for in Article 1:point (4): Article 6(1), Article 9d(2), Article 9e(3), Article 9f, Article 9g, Article 9h, Article 9i, Article 9j, Article 9n, Article 9o,points 10, 12, 19 and 20,on 1 April 1998;(b) ...They shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof....3 Directive 96/93 provides, in Article 9(1):Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive before 1 January 1998. They shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof....4 Not having received notification of any measure to transpose Directives 96/51 and 96/93 into Italian law and having no other information from which it could conclude that the Italian Republic had complied with its obligation to transpose those directives, the Commission, by letters of 16 July 1998 with regard to Directive 96/51 and 3 June 1998 with regard to Directive 96/93, gave that Member State formal notice to submit its observations within a period of two months.5 The Italian authorities did not reply to those letters of formal notice.6 The Commission therefore took the view that the measures transposing, firstly, the provisions referred to in Article 2(1)(a) of Directive 96/51 and, secondly, the provisions of Directive 96/93 had not yet been adopted and sent the Italian Republic reasoned opinions asking it to adopt the measures necessary to comply with its obligations arising from those provisions within a period of two months from the date of notification of those opinions.7 The Italian authorities replied, by two letters of 22 February 1999, that they were preparing the national measures necessary to transpose Directives 96/51 and 96/93.8 Since no other information concerning the transposition of the directives in question had been communicated to the Commission, it decided to bring the present action.9 The Italian Government acknowledges its lateness in adopting and notifying the measures to implement Directives 96/51 and 96/93. That delay, it maintains, is due to the complexity of the procedure which must be followed under Italian law. However, the approval procedures have now reached their final stage.10 It is clear from the explanations provided by the Italian Government that the transposition of the provisions referred to in Article 2(1)(a) of Directive 96/51 and of the provisions of Directive 96/93 was not carried out within the prescribed periods. In those circumstances, the action brought in that connection by the Commission must be regarded as well founded.11 It must therefore be held that, by not adopting, within the prescribed periods, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with the provisions referred to in Article 2(1)(a) of Directive 96/51 and with the provisions of Directive 96/93, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under those provisions. 

Decision on costs

Costs12 Under Article 69(2) of the Rules of Procedure, the unsuccessful party is to be ordered to pay the costs if they have been applied for in the successful party's pleadings. Since the Commission has applied for costs and the Italian Republic has been unsuccessful, the latter must be ordered to pay the costs. 

Operative part

On those grounds,THE COURT (First Chamber)hereby:1. Declares that, by not adopting within the prescribed periods the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with the provisions referred to in Article 2(1)(a) of Council Directive 96/51/EC of 23 July 1996 amending Directive 70/524/EEC concerning additives in feedingstuffs, and with the provisions of Council Directive 96/93/EC of 17 December 1996 on the certification of animals and animal products, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under those provisions;2. Orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs.