CELEX: C2003/184/33
Language: en
Date: 2003-08-02 00:00:00
Title: Case C-190/03: Action brought on 9 May 2003 by Portuguese Republic against Commission of the European Communities

2.8.2003                 EN                           Official Journal of the European Union                                              C 184/17
declaration that, by failing to communicate measures trans-                   under that directive, the Court (Third Chamber), composed of:
posing into national law the provisions of Directive 1999/94/                 J.-P. Puissochet (Rapporteur), President of the Chamber,
EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of                           F. Macken and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, Judges; F.G. Jacobs,
13 December 1999 relating to the availability of consumer                     Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment
information on fuel economy and CO2 emissions in respect of                   on 5 June 2003, in which it:
the marketing of new passenger cars (OJ 2000 L 12, p. 16) or,
at any rate, by not informing the Commission fully thereof, the               1.    Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed period,
French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that                     the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to
directive, the Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of: M. Wathelet,                     comply with Directive 2000/14/EC of the European Parliament
President of the Chamber, C.W.A. Timmermans, D.A.O. Edward,                         and of the Council of 8 May 2000 on the approximation of
A. La Pergola (Rapporteur) and S. von Bahr, Judges; F.G. Jacobs,                    the laws of the Member States relating to the noise emission in
Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment on                      the environment by equipment for use outdoors, the Hellenic
19 June 2003, in which it:                                                          Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 22(1)
                                                                                    of that directive;
1.    Declares that, by failing to communicate to the Commission of
      the European Communities the national implementing measures             2.    Orders the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.
      required by Directive 1999/94/EC of the European Parliament
      and of the Council of 13 December 1999 relating to the
      availability of consumer information on fuel economy and CO2            (1) OJ C 289 of 23.11.2002.
      emissions in respect of the marketing of new passenger cars, the
      French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that
      directive;
2.    Orders the French Republic to pay the costs.
                                                                              Action brought on 9 May 2003 by Portuguese Republic
(1) OJ C 169 of 13.7.2002.                                                         against Commission of the European Communities
                                                                                                        (Case C-190/03)
                                                                                                        (2003/C 184/33)
                   JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                                                                              An action against the Commission of the European Commu-
                                                                              nities was brought before the Court of Justice of the European
                           (Third Chamber)                                    Communities on 9 May 2003 by the Portuguese Republic,
                                                                              represented by L. Fernandes, acting as Agent, and C. Botelho
                            of 5 June 2003                                    Moniz and E. Maia Cadete, lawyers, with an address for service
                                                                              in Luxembourg.
in Case C-352/02: Commission of the European Commu-
                    nities v Hellenic Republic (1)                            The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                              —     annul the decision of the Director-General of the Directo-
(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Failure to                       rate General for Agriculture of the European Commission,
transpose Directive 2000/14/EC — Noise emission in the                              reference No AGR 05697, of 19 February 2003, with
                              environment)                                          regard to ‘Clearance of the EAGGF Guarantee Section
                                                                                    accounts pursuant to Article 5(2)(c) of Regulation (EEC)
                            (2003/C 184/32)                                         No 729/70 (1) and Article 7(4) of Regulation (EC)
                                                                                    No 1258/1999 (2) — Inquiry AP/2000/10 into premia for
                                                                                    beef, pursuant to Regulations (EEC) No 3508/92 (3) (EEC)
                      (Language of the case: Greek)
                                                                                    No 3887/92 (4) and (EEC) No 3886/92 (5) — Conciliation
                                                                                    Procedure No 02/PT/202’;
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published in
                       the European Court Reports)                            —     order the defendant institution to pay the costs.
In Case C-352/02, Commission of the European Communities
(Agent: M. Konstantinidis) v Hellenic Republic (Agent:                        Pleas in law and main arguments
N. Dafniou): Application for a declaration that, by failing to
adopt or by failing to notify to the Commission the laws,                     —     Lack of competence of the Commission inasmuch as it
regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply                       infringed Article 4 of its Rules of Procedure: The Director-
with Directive 2000/14/EC of the European Parliament and of                         General of the Directorate General for Agriculture does
the Council of 8 May 2000 on the approximation of the laws                          not have powers to adopt a measure such as the
of the Member States relating to the noise emission in the                          contested decision and he did not rely on any delegation
environment by equipment for use outdoors (OJ 2000 L 162,                           of powers enabling him so to do. Accordingly, he clearly
p. 1), the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations                   acted ultra vires.
