CELEX: C2001/245/27
Language: en
Date: 2001-09-01 00:00:00
Title: Case C-274/01: Information Action brought on 12 July 2001 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Kingdom of Belgium

1.9.2001               EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                       C 245/15
Information Action brought on 12 July 2001 by the                       Appeal brought on 13 July 2001 by European Parliament
Commission of the European Communities against the                      against the judgment delivered on 3 May 2001 by the
                      Kingdom of Belgium                                Fourth Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the
                                                                        European Communities in Case T-99/00 between Ignacio
                                                                                       Samper and European Parliament
                         (Case C-274/01)
                                                                                                (Case C-277/01 P)
                         (2001/C 245/27)
                                                                                                 (2001/C 245/28)
An action against the Kingdom of Belgium was brought before
the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 12 July             An appeal against the judgment delivered on 3 May 2001 by
2001 by the Commission of the European Communities,                     the Fourth Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the
represented by M. Wolfcarius, acting as Agent.                          European Communities in case T-99/00 between Ignacio
                                                                        Samper and European Parliament was brought before the
                                                                        Court of Justice of the European Communities on 13 July
                                                                        2001 by European Parliament, represented by H. Von Herzen
The applicant claims that the Court should:                             and D. Moor, with an address for service in Luxembourg.
1.    Declare that, by failing to adopt and bring into force            The appellant claims that the Court should:
      within the prescribed period the laws, regulations and
      administrative provisions necessary to comply with
      Council Directive 98/76/EC of 1 October 1998 amending             —     set aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance;
      Directive 96/26/EC on admission to the occupation of
      road haulage operator and road passenger transport
                                                                        —     give a final decision on the dispute by dismissing
      operator and mutual recognition of diplomas, certificates
                                                                              the action for annulment brought by Mr Samper as
      and other evidence of formal qualifications intended to
      facilitate for these operators the right to freedom of                  unfounded;
      establishment in national and international transport
      operations (1), the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil       —     in the alternative, refer the case back to the Court of First
      its obligations under that directive; and                               Instance for it to adjudicate anew on the action for
                                                                              annulment brought by Mr Samper;
2.    Order the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.
                                                                        —     make an appropriate order as to costs.
Pleas in law and main arguments                                         Pleas and main arguments
                                                                        The Parliament claims that the Court of First Instance distorted
Article 2(1) of the directive in question provides that Member          the clear sense of the evidence and overstepped the limits of
States are to bring into force the laws, regulations and                judicial review.
administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Direc-
tive no later than 1 October 1999 and are forthwith to inform
the Commission thereof.
                                                                        Distortion of the clear sense of the evidence:
The necessary measures have not yet been adopted by Belgium.            The Court of First Instance wrongly found, in paragraph 40 of
                                                                        the judgment, that, for 1997, the ‘decisive’ criterion should be,
                                                                        according to the decision of the appointing authority, the level
                                                                        of responsibility deployed, personal investment made and the
                                                                        consistency of effort vis-à-vis his responsibilities. The decision
(1) OJ 1998 L 277, p. 17.                                               in question does not, however, make mention of any factors
                                                                        other than those appearing in the staff reports and refers to a
                                                                        comparison between the various duties only to justify its
                                                                        decision to depart from the Promotions Committee’s pro-
                                                                        posals.