CELEX: C1997/252/33
Language: en
Date: 1997-08-16 00:00:00
Title: Appeal brought on 20 June 1997 by Hedwig Kuchlenz-Winter against the judgment delivered on 16 April 1997 by the First Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities in Case T-66/95 between Hedwig Kuchlenz-Winter and the Commission of the European Communities (Case C-228/97 P)

16 . 8 . 97             EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                 No C 252/ 17
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                        Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
— Failure to fulfil the obligations resulting from                         The appellant complains that Community law has been
     Articles 1 (2 ), 2 ( 1 ) (c ) and 2 ( 5 ) of the Directive: Law       infringed and, in particular, that, in reaching its decision,
     No 93/1416 does not guarantee that the penalty will                   the Court of First Instance disregarded its obligation to
     have a genuinely dissuasive effect. It establishes, by                extrapolate the law.
     way of derogation, a specific interlocutory procedure
     which is less restrictive than that provided for under
     national civil law.                                                   (') OJ No C 137, 3 . 6 . 1995 , p . 26 .
                                                                           ( 2 ) OJ No C 181 , 4 . 6 . 1997, p. 13 .
— Failure to fulfil the obligations resulting from
     Chapter 2 of the Directive: the fact that recourse to
     the attestation procedure is optional for the
     contracting entities does not in any way mean that the
     attestation system is optional for the Member States,
     which are obliged to organize a system complying                      Action brought on 24 June 1997 by the Commission of
     with the provisions of Chapter 2 of the Directive .                   the European Communities against the Portuguese
                                                                                                            Republic
— Failure to fulfil the obligations resulting from                                                     ( Case C-229/97)
     Chapter 4 of the Directive: France has failed to specify
     the detailed rules governing intervention by the                                                    ( 97/C 252/34 )
     national authorities called upon to forward requests
     for conciliation to the Commission (Article 9 ( 2 ) of
     the Directive ). Lastly, Chapter 4 should have been                   An action against the Portuguese Republic was brought
     transposed in its entirety, if only for the purposes of               before the Court of Justice of the European Communities
     informing the persons concerned, as defined in                        on 24 June 1997 by the Commission of the European
     Article 9 ( 1 ), of the possibility open to them of having             Communities, represented by Francisco de Sousa Fialho,
     recourse to conciliation .                                             of its Legal Service, acting as Agent, with an address for
                                                                            service in Luxembourg at the office of Carlos Gomez de la
(') OJ No L 76 , 23 . 3 . 1992, p . 14 .
                                                                            Cruz, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.
                                                                            The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                            — declare that, by failing to adopt within the prescribed
                                                                                  period the laws, regulations or administrative
Appeal brought on 20 June 1997 by Hedwig Kuchlenz­                                provisions necessary to comply fully and correctly
Winter against the judgment delivered on 16 April 1997                            with Council Directive 79/869/EEC H of 9 October
by the First Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the                        1979 concerning the methods of measurement and
European Communities in Case T-66/95 between Hedwig                               frequencies of sampling and analysis of surface water
Kuchlenz-Winter and the Commission of the European                                intended for the abstraction of drinking water in the
                              Communities
                                                                                  Member States, the Portuguese Republic has failed to
                         ( Case C-228/97 P)                                       fulfil its obligations under the third paragraph of
                             ( 97/C 252/33 )                                      Article 189 of the EC Treaty and Article 13 of
                                                                                  Directive 79/869/EEC in combination with Article 395
                                                                                  and Annex XXXVI of the Act of Accession ( 2 ),
An appeal against the judgment delivered on 16 April
 1997 by the First Chamber of the Court of First Instance
of the European Communities in Case T-66/95 between                         — declare, in the alternative, that, by failing to inform
Hedwig Kuchlenz-Winter and the Commission of the                                  the Commission forthwith of such measures, the
 European Communities was brought before the Court of                             Portuguese Republic failed to fulfil its obligations
Justice of the European Communities on 20 June 1997 by                            under those provisions,
 Hedwig Kuchlenz-Winter, represented by Dieter Rogalla,
 Rechtsanwalt, with an address for service in Luxembourg                    — order the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs .
 at the Chambers of Decker, Braun & Wagner, 16 Avenue
 Marie-Therese .
                                                                             Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
 The appellant claims that the Court should:
                                                                             Under the third paragraph of Article 189 of the EC Treaty,
 — uphold all four heads of claim ( l ) advanced by the                      a directive is to be binding, as to the result to be achieved,
      applicant and set aside the judgment (2 ) of the Court                 upon each Member State to which it is addressed. In the
      of First Instance,                                                     present case, under Article 13 of Directive 79/869/EEC,
                                                                             the Member States are to bring into force the necessary
 — order the respondent to pay all the costs, including                      provisions within two years of its notification. That period
      those of the proceedings before the Court of First                     expired on 1 January 1989 without Portugal having
      Instance .                                                             adopted the provisions necessary to comply with, firstly,