 ---pagebreak--- C 184/18             EN                         Official Journal of the European Union                                              2.8.2003
—   Error in law as a result of the misapplication of Article 6                      the Alentejo region in September 2000, are of no
    (5) of Regulation (EEC) No 3887/92: the Commission                               relevance to the application of the flat-rate correc-
    relies on the failure to carry out the minimum number                            tions applied to expenditure in respect of the 1999
    of on-the-spot checks required by the regulation with                            financial year. In the alternative, the Portuguese
    regard to the special premium for beef as the basis for                          Government takes the view that the irregularities
    applying the flat-rate correction to the expenditure                             alleged by the Commission are irrelevant, since
    incurred with regard to the special premium for male                             Portugal has complied and continues to comply with
    bovine animals. The Portuguese Government claims that:                           the rules relating to the identification of bovine
                                                                                     animals.
    —     Portugal adopted an approach centring on holdings,
                                                                               —     The Commission further alleges, as the basis for
          devising an integrated application common to the
                                                                                     applying the financial correction, that some animals
          various ‘animal’ aid schemes available under the
                                                                                     bore producer markings bearing an identification
          EAGGF Guarantee section, in the context of which
                                                                                     number which was not that accorded by the compe-
          the checks are carried out. In the year in question,
                                                                                     tent authorities, and considers that the practice
          the minimum percentage of lawful applications were
                                                                                     increases the risk that a premium might be paid
          checked on the spot during the retention period.
                                                                                     more than once in respect of the same animal.
          Indeed, 50 % of the minimum number of checks
                                                                                     Again in that respect the Commission erred in its
          on the animals to be carried out during the retention
                                                                                     assessment of the relevant facts by failing to take
          period must be calculated having regard to all the
                                                                                     account of the actual circumstances in which the
          ‘animal’ aid applications submitted in each year as
                                                                                     said practice occurred.
          part of the integrated application rather than by
          reference to each aid scheme, as the Commission
          suggests.
                                                                        —      Breach of the obligation to provide reasons enshrined in
                                                                               Article 253 of the EC Treaty: the Commission's decision
                                                                               does not indicate which legislation was infringed by the
    —     Article 6(5) of Regulation (EEC) No 3887/92, in its                  conduct of the Portuguese authorities, nor does it show
          wording in force at the material time, did not                       how the conduct in question undermines the reliability of
          distinguish between the various aid schemes so far                   the checks but merely states that it does. The decision
          as concerned the obligation to check 5 % of the                      therefore does not fulfil the obligation to provide reasons.
          ‘animal’ aid applications during the retention period,               That requirement is stricter where at issue is the adoption
          so that, contrary to the Commission's contention,                    of measures which impose sanctions on or entail adverse
          the Portuguese authorities acted in conformity with                  consequences, in particular in financial terms, for those to
          the provision in issue.                                              whom it is addressed, as in the present case. In those
                                                                               circumstances, fulfilment of the obligation to provide
                                                                               reasons is essential in order to protect the rights of
                                                                               defence of the person or body affected by the adverse
                                                                               consequences flowing from the measure.
    —     by applying in this case Article 6(5) of Regulation
          No 3887/92 as amended by Regulation (EC)                      (1) Council Regulation (EEC) No 729/70 of 21 April 1970 on the
          No 2801/99 (6), rather than the version in force at               financing of the common agricultural policy (OJ, English Special
          the material time, the Commission is applying retro-              Edition, 1970(I), p. 218).
          spectively a new provision, which is contrary to the          (2) Council Regulation (EC) No 1258/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the
          general principles of law common to the Member                    financing of the common agricultural policy (OJ 1999 L 160,
          States.                                                           p. 103).
                                                                        (3) Council Regulation (EEC) No 3508/92 of 27 November 1992
                                                                            establishing an integrated administration and control system for
                                                                            certain Community aid schemes (OJ 1992 L 355, p. 1).
                                                                        (4) Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3887/92 of 23 December 1992
                                                                            laying down detailed rules for applying the integrated administra-
                                                                            tion and control system for certain Community aid schemes (OJ
—   Error of assessment of the facts with regard to the                     1992 L 391, p. 36).
    expenditure declared by the Portuguese authorities for              (5) Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3886/92 of 23 December 1992
    1999 concerning the premium for the maintenance of                      laying down detailed rules for the application of the premium
    the suckler cow herd:                                                   schemes provided for in Council Regulation (EEC) No 805/68 on
                                                                            the common organization of the market in beef and repealing
                                                                            Regulations (EEC) No 1244/82 and (EEC) No 714/89 (OJ 1992
                                                                            L 391, p. 20).
                                                                        (6) Commission Regulation (EC) No 2801/1999 of 21 December 1999
                                                                            amending Regulation (EEC) No 3887/92 laying down detailed rules
                                                                            for applying the integrated administration and control system for
    —     The alleged irregularities regarding the identification           certain Community aid schemes (OJ 1999 L 340, p. 29).
          of the animals, which the Commission claims to
          have detected in checks carried out in holdings in