CELEX: C2003/226/26
Language: en
Date: 2003-09-20 00:00:00
Title: Case C-344/03: Action brought on 4 August 2003 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Republic of Finland

C 226/14                EN                       Official Journal of the European Union                                            20.9.2003
Communities on 4 August 2003 by the Kingdom of Spain,                    —     Infringement of Article 253 EC (failure to state reasons),
represented by N. Díaz Abad, Abogado del Estado, with an                       on the ground that the contested regulation is not based
address for service in Luxembourg.                                             on a technical study showing why it is necessary;
                                                                         —     Misuse of powers, in that the tariff quota has been allo-
The applicant claims that the Court should:                                    cated arbitrarily between the countries benefitting from it.
—     annul Council Regulation No 975/2003 (1) of 5 June
      2003 opening and providing for the administration of a
      tariff quota for imports of canned tuna covered by CN              (1) OJ L 141, 7.6.2003, p. 1.
      codes 16041411, 16041418 and 16042070;
—     order the Council of the European Union to pay the costs.
                                                                         Action brought on 4 August 2003 by the Commission of
Pleas in law and main arguments                                          the European Communities against the Republic of
                                                                                                       Finland
The Kingdom of Spain submits that Regulation No 975/2003                                           (Case C-344/03)
infringes Community law for the following reasons:
                                                                                                   (2003/C 226/26)
—     Breach of the principle of Community preference, given
      that measures such as those adopted by the contested               An action against the Republic of Finland was brought before
      regulation are appropriate only where Community pro-               the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 4 August
      duction is inadequate, which has not been established. The         2003 by the Commission of the European Communities, repre-
      Spanish tuna canning industry is particularly prejudiced           sented by G. Valero Jordana and P. Aalto, acting as Agents, with
      by this regulation;                                                an address for service in Luxembourg.
—     Distortion of competition in the market: owing to the fact         The Commission claims that the Court should:
      that a product has been put onto the market on more
      advantageous conditions than those laid down in the gen-           1.   Declare that the Republic of Finland has failed to fulfil its
      eral tariff arrangements may give rise to imbalances in the             obligations under Council Directive 79/409/EEC on the
      market concerned, with negative economic consequences;                  conservation of wild birds (1), as amended by the 1994
                                                                              Act of Accession, inasmuch as the Republic of Finland has
                                                                              not applied the derogation laid down in Article 9(1) of the
—     Procedural irregularities in that the contested regulation is           directive in accordance with the criteria laid down therein,
      not based on any technical study showing why it is nee-                 since it has not indicated that the conditions for a deroga-
      ded. Nor is Community production of canned tuna inade-                  tion under that provision are fulfilled in the case of spring
      quate and such as to provide grounds justifying the                     hunting of certain water birds in mainland Finland and the
      regulation;                                                             district of Åland, as regards in particular the application of
                                                                              the criteria ‘no other satisfactory solution’ and ‘small num-
                                                                              bers’ with respect especially to the species eider (Somateria
—     Infringement of Article 12 of the EC-ACP Partnership                    mollissima), golden-eye (Bucephala clangula), red-breasted
      Agreement, since the ACP States were not informed of                    merganser (Mergus serrator), goosander (Mergus mergan-
      the adoption of a measure affecting them;                               ser), velvet scoter (Melanitta fusca) and tufted duck (Aythya
                                                                              fuligula), and
—     Infringement of the preferential agreements with the ACP
      and GSP-Drugs (Generalised System of Preferences —                 2.   Order the Republic of Finland to pay the costs.
      Drugs) States, since the tariff quota to be allocated pur-
      suant to the measures adopted in the contested regulation
      will render ineffective the preferential regimes referred to       Pleas in law and main arguments
      by allowing canned tuna from industrially developed
      countries to compete in the Community market with                  The Commission submits that the ‘no other satisfactory solu-
      that from ACP and GSP-Drugs States;                                tion’ criterion in the directive is not satisfied if autumn hunting
                                                                         of the same species is possible, albeit in smaller numbers and
                                                                         possibly in more difficult conditions from the hunter's point of
—     Breach of the principle of legitimate expectations, since          view or in different hunting locations. The Commission con-
      investments made by Community traders in the ACP and               siders that the ‘no other satisfactory solution’ requirement is to
      GSP-Drugs States will be affected, account being taken of          be assessed in a concrete and specific manner, not abstractly
      the conditions for market access for products originating          and at a general level. Local circumstances must be taken into
      in those countries;                                                account in the assessment.
 ---pagebreak--- 20.9.2003              EN                       Official Journal of the European Union                                     C 226/15
According to the ORNIS committee set up by Article 16 of the                  Removal from the register of Case C-131/02 (1)
directive, ‘small numbers’ should mean an [additional] number
of less than 1 % of the annual mortality (average), determined                                 (2003/C 226/28)
on the basis of an expert opinion, for those species whose
hunting is prohibited, and a number corresponding to a level            By order of 12 June 2003 the President of the Court of Justice
of about 1 % for those species whose hunting is permitted, in           of the European Communities ordered the removal from the
such a way, however, that compliance with Article 9 of the              register of Case C-131/02: Commission of the European
directive depends in any case on compliance with the other              Communities v Republic of Austria.
points of the article. The spring hunting permitted by Finland
has exceeded by several times the number calculated on the
basis of the committee's recommendation.
                                                                        (1) OJ C 131 of 1.6.2002.
(1) Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979, OJ 1979 L 103,
    p. 1.
                                                                              Removal from the register of Case C-393/02 (1)
                                                                                               (2003/C 226/29)
Action brought on 5 August 2003 by the Commission of                    By order of 18 June 2003 the President of the Court of Justice
the European Communities against the Kingdom of Belgium                 of the European Communities ordered the removal from the
                                                                        register of Case C-393/02: Commission of the European
                         (Case C-345/03)                                Communities v Portuguese Republic.
                         (2003/C 226/27)
                                                                        (1) OJ C 323 of 21.12.2002.
An action against the Kingdom of Belgium was brought before
the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 5 August
2003 by the Commission of the European Communities, repre-
sented by M. Konstantinidis and F. Simonetti, acting as Agents,
with an address for service in Luxembourg.                                    Removal from the register of Case C-407/02 (1)
                                                                                               (2003/C 226/30)
The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                        By order of 25 June 2003 the President of the Court of Justice
1.   declare that, by not adopting all the laws, regulations and        of the European Communities ordered the removal from the
     administrative provisions necessary to comply with                 register of Case C-407/02: Commission of the European
     Directive 2000/53/EC (1) of the European Parliament and            Communities v Hellenic Republic.
     of the Council of 18 September 2000 on end-of-life vehi-
     cles or, in any event, by not communicating them to the
     Commission, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its
                                                                        (1) OJ C 19 of 25.01.2003.
     obligations under that directive;
2.   order the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.
Pleas in law and main arguments                                                Removal from the register of Case C-10/03 (1)
                                                                                               (2003/C 226/31)
The time-limit for transposition of the directive expired on
21 April 2002.                                                          By order of 26 June 2003 the President of the Court of Justice
                                                                        of the European Communities ordered the removal from the
                                                                        register of Case C-10/03: Commission of the European
                                                                        Communities v Republic of Finland.
(1) OJ 2000 L 269, p. 34.
                                                                        (1) OJ C 44 of 22.02.2003.