CELEX: C1999/160/03
Language: en
Date: 1999-06-05 00:00:00
Title: Case C-62/99: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Landesarbeitsgericht Düsseldorf, by order of that court of 21 January 1999 in the case of Betriebsrat (Works Council) of bofrost Josef H. Boquoi Deutschland West GmbH & Co KG v. bofrost Josef H. Boquoi Deutschland West GmbH & Co KG

C 160/2                 EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                      5.6.1999
of: G. C. Rodrı́guez Iglesias, President, P. J. G. Kapteyn,             Action brought on 1 March 1999 by the Commission of
J. P. Puissochet, G. Hirsch and P. Jann, Presidents of Chambers,        the European Communities against the Federal Republic
G. F. Mancini, J. C. Moitinho de Almeida, C. Gulmann,                                             of Germany
J. L. Murray, D. A. O. Edward, H. Ragnemalm, L. Sevón
and M. Wathelet (Rapporteur), Judges: G. Cosmas, Advocate
General; R. Grass, Registrar, has made an order on 5 March                                       (Case C-71/99)
1999, the operative part of which is as follows:
1. The appeal is dismissed.                                                                     (1999/C 160/04)
2. Guérin Automobiles EURL is ordered to pay the costs of the
     proceedings.                                                       An action against the Federal Republic of Germany was
                                                                        brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communi-
                                                                        ties on 1 March 1999 by the Commission of the European
(1) OJ C 258, 15.8.1998.                                                Communities, represented by Götz zur Hausen, Legal Advisor
                                                                        in the Legal Service of the European Commission and Paolo
                                                                        Stancanelli, a member of the Legal Service of the European
                                                                        Commission, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the
                                                                        office of Carlos Gómez de la Cruz a member of the Legal
                                                                        Service of the European Commission, Wagner Centre, Kirch-
                                                                        berg, Luxembourg.
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Landesarbeits-
gericht Düsseldorf, by order of that court of 21 January
1999 in the case of Betriebsrat (Works Council) of                      The applicant claims that the Court should:
bofrost (1) Josef H. Boquoi Deutschland West GmbH & Co
KG v. bofrost (1) Josef H. Boquoi Deutschland West GmbH
                              & Co KG                                   — declare that the Federal Republic of Germany failed to fulfil
                                                                            its obligations under Council Directive 92/43/EEC of
                           (Case C-62/99)                                   21 May 1992 (1) on the conservation of natural habitats
                                                                            and of wild flora and fauna by failing to transmit to the
                                                                            Commission a full list of the sites referred to in the first
                          (1999/C 160/03)                                   subparagraph of Article 4 (1) together with the information
                                                                            on each site set out in the second subparagraph of Article
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                      4 (1), and
European Communities by an order of the Landesarbeitsgericht
Düsseldorf (Düsseldorf Higher Labour Court), by order of that
court of 21 January 1999, which was received at the Court               — order the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs.
Registry on 22 February 1999, for a preliminary ruling in the
case of Betriebsrat (Works Council) of bofrost (1) Josef
H. Boquoi Deutschland West GmbH & Co KG v. bofrost (1)
Josef H. Boquoi Deutschland West GmbH & Co KG on the
                                                                        Pleas in law and main arguments
following questions:
(a) Is Article 11 (1) and (2) of Council Directive 94/45/EC of
     22 September 1994 (1) to be interpreted as meaning that            According to the Commission, the first subparagraph of
     the right to information laid down therein exists even             Article 4 (1) of the Directive requires the Member States to
     where it is not (yet) established whether or not there is a        propose in their lists sites which are most suitable for
     controlling undertaking within the meaning of Article 3 of         conservation of the relevant habitats and at the same time
     Directive 94/95/EC in a group of undertakings as defined           geographically representative of the national territory of each
     in Article 2 (1) (b) of Directive 94/45/EC?                        Member State as a whole. The Federal Republic of Germany
                                                                        therefore infringes Community law in proposing a list which
(b) If question (a) is answered in the affirmative:                     omits a whole series of habitat types. It further infringes
                                                                        Community law in not assuring geographical representativity
     Does the right to information in Article 11 (1) and (2) of         for the whole of the territory of the Federal Republic of
     Directive 94/45/EC also include the right of a works               Germany, for instance, because no sites for habitat types
     council to request from the undertaking concerned infor-           within Annex 1 or species within Annex 2 in the Federal
     mation which gives rise to the presumption referred to in          States of Brandenburg, Sachsen, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern,
     Article 3 (2) of Directive 94/45/EC?                               Baden-Württemberg, Nordrhein-Westfalen are mentioned or
                                                                        because the lists hitherto provided are incomplete.
(c) Does Article 11 (1) and (2) of Directive 94/45/EC include
     the right of a works council to request documents from an
     undertaking to clarify and explain such information?               Under Article 4 (1) of the Directive, a complete list was to be
                                                                        transmitted by 10 June 1995. Even taking into account the
(1) OJ L 254, 30.9.1994, p. 64.                                         fact that the formula which Article 4 (1) required to be used
                                                                        was not available at that time, the information could none the
                                                                        less have been entered soon after notification of the formula
                                                                        on 19 December 1996 and transmitted. But at the time of