CELEX: C2003/158/31
Language: en
Date: 2003-07-05 00:00:00
Title: Case C-214/03: Action brought on 19 May 2003 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Republic of Austria

5.7.2003              EN                          Official Journal of the European Union                                             C 158/19
1.   Must Article 6(3) of the Athens Protocol of 17 May 1980                    2.     by failing to include in the relevant Austrian legal
     for the protection of the Mediterranean Sea against                               provisions (Luftreinhaltegesetz für Kesselanlagen —
     pollution from land-based sources (the Barcelona Con-                             LRG-K and LRV-K) (law on air purity for boiler
     vention), which has become Article 6(1) in the revised                            plants) the definitions of ’new plant’ and ’existing
     version, be held to have direct effect, so that any interested                    plant’ as set out in Article 2.9 and 2.10 of the
     party may rely on it before the national courts in an action                      directive;
     to halt discharges of water which are not authorised in
     accordance with the procedure and criteria which it                        3.     by failing fully, in particular by reason of the
     prescribes?                                                                       divergence of the Austrian definition of fuel from
                                                                                       that set out in Article 2.6 of the directive, to
                                                                                       incorporate in the relevant air-purity legislation the
2.   Must the same provision be interpreted to mean that it                            emission limit values for sulphur dioxide, oxides of
     prohibits the discharge into a saltwater marsh communi-                           nitrogen and dust laid down in Article 4.1 in
     cating with the Mediterranean Sea of substances which,                            conjunction with Annexes III to VII to the directive;
     although not toxic, adversely affect the oxygen content
     of the marine environment, without an authorisation                        4.     by failing correctly to transpose in the LRG-K
     issued by the competent authorities of the Member States,                         and LRV-K Article 9(2) and (3) of the directive
     taking into account the provisions of the abovementioned                          concerning the calculation of the emission limit
     Protocol and of Annex III C thereto (now Annex II)?                               value in multi-fuel firing units which use distillation
                                                                                       and conversion residues from crude-oil refining for
                                                                                       own consumption, alone or with other fuels,
                                                                                the Republic of Austria has failed to fulfil its obligations
                                                                                under Articles 2.6, 2.8, 2.9, 2.10 and 10(4)(1) of Directive
                                                                                88/609, in conjunction with Annexes III to VII thereto
                                                                                and Article 9(2) and (3) of that directive;
                                                                          II.   Order the Republic of Austria to pay the costs of the
                                                                                proceedings.
Action brought on 19 May 2003 by the Commission
of the European Communities against the Republic of
                              Austria                                     Pleas in law and main arguments
                                                                          The Commission finds that the Republic of Austria has failed
                                                                          to fulfil its obligations by failing to bring its national law into
                       (Case C-214/03)
                                                                          line with the directive, which was thus improperly and
                                                                          incompletely transposed, in so far as:
                       (2003/C 158/31)                                    —     it failed correctly to transpose Article 2.8 of the directive
                                                                                relating to the term ‘multi-fuel firing unit’ by restricting
                                                                                the term, in a manner not envisaged in the directive,
                                                                                to units in which the percentage of additional fuels
                                                                                contributing to the thermal input amounts to at least
An action against the Republic of Austria was brought before                    20 % and thus restricting the scope of the directive in
the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 19 May                      that regard;
2003 by the Commission of the European Communities,
                                                                          —     it failed to transpose Article 2.9 and 2.10 of the directive
represented by Josef Christian Schieferer and Gregorio Valero
                                                                                with regard to the definitions of ‘new plant’ and ‘existing
Jordana, of the Commission’s Legal Service, acting as Agents,
                                                                                plant’;
with an address for service in Luxembourg.
                                                                          —     it failed fully to give effect to the emission limit values for
                                                                                sulphur dioxide, oxides of nitrogen and dust in accord-
                                                                                ance with Article 4(1) in conjunction with Annexes III
The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                                to VII, particularly in light of the definition of fuel,
                                                                                which in the Austrian legal provisions is confined to
I.   Rule that:                                                                 ‘conventional fuels’, as a result of which only partial effect
                                                                                is given to the scope of the directive;
     1.   by laying down in paragraph 22(1) of the Luft-
          reinhalteverordnung für Kesselanlagen (regulation               —     it failed correctly to transpose Article 9(2) and (3) of the
          on air purity for boiler plants) (LRV-K) a definition                 directive with regard to the calculation of the limit values
          of ’multi-fuel firing unit’ that departs from Article 2.8             for multi-fuel firing units in refineries.
          of Council Directive 88/609/EEC of 24 November
          1988 on the limitation of emissions of certain                  (1 ) OJ 1988 L 336, p. 1.
          pollutants into the air from large combustion plants,
          as amended (1);