CELEX: C1999/188/49
Language: en
Date: 1999-07-03 00:00:00
Title: Case C-158/99: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunal Tributário de 1a Instância, Faro, by order of that court of 11 March 1999, in the case of Corticeira Amorim - Algarve Lda. and Fazenda Pública

C 188/22                 EN                       Official Journal of the European Communities                                        3.7.1999
The Applicant claims that the Court should                                   Action brought on 30 April 1999 by the Commission of
                                                                               the European Communities against the Italian Republic
1) declare that by failing to notify the laws, regulations or
     administrative provisions necessary to comply with
     Council Directive 95/19/EC of 19 June 1995 concerning                                             (Case C-159/99)
     the allocation of railway infrastructure capacity and the
     charging of infrastructure fees (1), or by failing to adopt the
     measures necessary to comply with it, Ireland has failed to                                      (1999/C 188/50)
     fulfil its obligations under that Directive;
2) order Ireland to pay the costs.                                           An action against the Italian Republic was brought before the
                                                                             Court of Justice of the European Communities on 30 April
                                                                             1999 by the Commission of the European Communities,
                                                                             represented by Paolo Stancanelli of its Legal Service, acting as
Pleas in law and main arguments                                              Agent, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the office
                                                                             of Carlos Gómez de la Cruz, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.
Article 189 of the EC Treaty, under which a directive shall be
binding, as to the result to be achieved, upon each Member
State, carries by implication an obligation on the Member                    The applicant claims that the Court should:
States to observe the period for compliance laid down in the
directive. That period expired on 27 June 1997 without Ireland               — Declare that the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its
having enacted the provisions necessary to comply with the                       obligations under Community Law
directive referred to in the conclusions of the Commission.
                                                                                  •   by laying down rules permitting the capture and
(1) OJ L 143, 27.06.95, p. 75.                                                        keeping of three species (passer italiae, passer mon-
                                                                                      tanus and sturnus vulgaris), contrary to Articles 5 and
                                                                                      7 of Council Directive 79/409/EEC (1) and Annex II
                                                                                      thereto, and by providing that those rules are to apply
                                                                                      by way of a general and permanent derogation, which
                                                                                      is contrary to Article 9 of that Directive and engenders
                                                                                      an unacceptable degree of legal uncertainty; and
                                                                                  •   by laying down rules concerning the conditions and
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunal Tribut-                            detailed rules for the application of the derogation from
ário de 1a Instância, Faro, by order of that court of                                the prohibitions laid down by Directive 79/409/EEC
11 March 1999, in the case of Corticeira Amorim-Algarve                               which do not fully comply with the requirements
                      Lda. and Fazenda Pública                                       under Article 9 thereof, in particular as regards the
                                                                                      reasons for derogation, listed in Article 9(1)(a) and (b);
                           (Case C-158/99)
                                                                             — Order the Italian Republic to pay the costs of the proceed-
                           (1999/C 188/49)                                        ings.
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by an order of the Tribunal Tributärio                  Pleas in law and main arguments
de 1a Instância, Faro, for a preliminary ruling in the case of
Corticeira Amorim-Algarve Lda. v Fazenda Pública, on the
following question:
                                                                             The first infrinqement
Is Article 2 of the Schedule of Land Registry Fees, in requiring
to be added to the fixed fee under Article 1 thereof the variable            The Commission maintains that the rules laid down by
fee based on value provided for therein, contrary to Article 12              Articles 4(4) and 5(2) of Law No 157/92, which authorise the
of Directive 69/335, (1) in so far as it is prohibited, under the            capture and keeping of three protected species (passer italiae,
latter article, to levy a charge whose amount is calculated on               passer montanus and sturnus vulgaris) are manifestly contrary
the basis not of the cost of the individual service but of the               to Articles 5 and 7 of Directive 79/409 and Annex II thereto,
overall financing and investment costs of the body responsible               and that Article 3 of the DPCM (2) of 27 September 1997,
for providing the service in question?                                       according to which those rules may be justified under the
                                                                             derogation provided for in Article 9 of the Directive, does not
                                                                             remedy that infringement because the ensuing legal situation
(1) Council Directive 69/335/EEC concerning indirect taxes on the            is incompatible with the principle of legal certainty and the
    raising of capital (OJ English Special Edition 1969 (II), p. 412).       requirement that the Directive be clearly transposed into
                                                                             national law, and because the provision at issue introduces
                                                                             unacceptable arrangements for general and permanent dero-
                                                                             gation from the prohibitions laid down in the Directive.