CELEX: C1999/160/10
Language: en
Date: 1999-06-05 00:00:00
Title: Case C-90/99: Action brought on 16 March 1999 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Portuguese Republic

5.6.1999                EN                       Official Journal of the European Communities                                         C 160/5
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal                        The applicant claims that the Court of Justice should:
Administratif of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg
(Second Chamber) by judgment of that court of 11 March                      — declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and
1999 in the case of Patrick Zurstrassen v. Administration                        administrative provisions necessary to comply fully and
                  des Contributions Directes                                     correctly with Commission Directive 96/4/EC (1), Euratom
                                                                                 of 16 February 1996 amending Directive 91/321/EEC on
                                                                                 infant formulae and follow-on formulae, the Portuguese
                           (Case C-87/99)                                        Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under the third
                                                                                 paragraph of Article 189 of the EC Treaty and Article 2 of
                                                                                 Directive 96/4/EC,
                          (1999/C 160/09)
                                                                            — in the alternative, declare that by failing to inform the
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                           Commission forthwith of such measures, the Portuguese
European Communities by a judgment of the Tribunal Admini-                       Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under the same
                                                                                 provisions;
stratif (Administrative court) of the Grand Duchy of Luxem-
bourg (Second Chamber) of 11 March 1999, which was
received at the Court Registry on 12 March 1999, for a                      — order the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.
preliminary ruling in the case of Patrick Zurstrassen v.
Administration des Contributions Directes on the following
question:                                                                   Contentions and principal arguments adduced in support
— Do Article 48 of the Treaty on European Union and Article                 The contentions and principal arguments adduced in support
    1(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 (1) of the Council on               are similar to those in Case C-78/99 (2), the period for
    freedom of movement for workers within the Community,                   implementing the directive expired on 31 March 1997.
    of 15 October 1968 preclude national rules which subject
    the joint assessment to tax of two spouses and their
    classification in tax bracket II, which allows the spouses a            (1) OJ L 49, 22.2.1996, p. 12.
    lighter tax burden under certain circumstances than that                (2) See p. 3 of this Official Journal.
    imposed on them if taxed individually, to the condition
    that the two spouses — who are not separated either de
    facto or by virtue of a judicial decision — must have their
    respective residences for tax purposes in the same State,
    and which thereby exclude from that tax regime a spouse
    who establishes himself in one Member State, leaving the
    rest of his family in another Member State?
                                                                            Action brought on 17 March 1999 by the Commission
(1) OJ, English Special Edition 1968 (II), p. 475.                          of the European Communities against the Portuguese
                                                                                                            Republic
                                                                                                        (Case C-91/99)
                                                                                                       (1999/C 160/11)
                                                                            An action against the Portuguese Republic was brought before
                                                                            the Court of Justice on 17 March 1999 by the Commission of
Action brought on 16 March 1999 by the Commission                           the European Communities, represented by Ana Maria Alves
of the European Communities against the Portuguese                          Vieira, of its Legal Service, acting as Agent, with an address for
                              Republic                                      service in Luxembourg at the office of Carlos Gómez de la
                                                                            Cruz, also of its Legal Service, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.
                           (Case C-90/99)
                                                                            The applicant claims that the Court of Justice should:
                          (1999/C 160/10)                                   — declare that, by failing to adopt within the prescribed
                                                                                 period all the measures needed to comply fully with
                                                                                 Council Directive 96/43/EC (1) of 26 June 1996 amending
An action against the Portuguese Republic was brought before                     and consolidating Directive 85/73/EEC (2) and amending
the Court of Justice on 16 March 1999 by the Commission of                       Directives 90/675/EEC (3) and 91/496/EEC (4), the Portu-
the European Communities, represented by Francisco de Sousa                      guese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under the
Fialho, of its Legal Service, acting as Agent, with an address for               Treaty,
service in Luxembourg at the office of Carlos Gómez de la
Cruz, also of its Legal Service, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.                  — order the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.
