CELEX: C1997/199/31
Language: en
Date: 1997-06-28 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 5 May 1997 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (Case C-177/97)

No C 199/ 16         EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                 28 . 6 . 97
Action brought on 5 May 1997 by the Commission of the               agreement as envisaged by Article 5 of the regulation,
 European Communities against the Kingdom of Belgium                with which it is incompatible .
                       ( Case C-176/97)
                                                                    (') OJ No L 378 , 31 . 12 . 1986 , p . 1 .
                         ( 97/C 199/30 )
An action against the Kingdom of Belgium was brought
before the Court of Justice of the European Communities
on 5 May 1997 by the Commission of the European                     Action brought on 5 May 1997 by the Commission of
Communities, represented by Frank Benyon, acting as                 the European Communities against the Grand Duchy of
Agent, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the                                         Luxembourg
offices of Carlos Gomez de la Cruz, Wagner Centre,
Kirchberg.                                                                                   ( Case C-l 77/97)
                                                                                               ( 97/C 199/31 )
The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                    An action against the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg was
                                                                    brought before the Court of Justice of the European
                                                                    Communities on 5 May 1997 by the Commission of the
— declare that by introducing and maintaining in force
                                                                    European Communities, represented by Frank Benyon,
     cargo-sharing arrangements, in the Agreement between
                                                                    acting as Agent, with an address for service in
     the Belgo-Luxembourg Economic Union and Malaysia
                                                                    Luxembourg at the offices of Carlos Gomez de la Cruz,
     which was approved by Belgium and entered into
                                                                    Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.
     force after 1 January 1987, the Kingdom of Belgium
     has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 5 of
     Council Regulation ( EEC ) No 4055/86 of 22 December           The applicant claims that the Court should:
     1986 applying the principle of freedom to provide
     services to maritime transport between Member States
     and between Member States and third countries ('),             — declare that by introducing and maintaining in force
                                                                         cargo-sharing arrangements, in the Agreement between
                                                                         the Belgo-Luxembourg Economic Union and Malaysia
— order the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs .                        which was approved by Belgium and entered into
                                                                         force after 1 January 1987, the Grand Duchy of
                                                                         Luxembourg has failed to fulfil its obligations under
                                                                         Article 5 of Council Regulation ( EEC ) No 4055/86 of
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                      22 December 1986 applying the principle of freedom
                                                                         to provide services to maritime transport between
                                                                         Member States and between Member States and third
Council Regulation ( EEC ) No 4055/86 of 22 December                     countries ('),
1986 applying the principle of freedom to provide services
to maritime transport between Member States and
between Member States and third countries entered into              — order the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to pay the
                                                                         costs .
force on 1 January 1987, pursuant to Article 12 thereof.
                                                                     Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
The regulation prohibits cargo-sharing arrangements in
agreements between Member States and third countries .
Article 5 provides that, in any future agreements, such              Council Regulation (EEC ) No 4055/86 of 22 December
arrangements are authorized only in exceptional                      1986 applying the principle of freedom to provide services
circumstances where Community liner shipping companies               to maritime transport between Member States and
                                                                     between Member States and third countries entered into
would not otherwise have an effective opportunity to ply
for trade to and from the third country concerned .                  force on 1 January 1987, pursuant to Article 12 thereof.
Article 3 provides that arrangements contained in existing
agreements were to be phased out or adjusted in                      The regulation prohibits cargo-sharing arrangements in
accordance with the provisions of Article 4 .                        agreements between Member States and third countries .
                                                                     Article 5 provides that, in any future agreements, such
                                                                     arrangements are authorized only in exceptional
 The maritime agreement between the Belgo-Luxembourg                 circumstances where Community liner shipping companies
 Economic Union and Malaysia , signed at Kuala Lumpur                would not otherwise have an effective opportunity to ply
 on 12 February 1985 , contains a cargo-sharing                      for trade to and from the third country concerned.
 arrangement. That agreement, which was approved by a                Article 3 provides that arrangements contained in existing
 law of 29 June 1987 (Moniteur Beige, 2 September 1987)              agreements were to be phased out or adjusted in
 and entered into force on 17 August 1987, is a future               accordance with the provisions of Article 4 .
