CELEX: C1998/151/06
Language: en
Date: 1998-05-16 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 27 February 1998 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (Case C-59/98)

C 151/4               EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                      16.5.98
Ioannou, Judges; G. Cosmas, Advocate-General; R. Grass,              Jacobs, Advocate-General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a
Registrar, has given a judgment on 12 March 1998, in                 judgment on 12 March 1998, in which it:
which it:
                                                                     1. declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed
1. declares that, by not adopting within the prescribed                  period, the laws, regulations and administrative
     period the laws, regulations and administrative                     provisions necessary in order to comply with Council
     provisions to comply with Council Directive 92/74/                  Directive 94/57/EC of 22 November 1994 on common
     EEC of 22 September 1992 widening the scope of                      rules and standards for ship inspection and survey
     Directive 81/851/EEC on the approximation of                        organisations and for the relevant activities of
     provisions laid down by law, regulation or                          maritime administrations, the Italian Republic has
     administrative action relating to veterinary medicinal              failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 16 thereof;
     products and laying down additional provisions on
     homeopathic veterinary medicinal products, the
     Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations         2. orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs.
     under Article 10(1) thereof;
                                                                     (1) OJ C 331, 1.11.1997.
2. orders the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.
(1) OJ C 212, 12.7.1997.
                                                                     Action brought on 27 February 1998 by the Commission
                                                                     of the European Communities against the Grand Duchy of
                                                                                                Luxembourg
                                                                                              (Case C-59/98)
               JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                                                                                               (98/C 151/06)
                       (Fifth Chamber)
                      of 12 March 1998
                                                                     An action against the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg was
      in Case C-313/97: Commission of the European                   brought before the Court of Justice of the European
             Communities v. Italian Republic (1)                     Communities on 27 February 1998 by the Commission of
                                                                     the European Communities, represented by Giuliano
(Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations Ð
                                                                     Marenco, Principal Legal Adviser, and JoseÂ F. Crespo
Directive 94/57/EC Ð Failure to transpose within the
                                                                     Carrillo, of its Legal Service, acting as Agents, with an
                      prescribed period)
                                                                     address for service in Luxembourg at the office of Carlos
                        (98/C 151/05)                                Gómez de la Cruz, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.
                (Language of the case: Italian)                      The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                     Ð declare that, by failing to adopt all the laws,
  (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be           regulations or administrative provisions necessary to
          published in the European Court Reports)                       comply with Commission Directive 94/46/EC of
                                                                         13 October 1994 amending Directive 88/301/EEC and
                                                                         Directive 90/388/EEC in particular with regard to
In Case C-313/97: Commission of the European                             satellite communications (1), the Grand Duchy of
Communities (Agent: L. Pignataro) v. Italian Republic                    Luxembourg has failed to fulfil its obligations under
(Agent: U. Leanza, assisted by G. Aiello) Ð application                  that directive,
for a declaration that, by failing to adopt and/or
communicate the laws, regulations and administrative
provisions necessary in order to comply with Council                 Ð order the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to pay the
Directive 94/57/EC of 22 November 1994 on common                         costs.
rules and standards for ship inspection and survey
organisations and for the relevant activities of maritime
administrations (OJ L 319, 12.12.1994, p. 20), the Italian           Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under the EC
Treaty and under that Directive Ð the Court (Fifth
Chamber), composed of: C. Gulmann, President of the                  The mandatory nature of the provisions of the third
Chamber, M. Wathelet (Rapporteur), J. C. Moitinho de                 paragraph of Article 189 and the first paragraph of
Almeida, J.-P. Puissochet and L. Sevón, Judges; F. G.                Article 5 of the EC Treaty requires Member States to
 ---pagebreak--- 16.5.98               EN                Official Journal of the European Communities                                  C 151/5
adopt the measures necessary to transpose directives               (EEC) No 4055/86 and, in particular to Article 4(1). They
addressed to them into their domestic law before the               should therefore be adjusted in order to comply with the
expiry of the period prescribed for doing so. That period,         Regulation.
which is laid down in Article 4 of the Directive, expired
on 8 August 1995 without the Grand Duchy of                        (1) OJ L 378, 31.12.1986, p. 1.
Luxembourg having brought into force the necessary
provisions.
(1) OJ L 268, 19.10.1994, p. 15.
                                                                   Appeal brought on 3 March 1998 by Odette Nicos
                                                                   Petrides Co. Inc. against the judgment delivered on
                                                                   17 December 1997 by the Fourth Chamber of the Court
                                                                   of First Instance of the European Communities in Case
                                                                   T-152/95 between Odette Nicos Petrides Co. Inc. and the
Action brought on 27 February 1998 by the Commission                        Commission of the European Communities
of the European Communities against the Portuguese
                                                                                         (Case C-64/98 P)
                           Republic
                       (Case C-62/98)                                                      (98/C 151/08)
                        (98/C 151/07)
                                                                   An appeal against the judgment delivered on 17 December
                                                                   1997 by the Fourth Chamber of the Court of First
                                                                   Instance of the European Communities in Case T-152/95
An action against the Portuguese Republic was brought
                                                                   between Odette Nicos Petrides Co. Inc. and the
before the Court of Justice of the European Communities
                                                                   Commission of the European Communities was brought
on 27 February 1998 by the Commission of the European
                                                                   before the Court of Justice of the European Communities
Communities, represented by António Caeiro, Principal
                                                                   on 3 March 1998 by Odette Nicos Petrides Co. Inc.,
Legal Adviser, acting as Agent, with an address for service
                                                                   represented by Nikolaos Vassilakakis and Evangelos
in Luxembourg at the office of Carlos Gómez de la Cruz,
                                                                   Vassilakakis, of the Thessalonica Bar, and Evangelia
of its Legal Service, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.
                                                                   Pallioudi, of the Kavala Bar, with an address for service in
                                                                   Luxembourg at the Chambers of Carlos Zeyen, 56Ð58
                                                                   Rue Charles Martel.
The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                   The appellant claims that the Court should:
1. declare that, by failing to denounce or adjust the
     agreements with Senegal, Cape Verde, Angola and Sao
                                                                   Ð grant the application for review and quash the
     Tome and Principe, so as to provide for fair, free and
                                                                       judgment (1),
     non-discriminatory access by all Community nationals
     to the cargo-shares due to Portugal, as provided for in
     Council Regulation (EEC) No 4055/86 of 22 December            Ð grant all the claims for damages in the action (2),
     1986 applying the principle of freedom to provide
     services to maritime transport between Member States
     and between Member States and third countries (1),            Ð order the Commission to pay the costs of the
     the Portuguese Republic failed to fulfil its obligations          proceedings before both the Court of First Instance
     under Articles 3 and 4(1) thereof and the EC Treaty,              and the Court of Justice.
                                                                   Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
2. order the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.
                                                                   Ð Insufficient reasoning in the contested judgment on
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                    questions which have a substantial bearing on the
                                                                       principle of proportionality,
The agreements between Portugal and the States referred            Ð manifestly incorrect application of the principle of
to in the application reserve the transport of cargo                   proportionality to the actual events in the second
between the parties to vessels flying the flag of one of the           tendering procedure,
parties or to vessels operated by persons or undertakings
having the nationality of one of the parties. Thus, vessels
operated by nationals of others are excluded from the              Ð distortion and misinterpretation of documentary
trade covered by the agreements. The Commission                        evidence by the Court of First Instance in that it
considers them to be cargo-sharing arrangements which                  manifestly gave those documents a different meaning
are subject to the provisions and obligations of Regulation            from their actual one when considering the principle