 ---pagebreak--- C 160/6                   EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                         5.6.1999
Contentions and principal arguments adduced in support                    Action brought on 17 March 1999 by the Commission
                                                                          of the European Communities against the Portuguese
                                                                                                           Republic
The contentions and principal arguments adduced in support
are similar to those in Case C-78/99 (5); the period for
implementing the directive expired on 1 July 1997.                                                     (Case C-93/99)
                                                                                                      (1999/C 160/13)
( 1) OJ L 162, 1.7.1996, p. 1.
( 2) OJ L 32, 5.2.1985, p. 14.
( 3) OJ L 373, 31.12.1990, p. 1.                                          An action against the Portuguese Republic was brought before
( 4) OJ L 268, 24.9.1991, p. 56.                                          the Court of Justice on 17 March 1999 by the Commission of
( 5) See p. 3 of this Official Journal.                                   the European Communities, represented by Ana Maria Alves
                                                                          Vieira, of its Legal Service, acting as Agent, with an address for
                                                                          service in Luxembourg at the office of Carlos Gómez de la
                                                                          Cruz, also of its Legal Service, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.
                                                                          The applicant claims that the Court of Justice should:
                                                                          — declare that, by failing to adopt within the prescribed
Action brought on 17 March 1999 by the Commission                               period all the measures needed to comply fully with
of the European Communities against the Portuguese                              Council Directive 96/22/EC (1) of 29 April 1996 repealing
                                 Republic                                       Directives 81/602/EEC (2) and 88/299/EEC (3), the Portu-
                                                                                guese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under the
                                                                                Treaty,
                             (Case C-92/99)
                                                                          — order the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.
                            (1999/C 160/12)
                                                                          Contentions and principal arguments adduced in support
An action against the Portuguese Republic was brought before
the Court of Justice on 17 March 1999 by the Commission of
                                                                          The contentions and principal arguments adduced in support
the European Communities, represented by Ana Maria Alves
                                                                          are similar to those in Case C-78/99 (4); the period for
Vieira, of its Legal Service, acting as Agent, with an address for
                                                                          implementing the Directive expired on 1 July 1997.
service in Luxembourg at the office of Carlos Gómez de la
Cruz, also of its Legal Service, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.
                                                                          ( 1) OJ L 125, 23.5.1996, p. 10.
The applicant claims that the Court of Justice should:                    ( 2) OJ L 222 , 7.8.1981, p. 32.
                                                                          ( 3) OJ L 128, 21.5.1988, p. 36.
                                                                          ( 4) See p. 3 of this Official Journal.
— declare that, by failing to adopt within the prescribed
      period all the measures needed to comply fully with
      Council Directive 96/23/EC (1) of 29 April 1996 repealing
      Directives 85/358/EEC (2) and 86/469/EEC (3) and
      Decisions 89/187/EEC(4) and 91/664/EEC (5), the Portu-
      guese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under the
      Treaty,
                                                                          Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverga-
— order the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.                         beamt by order of that tribunal of 5 March 1999 in the
                                                                          review procedure of ARGE Gewässerschutz v. Bundesmi-
                                                                                      nisterium für Land- und Forstwirtschaft
Contentions and principal arguments adduced in support
                                                                                                       (Case C-94/99)
The contentions and principal arguments adduced in support
are similar to those in Case C-78/99 (6); the period for                                              (1999/C 160/14)
implementing the directive expired on 1 July 1997.
                                                                          Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
( 1) OJ L 125, 23.5.1996, p. 10.                                          European Communities by an order of the Bundesvergabeamt
( 2) OJ L 191, 23.7.1985, p. 46.                                          (Federal Procurement Office), Austria, of 5 March 1999, which
( 3) OJ L 275, 26.9.1986, p. 36.                                          was received at the Court Registry on 17 March 1999, for a
( 4) OJ L 66, 10.3.1989, p. 37.                                           preliminary ruling in the review procedure of ARGE Gewässer-
( 5) OJ L 368, 31.12.1991, p. 17.                                         schutz v. Bundesministerium für Land- und Forstwirtschaft on
( 6) See p. 3 of this Official Journal.                                   the following questions:
                                                                          I.    Does the decision of a contracting authority to admit to an
                                                                                award procedure bodies which receive subsidies of any