CELEX: C1999/188/52
Language: en
Date: 1999-07-03 00:00:00
Title: Case C-166/99: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour du Travail, Brussels (Fourth Chamber), by judgment of that court of 28 April 1999 in the case of Marthe Defreyn v Sabena SA

3.7.1999                EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                        C 188/23
The second infringement                                                   Pleas in law and main arguments
                                                                          Under Article 189 of the EC Treaty, according to which a
The Commission maintains that Italy has failed to fulfil its              directive is to be binding, as to the result to be achieved, upon
obligations under Community law because it has failed to                  each Member State to which it is addressed, Member States are
transpose fully, clearly and unambiguously into national law              required to observe the time-limits laid down in directives for
the whole substantive content of Article 9 of Direc-                      their transposition. The time-limit in the present case expired
tive 79/409/EEC: the national rules provide for derogation in             on 1 Juli 1997 without the Italian Republic having brought
some of the cases referred to in Article 9(1)(a) and (b), but do          into the necessary provisions in order to comply with the
not comply with the conditions and detailed rules laid down               directives referred to in the Commission’s application.
in Article 9(2) or make derogation conditional upon the
investigation of other satisfactory solutions, at least in cases
where derogation is based on reasons connected with air                   (1) OJ L 125 of 23.5.1996, p. 3.
safety.                                                                   (2) OJ L 125 of 23.5.1996, p. 10.
(1) OJ No L 103 of 25.4.1979, p. 1.
(2) Decree of the President of the Council of Ministers.
                                                                          Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour du
                                                                          Travail, Brussels (Fourth Chamber), by judgment of that
                                                                          court of 28 April 1999 in the case of Marthe Defreyn v
                                                                                                      Sabena SA
                                                                                                   (Case C-166/99)
Action brought on 30 April 1999 by the Commission of                                               (1999/C 188/52)
  the European Communities against the Italian Republic
                                                                          Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
                         (Case C-161/99)                                  European Communities by a judgment of the Cour du Travail
                                                                          (Labour Court), Brussels (Fourth Chamber), of 28 April 1999,
                                                                          which was received at the Court Registry on 4 May 1999, for
                         (1999/C 188/51)                                  a preliminary ruling in the case of Marthe Befreyn v Sabena
                                                                          SA on the following questions:
An action against the Italian Republic was brought before the             1. Can the additional pre-retirement payment provided for
Court of Justice on 30 April 1999 by the Commission of the                     by Collective Agreement No 17, rendered compulsory by
European Communities, represented by Francesco P. Ruggeri                      the Royal Decree of 16 January 1975 and provided for in
Laderchi, of its Legal Service, acting as Agent, with an address               the Collective labour Agreement of 23 May 1984 con-
for service in Luxembourg at the office of Carlos Gómez de la                 cluded within Joint Sub-committee No 315.1, be treated
Cruz, of its Legal Service, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.                          as an allowance payable under an occupational social
                                                                               security scheme to which the Protocol on Article 119 of
The applicant claims that the Court of Justice should:                         the Treaty establishing the European Community applies?
                                                                          2. Are the provisions of Collective Labour Agreement No 17
(1) declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and                and the Collective Labour Agreement of 23 May 1984
    administrative provisions necessary in order to comply                     concluded within Joint Sub-committee No 315.1 compat-
    with:                                                                      ible with Article 5 of Directive 76/207/EC (1)in that they
                                                                               exclude female workers over the age of 60 from the benefit
    (a) Council Directive 96/22/EC (1) of 29 April 1996                        of pre-retirement payments which constitute additional
         concerning the prohibition on the use in stockfarming                 redundancy payments, granted in addition to unemploy-
         of certain substances having a hormonal or thyrostatic                ment benefit, whereas such payments are guaranteed for
         action and of beta-agonists, and repealing Direc-                     male workers until the age of 65?
         tives 81/602/EEC, 88/146/EEC and 88/299/EEC
                                                                          3. If the above two questions are answered in the affirmative,
                                                                               does the application of the Protocol on Article 119 of the
    (b) Council Directive 96/23/EC       (2) of 29 April 1996 on               Treaty preclude the action brought by Mrs Defreyn from
         measures to monitor certain substances and residues                   succeeding, inasmuch as it is founded on breach of
         thereof in live animals and animal products and                       Article 5 of Directive 76/207?
         repealing Directives 85/358/EEC and 86/469/EEC and
         Decisions 89/187/EEC and 91/664/EEC,
                                                                          (1) Council Directive 76/207/EEC of 9 February 1976 on the
or by failing in any event to communicate those provisions,                   implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and
the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under the           women as regards access to employment, vocational training and
Treaty and the said directives;                                               promotion, and working conditions (OJ 1976 L 39, p. 40).
(2) order the Italian Republic to pay the costs.