CELEX: C1995/159/21
Language: en
Date: 1995-06-24 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 4 April 1995 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Italian Republic (Case C-117/95)

No C 159/ 10              EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                     24 . 6 . 95
6 . In view of the fact that it follows from the established                The applicant claims that the Court should :
     case-law of the Court of Justice that the repayment of
     duties levied in breach of Community law must have                     1 , declare that by failing to adopt by law, regulation or
     regard to the substantive and formal requirements laid                     administrative action within the prescribed time limit
     down in national legislation, and that the Court of                        the necessary provisions to comply with Council
     Justice held at paragraph 12 of its judgment in Case                       Directive 92/48/EEC of 16 June 1992 laying down the
      1 99/82 Amministrazione delle Finanze dello Stato v . San
                                                                                minimum hygiene rules applicable to fishery products
      Giorgio of 9 November 1983 ( 4 ) that entitlement to the                  caught on board certain vessels in accordance with
     repayment of charges levied by a Member State contrary                     Article 3 ( 1 ) ( a ) (i ) of Directive 91/493/EEC O , the
      to the rules of Community law is a consequence of, and                    Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under
      an adjunct to, the rights conferred on individuals by the                 the EC Treaty;
      Community provisions prohibiting charges having an
      effect equivalent to customs duties or, as the case may
      be, the discriminatory application of internal taxes, the             2 , order the Italian Republic to pay the costs .
      following question arises :
                                                                            Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
      must the case-law of the Court of Justice be understood
      as meaning that Community law contains an                             The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as in Case
      unconditional obligation to repay duties which,                       C-79/95 ; the time limit for implementation expired on
      according to the replies to Questions 1 to 4 , may be                 1 January 1993 .
      contrary to Community law, but that this obligation is
      such that the detailed conditions for the actual
                                                                            (!) OJ No L 187, 7. 7. 1992 , p . 41 .
      processing of the claim for repayment are subject, within
      certain limits laid down in the case-law of the Court of
      Justice, to relevant national legislation ?
7. If it is held that the 40 % surcharge on the general goods
      duty is contrary to Community law, including
      ( free-trade ) agreements entered into, it is compatible              Action brought on 4 April 1995 by the Commission of the
      with Community law that a limitation period laid down                     European Communities against the Italian Republic
      in national law for repayment claims runs from an                                              ( Case C-117/95 )
      earlier point in time than that from which the Member
                                                                                                       ( 95/C 159/21 )
      State in question discontinued the duty which was
      contrary to Community law ?
                                                                            An action against the Italian Republic was brought before
                                                                            the Court of Justice of the European Communities on
(M   OJ No    L 172 , 22 . 7 . 1968 , p . 1 .
                                                                            4 April 1995 by the Commission of the European
(2 ) OJ No    L 256 , 7 . 9 . 1987, p . 1 .
(')  OJ No    L 378 , 31 . 12 . 1986 , p . 1 .
                                                                            Communities, represented by Eugenio de March, Legal
(4 ) [ 1983 ] ECR, p . 3595 .                                               Adviser, acting as Agent, with an address for service in
                                                                            Luxembourg at the office of Georgios Kremlis, Wagner
                                                                            Centre, Kirchberg .
                                                                            The applicant claims that the Court should :
                                                                            1 , declare that by failing to adopt by law, regulation or
                                                                                 administrative action within the prescribed time limits
                                                                                 the necessary provisions to comply with Council
                                                                                 Directive 92/35/EEC of 29 April 1992 laying down
Action brought on 4 April 1995 by the Commission of the                          control rules and measures to combat African horse
     European Communities against the Italian Republic
                                                                                 sickness (*) and Council Directive 92/40/EEC of 19 May
                             ( Case C- 1 16/95 )                                 1992 introducing Community measures for the control
                               ( 95/C 159/20 )                                   of avian influenza ( 2 ) the Italian Republic has failed to
                                                                                 fulfil its obligations under the EC Treaty;
An action against the Italian Republic was brought before                   2 , order the Italian Republic to pay the costs .
the Court of Justice of the European Communities on
4 April 1995 by the Commission of the European
Communities, represented by Eugenio de March, Legal                         Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
Adviser, acting as Agent, with an address for service in
Luxembourg at the office of Georgios Kremlis, Wagner                        The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as in Case
Centre, Kirchberg .                                                         C-79/95 ; the time limits for implementation expired on
 ---pagebreak---  24 . 6 . 95             EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                      No C 159/ 11
 31 December 1992 ( Directive 92/35/EEC ) and 1 January                 preliminary ruling in the case of The Queen against the
 1993 ( Directive 92/40/EEC ).                                          Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex-parte :
                                                                        Mann Singh Shingara, on the following questions :
 H OJ No L 157, 10 . 6 . 1992 , p . 19 .
 ( 2 ) OJ No L 167, 22 . 6 . 1992, p . 1 .
                                                                        1 . ( 1 ) In Article 8 of Council Directive 64/221 /EEC of
                                                                                  25 February 1964 on the coordination of special
                                                                                  measures concerning the movement and residence
                                                                                  of foreign nationals which are justified on grounds
                                                                                  of public policy, public security or public health ( l ),
Action brought on 4 April 1995 by the Commission of the                           do the words 'the same legal remedies . . . as are
       European Communities against the Italian Republic                          available to nationals of the State concerned in
                          ( Case C-118/95 )                                       respect of acts of the administration ' refer (a ) to
                                                                                  specific remedies available in respect of decisions
                             ( 95/C 159/22 )                                      concerning entry by nationals of the State
                                                                                  concerned ( in casu, an appeal to an immigration
An action against the Italian Republic was brought before                         adjudicator ) or ( b ) do they refer only to remedies
the Court of Justice of the European Communities on                               available in respect of acts of the administration
4 April 1995 by the Commission of the European                                    generally ( in casu, an application for judicial
Communities, represented by Eugenio de March, Legal                               review )?
Adviser, acting as Agent, with an address for service in
Luxembourg at the office of Georgios Kremlis, Wagner ,
                                                                            ( 2 ) If the answer to ( 1 ) is ( a ), do the words quoted from
Centre, Kirchberg.
                                                                                  Article 8 of Directive 64/221 refer only to the legal
                                                                                  remedies available to nationals of the               State
The applicant claims that the Court should :                                      concerned in the same circumstances ( in casu,
                                                                                  refusal of entry on grounds of national security), or
 1 , declare that by failing to adopt by law, regulation or                       do they also refer to the specific remedies available
       adminstrative action within the prescribed time limit the                  in analogous or similar circumstances to nationals
       necessary provisions to implement Council Directive                        of the State concerned ; and, if so , how similar or
        92/33/EEC of 28 April 1992 on the marketing of                            analogous must the circumstances be ?
       vegetable propagating and planting material, other than
       seed ( 1 ) and Council Directive 92/34/EEC of 28 April
        1992 on the marketing of fruit plant propagating                2 . In the light of the answer to Question 1 , where a
       material and fruit plants intended for fruit                         Community national is refused entry into the United
       production (2 ) the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its        Kingdom on grounds of national security does Article 8
       obligations under the EC Treaty;                                     of Directive 64/221/EEC require that national to have a
                                                                            right of appeal to an immigration adjudicator if, on the
2 , order the Italian Republic to pay the costs .                           correct construction of the relevant provisions of
                                                                            national law, a British national refused entry to the
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                         United Kingdom on grounds of national security has a
                                                                            right of appeal for the purpose of establishing that he is a
The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as in Case                 British national and is therefore entitled to enter the
C-79/95 ; the time limit for implementation expired on                      United Kingdom irrespective of whether his presence in
31 December 1992 .                                                          the United Kingdom is undesirable for reasons of
                                                                            national security ?
(') OJ No L 157, 10 . 6 . 1992 , p . 1 .
( 2 ) OJ No L 157, 10 . 6 . 1992 , p . 10 .
                                                                        3 . Do the opening words of Article 9 ( 1 ) of Directive
                                                                            64/221 /EEC ('where there is no right of appeal to a court
                                                                            of law, or where such appeal may be only in respect of
                                                                            the legal validity of the decision, or where the appeal
                                                                            cannot have suspensory effect') apply equally to
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the High Court of                     Article 9 ( 2 )?
Justice, Queen's Bench Division, by order of that court of
3 February 1995 , in the case of The Queen against the
Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex-parte:                  4 . Where a        decision has been taken to exclude a
                       Mann Singh Shingara                                  Community national from the territory of a Member
                           ( Case C-65/95 )                                 State other than his own on public policy or public
                                                                            security grounds and the Community national has left
                              95/C 159/23 )                                 that territory without there having been an appeal or
                                                                            reference for an advisory opinion to an independent
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                      competent authority pursuant to Articles 8 or 9 of
European Communities by an order of the High Court of                       Council Directive 64/221 /EEC, does that Community
Justice, Queen's Bench Division, of 3 February 1995 , which                 national have a right of reference to an independent
was received at the Court Registry on 13 March 1995 , for a                 competent authority under Article 9 ( 2 ) if that national