CELEX: C2004/228/31
Language: en
Date: 2004-09-11 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court (Full Court) of 13 July 2004 in Case C-27/04: Commission of the European Communities v Council of the European Union (Action for annulment — Article 104 EC — Regulation (EC) No 1467/97 — Stability and Growth Pact — Excessive government deficits — Council decisions under Article 104(8) and (9) EC — Required majority not achieved — Decisions not adopted — Action challenging ‘decisions not to adopt the formal instruments contained in the Commission's recommendations’ — Inadmissible — Action challenging ‘Council conclusions’)

11.9.2004   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 228/16
            
         
      JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
   
   (Full Court)
   of 13 July 2004
   in Case C-27/04: Commission of the European Communities v Council of the European Union (1)
   
   (Action for annulment - Article 104 EC - Regulation (EC) No 1467/97 - Stability and Growth Pact - Excessive government deficits - Council decisions under Article 104(8) and (9) EC - Required majority not achieved - Decisions not adopted - Action challenging ‘decisions not to adopt the formal instruments contained in the Commission's recommendations’ - Inadmissible - Action challenging ‘Council conclusions’)
   (2004/C 228/31)
   Language of the case: French
   In Case C-27/04: Commission of the European Communities (Agents: M. Petite, A. van Solinge and P. Aalto) v Council of the European Union (Agents: J.-C. Piris, T. Middleton and J. Monteiro) — application for annulment of Council measures of 25 November 2003, namely:
   
               —
            
            
               decisions not to adopt, in respect of the French Republic and the Federal Republic of Germany, the formal instruments contained in Commission recommendations pursuant to Article 104(8) and (9) EC;
            
         
               —
            
            
               conclusions adopted in respect of each of those two Member States, entitled ‘Council conclusions on assessing the actions taken by [the French Republic and the Federal Republic of Germany respectively] in response to recommendations of the Council according to Article 104(7) of the Treaty establishing the European Community and considering further measures for deficit reduction in order to remedy the situation of excessive deficit’, in so far as those conclusions involve holding the excessive deficit procedure in abeyance, recourse to an instrument not envisaged by the Treaty and modification of the recommendations decided on by the Council under Article 104(7) EC,
            
         the Court (Full Court), composed of: V. Skouris, President, P. Jann, C.W.A. Timmermans, A. Rosas, C. Gulmann (Rapporteur), J.-P. Puissochet and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, Presidents of Chambers, R. Schintgen, F. Macken, N. Colneric, S. von Bahr, R. Silva de Lapuerta and K. Lenaerts, Judges; A. Tizzano, Advocate General; M.-F. Contet, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 13 July 2004, in which it:
   
               1.
            
            
               Declares the action of the Commission of the European Communities inadmissible in so far as it seeks annulment of the failure of the Council of the European Union to adopt the formal instruments contained in the Commission's recommendations pursuant to Article 104(8) and (9) EC;
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Annuls the Council's conclusions of 25 November 2003 adopted in respect of the French Republic and the Federal Republic of Germany respectively, in so far as they contain a decision to hold the excessive deficit procedure in abeyance and a decision modifying the recommendations previously adopted by the Council under Article 104(7) EC;
            
         
               3.
            
            
               Orders the parties to bear their own costs.
            
         
      (1)  OJ C 35 of 7.2.2004.