CELEX: C1997/331/26
Language: en
Date: 1997-11-01 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 17 September 1997 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Kingdom of Belgium (Case C-322/97)

C 331/ 14              EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                    1 . 11 . 97
1 . Is Article 6 of the EEA Agreement to be interpreted as                   administrative provisions necessary to comply with
     meaning that the legal principles laid down by the                      the Seventeenth Commission Directive 94/32/EC (')
     Court of Justice in, inter alia, Joined Cases C-6/90 and                of 29 June 1994 adapting to technical progress
     C-9/90 Francovich are part of EEA law, so that a State                  Annexes II, III, V, VI and VII of Council Directive 76/
     can be liable in damages towards an individual for not                  768/EEC (2 ) on the approximation of the laws of the
     properly implementing Council Directive 80/987/EEC                      Member States relating to cosmetic products, the
     of 20 October 1980, on the approximation of the laws                    Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations
     of the Member States relating to the protection of                      under that Directive;
     employees in the event of the insolvency of the
     employer ( l ), during the period in which the State was
     only party to the EEA Agreement and had not acceded              2 . order the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.
     to the EU ?
                                                                      Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
2. If the answer to Question 1 is in the affirmative, is
     Article 6 of the EEA Agreement to be interpreted as
     meaning that Directive 80/987/EEC as well as the
     legal principles which the Court of Justice laid down            Pleas in law and main arguments correspond to those set
     in, inter alia, Joined Cases C-6/90 and C-9/90                   out in Case C-320/97 ( 3 ), the period prescribed in the
     Francovich prevail over domestic law if the State has            Directive expired on 30 June 1995 .
     not implemented the aforementioned directive in the
     proper way ?                                                     W OJ L 181 , 15 . 7. 1994, p . 31 .
                                                                      (2 ) OJ L 262, 27. 9 . 1976 , p . 169 .
                                                                      ( 3 ) See p. 13 of this Official Journal .
3 . If the answer to Question 1 is the negative, does a
     State 's accession to the EU mean that Directive 80/
     987/EEC as well as the legal principles which the
     Court of Justice laid down in Francovich prevail over
     domestic law even in regard to circumstances
     occurring during a period in which the State was only
     party to the EEA Agreement but before its accession              Action brought on 17 September 1997 by the Commission
     to the EU if the State has not implemented the                   of the European Communities against the Kingdom of
     aforementioned directive in the proper way ?                                                      Belgium
                                                                                                  (Case C-323/97)
(M OJL283 , 28 . 10. 1980, p. 23 .
                                                                                                   ( 97/C 331 /27)
                                                                      An action against the Kingdom of Belgium was brought
                                                                      before the Court of Justice on 17 September 1997 by the
                                                                      Commission of the European Communities, represented
Action brought on 17 September 1997 by the Commission                 by Pieter Van Nuffel, of its Legal Service, acting as Agent,
of the European Communities against the Kingdom of                    with an address for service in Luxembourg at the office of
                               Belgium                                Carlos Gomez de la Cruz, also of the Commission's Legal
                         ( Case C-322/97)                             Service, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.
                           ( 97/C 331/26 )
                                                                      The Commission claims that the Court should:
An action against the Kingdom of Belgium was brought
before the Court of Justice on 17 September 1997 by the                1 . declare that, by failing to bring into force, within the
Commission of the European Communities, represented                          period prescribed, the laws, regulations and
by Pieter Van Nuffel, of its Legal Service, acting as Agent,                 administrative provisions necessary to comply with
with an address for service in Luxembourg at the office of                   Council Directive 94/80/EC of 19 December 1994
Carlos Gomez de la Cruz, also of the Commission's Legal                      laying down detailed arrangements for the exercise of
Service, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.                                           the right to vote and to stand as a candidate in
                                                                             municipal elections by citizens of the Union residing in
                                                                             a Member State of which they are not nationals ( ! ),
The Commission claims that the Court should :                                the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its
                                                                             obligations under that Directive;
 1 . declare that, by failing to bring into force, within
      the period prescribed, the laws, regulations and                 2 . order the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.