 ---pagebreak--- 28 . 6 . 97          EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                 No C 199/ 17
The maritime agreement between the Belgo-Luxembourg                 Infringement of Council Regulation ( EEC )
Economic Union and Malaysia, signed at Kuala Lumpur                 No 1956 / 88 ( 2 ), as amended by Council
on 12 February 1985 , contains a cargo-sharing                      Regulation ( EC ) No 3067 / 95 ( 3 ) :
arrangement. Concluded by Belgium in the name of the
Union in accordance with Article 31 of the Treaty
establishing the Belgo-Luxembourg Economic Union, the               the contested provision also infringes paragraph 10 ( iv ) of
agreement entered into force on 17 August 1987 and is a             the Annex to the above regulation, which also provides
future agreement covered by Article 5 of the regulation,            that 'a NAFO inspector from another Contracting Party
with which it is incompatible.                                      may, subject to the consent of the Contracting Party of the
                                                                    vessel, board the vessel as it is proceeding to port, may
                                                                    remain on board the vessel as it proceeds to port and may
O OJ No L 378 , 31 . 12 . 1986, p . 1 .
                                                                    be present during the inspection of the vessel in port.' But,
                                                                    when Article 4 of Council Regulation ( EEC ) No 1956/88
                                                                    empowers the Commission to adopt implementing
                                                                    measures under the Management Committee procedure, it
                                                                    does not allow it in any circumstances to approve
                                                                    provisions which are contrary to the Regulation which it
Action brought on 12 May 1997 by the Kingdom of Spain               purports to implement.
     against Commission of the European Communities
                       ( Case C-l 79/97                             H OJ No L 77, 19 . 3 . 1997, p. 5 .
                                                                    ( 2 ) OJ No L 175 , 6 . 7. 1988 , p. 1 .
                         ( 97/C 199/32 )                            ( 3 ) OJ No L 329, 30 . 12 . 1995 , p . 1
An action against the Commission of the European
Communities was brought before the Court of Justice on
12 May 1997 by the Kingdom of Spain, represented by
Rosario Silva de la Puerta, with an address for service in
Luxembourg at the Spanish Embassy, 4-6 Boulevard                    Action brought on 12 May 1997 by the Commission of the
E. Servais .                                                            European Communities against the Portuguese Republic
                                                                                               ( Case C-183/97)
The applicant claims that the Court of Justice should:
                                                                                                  97/C 199/33 )
— annul Article 4a ( 6 ) of Commission Regulation ( EEC )
     No 2868/88 establishing detailed rules for the                 An action against the Portuguese Republic was brought
     application of the Joint International Inspection              before the Court of Justice of the European Communities
     Scheme adopted by the North-West Atlantic Fisheries            on 12 May 1997 by the Commission of the European
     Organization, as modified by Commission Regulation             Communities, represented by Francisco de Sousa Fialho,
     ( EC ) No 494/97 H of 18 March 1997, and                       of its Legal Service, acting as Agent, with an address for
                                                                    service in Luxembourg at the office of Carlos Gomez de la
— order the Commission to pay the costs .                           Cruz, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                 The applicant claims that the Court should:
Infringement of Annex I , point II ( 9 ) ( e ) ( iv )               — declare that, by failing to adopt all the laws,
of the Convention between the Community                                    regulations or administrative provisions necessary to
and Canada on fishing under the NAFO                                       comply with Council Directive 80/68/EEC of
arrangements :                                                             17 December 1979 on the protection of groundwater
                                                                           against pollution caused by certain dangerous
                                                                           substances ('), in particular with respect to the
according to that Convention, for a NAFO inspector of
                                                                           obligations arising from Articles 8 , 9, 10, 11 and 15
another Contracting Party to take part in an inspection
                                                                           thereof, the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its
carried out in port, the consent is required of the
Contracting Party whose flag the vessel is flying. There is                obligations under the third paragraph of Article 189 of
thus a clear contradiction between the content of the                      the EC Treaty and Article 21 ( 1 ) of Directive 80/68/
                                                                           EEC ,
contested regulation, which does not require the consent
to be obtained of the Contracting Party whose flag the
vessel is flying, and the Convention on which it is based.          — declare, in the alternative, that by failing to inform the
An internal Community provision cannot override the                        Commission       forthwith        of such measures,  the
provisions of an international commitment. The primacy                     Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations
of international agreements concluded by the Community                     under the abovementioned provisions;
over instruments of secondary Community law means that
the latter must be interpreted in accordance with those
agreements .                                                        — order the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs .