CELEX: 62007CA0188
Language: en
Date: 2008-06-24 00:00:00
Title: Case C-188/07: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 24 June 2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation, France) — Commune de Mesquer v Total France SA, Total International Ltd (Directive 75/442/EEC — Waste management — Concept of waste — Polluter pays principle — Holder — Previous holders — Producer of the product from which the waste came — Hydrocarbons and heavy fuel oil — Shipwreck — International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage — International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund)

15.8.2008   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 209/10
            
         Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 24 June 2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation, France) — Commune de Mesquer v Total France SA, Total International Ltd
   (Case C-188/07) (1)
   
   (Directive 75/442/EEC - Waste management - Concept of waste - ‘Polluter pays’ principle - Holder - Previous holders - Producer of the product from which the waste came - Hydrocarbons and heavy fuel oil - Shipwreck - International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage - International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund)
   (2008/C 209/14)
   Language of the case: French
   Referring court
   Cour de cassation
   Parties to the main proceedings
   
      Applicant: Commune de Mesquer
   
      Defendants: Total France SA, Total International Ltd
   Re:
   Reference for a preliminary ruling — Cour de cassation (France) — Interpretation of Article 1 of Council Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste (OJ 1975 L 194, p. 39), as amended by Directive 91/156/EEC of 18 March 1991 (OJ 1991 L 78, p. 32) and of Category Q4 of Annex 1 and of Article 1(b) and (c) and Article 15 of Directive 2006/12/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2006 on waste (OJ 2006 L 114, p. 9) — Definition of waste — Inclusion of hydrocarbons and heavy fuel oil, by itself or mixed with water and sand? — Responsibility of the producer and/or holder of the waste where it is transported by a third party
   Operative part of the judgment
   
               1.
            
            
               A substance such as that at issue in the main proceedings, namely heavy fuel oil sold as a combustible fuel, does not constitute waste within the meaning of Council Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste, as amended by Commission Decision 96/350/EC of 24 May 1996, where it is exploited or marketed on economically advantageous terms and is capable of actually being used as a fuel without requiring prior processing.
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Hydrocarbons accidentally spilled at sea following a shipwreck, mixed with water and sediment and drifting along the coast of a Member State until being washed up on that coast, constitute waste within the meaning of Article 1(a) of Directive 75/442, as amended by Decision 96/350, where they are no longer capable of being exploited or marketed without prior processing.
            
         
               3.
            
            
               For the purposes of applying Article 15 of Directive 75/442, as amended by Decision 96/350, to the accidental spillage of hydrocarbons at sea causing pollution of the coastline of a Member State:
               
                           —
                        
                        
                           the national court may regard the seller of those hydrocarbons and charterer of the ship carrying them as a producer of that waste within the meaning of Article 1(b) of Directive 75/442, as amended by Decision 96/350, and thereby as a ‘previous holder’ for the purposes of applying the first part of the second indent of Article 15 of that directive, if that court, in the light of the elements which it alone is in a position to assess, reaches the conclusion that that seller-charterer contributed to the risk that the pollution caused by the shipwreck would occur, in particular if he failed to take measures to prevent such an incident, such as measures concerning the choice of ship;
                        
                     
                           —
                        
                        
                           if it happens that the cost of disposing of the waste produced by an accidental spillage of hydrocarbons at sea is not borne by the International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund, or cannot be borne because the ceiling for compensation for that accident has been reached, and that, in accordance with the limitations and/or exemptions of liability laid down, the national law of a Member State, including the law derived from international agreements, prevents that cost from being borne by the shipowner and/or the charterer, even though they are to be regarded as ‘holders’ within the meaning of Article 1(c) of Directive 75/442, as amended by Decision 96/350, such a national law will then, in order to ensure that Article 15 of that directive is correctly transposed, have to make provision for that cost to be borne by the producer of the product from which the waste thus spread came. In accordance with the ‘polluter pays’ principle, however, such a producer cannot be liable to bear that cost unless he has contributed by his conduct to the risk that the pollution caused by the shipwreck will occur.
                        
                     
         
      (1)  OJ C 129, 9.6.2007.