CELEX: C2001/227/27
Language: en
Date: 2001-08-11 00:00:00
Title: Case C-259/01: Action brought on 3 July 2001 by Commission of the European Communities against French Republic

11.8.2001              EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                    C 227/15
2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds (the ‘birds               Action brought on 3 July 2001 by Commission of the
directive’) by 1 January 1995. As of that date the obligations                 European Communities against French Republic
under the first sentence of Article 4(4) of the birds directive in
respect of all areas classified pursuant to Article 4(1) and (2) of                               (Case C-259/01)
the birds directive were replaced by the obligations in
Article 6(2) to (4) of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May                                      (2001/C 227/27)
1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna
and flora (‘habitats directive’) as laid down in Article 7 of that       An action against the French Republic was brought before the
directive.                                                               Court of Justice of the European Communities on 3 July 2001
                                                                         by the Commission of the European Communities, represented
As regards the first sentence of Article 4(4) of the birds               by Roland Tricot acting as Agent, with an address for service
directive with reference to Article 6(3) and (4) of the habitats         in Luxembourg.
directive the Swedish government considered that a number                The applicant claims that the Court should:
of amendments to its legislation were required to implement
the directive. The Commission claims that the necessary                  (a)   Declare that, by failing to adopt and bring into force
measures were not taken within the period of two months                        within the prescribed period the laws, regulations and
prescribed in the reasoned opinion.                                            administrative provisions necessary to comply with
                                                                               Directive 98/30/EC of the European Parliament and of
                                                                               the Council of 22 June 1998 concerning common rules
As regards the consultation obligation under Article 6(3) of                   for the internal market in natural gas (1), the French
the birds directive the Commission claims that the necessary                   Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that
measures were not taken within the period of two months                        directive and, in particular, Article 29;
prescribed in the reasoned opinion.
                                                                         (b) Order the French Republic to pay the costs.
Finally, as regards the deficiencies in the correct implemen-
tation of Article 9 of the birds directive, the legal provisions         Pleas in law and main arguments
which Sweden claims incorporate Article 9, that is to say
Paragraph 23a of the Jaktförordningen (hunting regulation),              Under the third paragraph of Article 249 and the first
which incorporates Article 9(1)(a), Paragraph 9 of the Jaktlagen         paragraph of Article 10 of the EC Treaty France was required
(hunting law), which incorporates Article 9(1)(c) and Para-              to adopt the measures necessary to transpose Directive
graph 31 of the Jaktförordningen, which incorporates                     98/30/EC at the latest by 10 August 2000, the date laid down
Article 9(1)(b), do not contain the specific information required        in Article 29 thereof.
under Article 9(2) of the birds directive. The further dero-
gations in the Swedish Jaktförordningen (Paragraphs 14, 15,              (1) OJ 1998 L 204, p. 1.
20, 21, 27 and 29), in Paragraph 12 of the Artskyddförordn-
ingen (species protection regulation) (SFS 1998:1790) and in
Paragraph 5 of the protective provisions of the Naturvårdverket
(Swedish environment protection board) (NFS 1997:5) do not
contain the information required under Article 9(2) of the
birds directive. Nor does Paragraph 9b of the Jaktförordningen                  Removal from the register of Case C-216/00 (1)
specify the conditions of risk as prescribed by the third indent
of Article 9(2).                                                                                  (2001/C 227/28)
                                                                         By order of 28 May 2001 the President of the Court of Justice
(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 223, 13.8.1997, p. 9.                                           of the European Communities has ordered the removal from
(3) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.                                           the register of Case C-216/00: Commission of the European
                                                                         Communities v Hellenic Republic.
                                                                         (1) OJ C 233 of 12.8.2000.