CELEX: C1999/071/25
Language: en
Date: 1999-03-13 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 28 December 1998 by the Kingdom of Spain against the Commission of the European Communities (Case C-480/98)

C 71/14                EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                  13.3.1999
(3) On the correct interpretation of Article 4(1) of                    Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
     Commission Decision 97/534/EC:
                                                                        1. The present case does not concern a loan made by a
     (a) must specified risk material be removed and                        State organisation to an undertaking for investment
         stained at the point of production; and                            purposes; instead, it relates to the recovery of a debt
                                                                            due in respect of unpaid social security contributions,
     (b) is the point of production for those purposes the                  to be effected in one of the ways provided for in the
         place at which the animals are slaughtered?                        social security legislation and under the circumstances
                                                                            laid down therein.
(4) If the answer to Question 1 is No, may a Member                         To attach different conditions to the deferral of
     State nonetheless justify under Article 36 of the Treaty               payment of the debt, and to impose an interest rate
     on the grounds of the protection of human health                       different from the statutory rate, as advocated by the
     measures including a prohibition on the importation                    Commission, would entail an act contrary to the
     from another Member State of:                                          Spanish social security legislation which the Spanish
                                                                            legislature alone is competent to adopt, as provided
     (a) specified risk material within the meaning of the                  for by Article 118 of the Treaty.
         said Decision;
                                                                        2. The Commission appears to question the lawfulness of
         or                                                                 the very system of deferral or payment in instalments
                                                                            which exists under Spanish law; however, it is not
                                                                            empowered to pronounce on the lawfulness of that
     (b) bovine heads       containing     such   specified   risk
                                                                            system, the determination thereof being a matter
         material?
                                                                            falling within the legislative competence of the State.
(1) Council Directive 89/662/EEC of 11 December 1989
    concerning veterinary checks in intra-Community trade with a        3. In accordance with the normal regulatory practice
    view to the completion of the internal market (OJ L 395,                regarding the deferral of debts due to the social
    30.12.1989, p. 13).                                                     security authorities, Royal Decree No 505/85 on the
(2) Commission Decision 97/534/EC of 30 July 1997 on the                    organisation and operation of the FOGASA refers to
    prohibition of the use of material presenting risks as regards          the application of the statutory interest rate
    transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (Text with EEA                determined in accordance with Article 1 of the 1984
    relevance) (OJ L 216, 8.8.1997, p. 95).                                 Law. The present case does not concern State aid but
                                                                            relates instead to the application of legislation laying
                                                                            down generally applicable rules.
                                                                        4. The general nature of the application of the statutory
                                                                            interest rate to agreements concerning the repayment
Action brought on 24 December 1998 by the Kingdom                           of wages and salaries paid by FOGASA and the
of Spain against the Commission of the European                             deferral of debts due to the social security authorities
                          Communities                                       is such as to preclude the existence of any unlawful
                                                                            State aid.
                        (Case C-479/98)
                         (1999/C 71/24)                                 5. The contested decision is based on an           inaccurate
                                                                            comparison, in that it treats a creditor      seeking to
                                                                            recover a debt due to it in the same way as   an investor
An action against the Commission of the European                            who is seeking to obtain an economic          benefit by
Communities was brought before the Court of Justice of                      granting a loan.
the European Communities on 24 December 1998 by the
Kingdom of Spain, represented by M. López-Monís
Gallego, Abogado del Estado, acting as Agent, with an
address for service in Luxembourg at the Spanish
Embassy, 4-6 Boulevard Emmanuel Servais.
                                                                        Action brought on 28 December 1998 by the Kingdom
The applicant claims that the Court should:                             of Spain against the Commission of the European
                                                                                                 Communities
                                                                                              (Case C-480/98)
(1) annul the Commission's decision of 28 October 1998
     concerning State aid granted to SNIACE, of                                                (1999/C 71/25)
     Torrelavega, Cantabria;
                                                                        An action against the Commission of the European
(2) order the defendant institution to pay the costs.                   Communities was brought before the Court of Justice of
 ---pagebreak--- 13.3.1999                 EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                    C 71/15
the European Communities on 28 December 1998 by the                              Exchequer and to the social security fund by four
Kingdom of Spain, represented by R. Silva de Lapuerta,                           undertakings, two of which are insolvent and the
Abogado del Estado, acting as Agent, with an address for                         other two of which are not trading, constitutes public
service in Luxembourg at the Spanish Embassy, 4-6                                aid which is incompatible with the common market.
