CELEX: 61993CC0037
Language: en
Date: 1993-11-09
Title: Opinion of Mr Advocate General Lenz delivered on 9 November 1993. # Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Belgium. # Failure to fulfil obligations - Article 48 of the EEC Treaty - Regulation (EEC) Nº 1612/68 of the Council. # Case C-37/93.

OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL LENZ
   delivered on 9 November 1993 (
         *1
      )
   
      Mr President,
   
   
      Members of the Court,
   
   
            1. 
         
         
            In these Treaty infringement proceedings the Commission claims that the Court should:
            
                     —
                  
                  
                     declare that, by retaining in its legislation provisions under which certain seamen's jobs, other than those of master and first mate, are reserved to Belgian nationals, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 48 of the EEC Treaty and Articles 1 and 4 of Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 of the Council of 15 October 1968;
                  
               
                     —
                  
                  
                     order the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.
                  
               
      
            2. 
         
         
            The Belgian Government does not dispute that the provisions of Belgian law objected to by the Commission are incompatible with Community law. It merely states that draft legislation has been prepared amending those provisions in line with Community law. It adds that the drafts have been sent to the Commission and will be placed before the appropriate legislative bodies as soon as the Commission has approved them.
         
      
            3. 
         
         
            In its reasoned opinion of 23 April 1991 the Commission called on Belgium to remedy the failure to fulfil obligations within two months from receipt of the reasoned opinion. It is clear that this was not done before the end of the written procedure (and presumably still has not been done), even though Belgium informed the Commission in its reply of 13 June 1991 to the reasoned opinion that it had decided to amend Belgian law in the manner desired by the Commission. Belgium has put forward no reasons to justify the delay.
         
      
            4. 
         
         
            I accordingly propose that the Court should uphold the Commission's claims.
         
      (
         *1
      )	Original language: German.