CELEX: C2003/135/11
Language: en
Date: 2003-06-07 00:00:00
Title: Case C-87/03: Action brought on 27 February 2003 by the Kingdom of Spain against the Council of the European Union

7.6.2003                   EN                           Official Journal of the European Union                                          C 135/7
obligations under that directive, the Court (First Chamber),                    — the Court (Fourth Chamber), composed of C.W.A. Timmer-
composed of: M. Wathelet (Rapporteur), President of the                         mans, President of Chamber, D.A.O. Edward and S. von Bahr
Chamber, P. Jann and A. Rosas, Judges; J. Mischo, Advocate                      (Rapporteur), Judges; P. Léger, Advocate General; R. Grass,
General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment on 10 April                  Registrar, made an order on 6 February 2003, the operative
2003, in which it:                                                              part of which is as follows:
1.    Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed period,         1.    The appeal is dismissed.
      all the laws, regulations and administrative measures necessary
      to comply with Directive 98/8/EC of the European Parliament               2.    Dieckmann & Hansen GmbH is ordered to pay the costs.
      and of the Council of 16 February 1998 concerning the placing
      of biocidal products on the market, the French Republic has
      failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;                    (1 ) OJ C 44, 16.2.2002.
2.    Orders the French Republic to pay the costs.
( 1) OJ C 131 of 1.6.2002.
                                                                                Action brought on 27 February 2003 by the Kingdom of
                                                                                      Spain against the Council of the European Union
                                                                                                           (Case C-87/03)
                      ORDER OF THE COURT
                                                                                                          (2003/C 135/11)
                            (Fourth Chamber)
                           of 6 February 2003                                   An action against the Council of the European Union was
                                                                                brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communi-
                                                                                ties on 27 February 2003 by the Kingdom of Spain, represented
in Case C-492/01 P: Dieckmann & Hansen GmbH v                                   by Nuria Díaz Abad, Abogado del Estado, with an address for
        Commission of the European Communities ( 1)                             service in Luxembourg.
(Commission Decision 1999/244/EC of 26 March 1999                               The applicant claims that the Court should:
amending Decision 97/296/EC drawing up the list of third
countries from which the import of fishery products is
authorised for human consumption — Prohibition on the                           —     annul Council Regulation (EC) No 2341/2002 (1) of
importation of caviar from Kazakhstan — Non-contractual                               20 December 2002 fixing for 2003 the fishing oppor-
liability of the Community — Appeal partly manifestly                                 tunities and associated conditions for certain fish stocks
                inadmissible and partly unfounded)                                    and groups of fish stocks, applicable in Community
                                                                                      waters and, for Community vessels, in waters where catch
                                                                                      limitations are required, in so far as it allocates certain
                             (2003/C 135/10)                                          quotas to the Spanish fleet in the Community waters of
                                                                                      the North Sea and the Baltic Sea, and
                     (Language of the case: German)
                                                                                —     order the Council to pay the costs.
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                     in the European Court Reports)
                                                                                Pleas in law and main arguments
                                                                                —     Infringement of the principle of non-discrimination: on
In Case 492/01 P: Dieckmann & Hansen GmbH, established in                             completion of the transitional period on 31 December
Hamburg (Germany), represented by H.-J. Rabe, lawyer —                                2002, the situation of Spanish fishermen is the same as
appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance of                         that of fishermen of the remaining Member States and
the European Communities, Fifth Chamber, of 23 October                                they should enjoy equal access to waters and resources.
2001 in Case T-155/99 Dieckmann & Hansen v Commission                                 However, by the contested regulation, Spanish fishermen
[2001] ECR II-3143, seeking to have that judgment set aside,                          are treated differently, since they are not allowed to fish
the other party to the proceedings being Commission of the                            in the waters of the North Sea and the Baltic Sea for
European Communities (Agents: G. Berscheid and M. Niejhar)                            virtually all the species subject to quotas.
 ---pagebreak--- C 135/8                 EN                          Official Journal of the European Union                                          7.6.2003
      Nor is there is any objective justification for that discrimi-        Action brought on 28 February 2003 by the Kingdom of
      nation. The general rule is the full applicability of all the               Spain against the Council of the European Union
      Community stock to new Member States from the very
      moment of accession and the derogations from that full
      applicability contained in an Act of Accession are always
      of a temporary nature and must be interpreted strictly.                                        (Case C-90/03)
      To extend those derogations beyond the transitional
      period provided for in the Act of Accession is to disregard
      the very essence of those derogations, namely their
      transitional and limited exceptional nature, and their                                        (2003/C 135/12)
      purpose, which is solely to permit the gradual integration
      of a new Member State into the Community.
—     Infringement of the Act of Accession of Spain: the non-
      allocation to Spain in the contested regulation of part of            An action against the Council of the European Union was
      the quotas in the Community waters of the North Sea                   brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communi-
      and the Baltic Sea which have been allocated since Spain’s            ties on 28 February 2003 by the Kingdom of Spain, represented
      accession has the effect of extending the transitional                by N. Díaz Abad, Abogado del Estado, with an address for
      period beyond that provided for in the Act and of thus                service in Luxembourg.
      infringing its provisions.
      It cannot be overlooked that had it not been for the
      transitional period in Article 166 of the Act of Accession,           The applicant claims that the Court should:
      Spain would have participated in the allocation of new
      quotas since 1986, on the basis of three factors:
                                                                            1.    annul Article 9(1)(b) of Regulation 2792/1999 ( 1) laying
                                                                                  down the detailed rules and arrangements regarding
      —     its historical catches during the years 1973/1978,                    Community structural assistance in the fisheries sector,
            i.e. the period taken into consideration when the                     as amended by Council Regulation 2369/2002 of
            principle of relative stability was first established;                20 December 2002 (2);
                                                                            2.    order the Council to pay the costs.
      —     its catches of the same species in adjoining zones;
            and
      —     the need to rely on by-catches.
                                                                            Pleas in law and main arguments
—     Infringement of Article 20(2) of Council Regulation
      (EC) No 2371/2002 (2) of 20 December 2002 on the                      —     Breach of essential procedural requirements: Spain con-
      conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries                      tends that the text of Article 9(1)(b) of Regulation 2792/
      resources under the Common Fisheries Policy: upon                           1999, as amended by Regulation 2369/2002, published
      expiry of the transitional period, the new fishing oppor-                   in Official Journal L 358 of 31 December 2002, is not
      tunities allocated in the waters in question between                        the text approved by the Council. In the present case, the
      1992 and 1998 must be allocated taking into account                         text approved by the Council was that contained in the
      the interests of each Member State and therefore Spain’s                    final compromise document, i.e. the one bearing the
      too.                                                                        number SN 113/02, which tacitly amended the document
                                                                                  containing the second compromise, SN 105/02, by
                                                                                  providing the possibility of applying a basic weighting of
                                                                                  1:1.35 to vessels of more than 100 GT, which implies
                                                                                  that that weighting would also apply to vessels of more
( 1) OJ L 356, 31.12.2002, p. 12.                                                 than 400 GT and, therefore, the possibility of granting
( 2) OJ L 358, 31.12.2002, p. 59.                                                 aid for renewal this vessels of that type.
                                                                            —     Infringement of Article 254 EC: publication must be
                                                                                  limited to reproducing the text of the measure, as adopted
                                                                                  by the Organ with legislative or regulatory power. What