Boulevard Emmanuel Servais.
                                                                            4. O b l i g a t i o n t o r e c o v e r t h e a i d
The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                                 As regards that repayment obligation, apart from the
(1) annul the Commission's decision of 14 October 1998
                                                                                 fact that the amount to be repaid is not quantified,
    concerning aid granted by Spain to the undertakings in
                                                                                 interest cannot accrue in relation to undertakings
    the MAGEFESA group and their successor
                                                                                 which are the subject of insolvency proceedings.
    undertakings;
(2) order the defendant institution to pay the costs.
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
                                                                            Action brought on 31 December 1998 by the Italian
1. I n f r i n g e m e n t o f A r t i c l e 9 2 ( 1 ) o f t h e E C        Republic against the Commission of the European
    Tr e a t y                                                                                          Communities
                                                                                                      (Case C-482/98)
    The Kingdom of Spain considers that the partial                                                    (1999/C 71/26)
    non-payment by the companies INDOSA, CUNOSA,
    MIGSA and GURSA of certain sums due to the social
    security fund and to the Hacienda PuÂblica (Exchequer)                  An action against the Commission of the European
    does not constitute aid incompatible with the common                    Communities was brought before the Court of Justice of
    market, since that non-payment results from the                         the European Communities on 31 December 1998 by the
    application of a general rule of law governing any                      Italian Republic, represented by Professor Umberto
    undertaking which is the subject of insolvency                          Leanza, acting as Agent, assisted by Oscar Fiumara,
    proceedings or which has incurred debts due to the                      Avvocato dello Stato, with an address for service in
    social security authorities or to the Hacienda PuÂblica,                Luxembourg at the Italian Embassy, 5 Rue
    and the undertakings alleged to have been granted the                   Marie-Adelaïde.
    aid have not been treated in a different way.
    Furthermore, this is not a case in which any advantage                  The applicant claims that the Court should:
    has been provided, either directly or indirectly, by
    means of State funds, inasmuch as neither the                           Ð Annul the Commission's decision, referring the matter
    Tesorería General de la Seguridad Social (Social                             back to the Commission for review (1);
    Security General Fund) nor the Agencia Estatal de la
    Administración Tributaría (State Fiscal Administration
    Agency) nor the Diputación Foral de Vizcaya                             Ð Order the Commission to pay the costs.
    (Government of the Province of Biscay) has at any
    time remitted any debts owed to them by those
    undertakings; on the contrary, they have taken all legal                Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
    steps within their powers in order to recover the debts
    due to them.
                                                                            The Commission's decision is erroneous and vitiated on
                                                                            the following grounds:
2. B r e a c h o f t h e p r i n c i p l e o f l e g a l c e r t a i n t y
                                                                            Ð It affirms, in general contrast with point 7.4 of Annex I
    The contested decision is not clear or precise and does                      to Council Directive 80/232/EEC (2) concerning certain
    not enable the Kingdom of Spain to ascertain the                             cosmetic products, that cosmetic products may be
    obligations which that decision imposes on it or,                            produced from impure alcohol; moreover, it does not
    consequently, to exercise its rights of defence and to                       appear from the decision that the Community
    adopt the measures which it considers appropriate; it                        scientific bodies have addressed the question, even
    therefore breaches the principle of legal certainty.                         though it was constantly urged by the Italian
                                                                                 administrative authorities throughout the procedure
3. A b s e n c e o f a s t a t e m e n t o f r e a s o n s                       that they be consulted;
    The Commission has failed to state in the contested                     Ð In contrast to Article 1(1) of Council Directive
    decision the reasons why the non-payment of certain                          76/768/EEC (3), as amended by Council Directive
    unspecified sums to the State and Provincial Public                          93/35/EEC (4), it endorses the argument that cosmetic