CELEX: 61995CC0325
Language: en
Date: 1996-07-11 00:00:00
Title: Opinion of Mr Advocate General Cosmas delivered on 11 July 1996. # Commission of the European Communities v Ireland. # Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directives 91/67/EEC, 91/492/EEC, 91/493/EEC and 92/48/EEC - Failure to transpose within the prescribed period. # Case C-325/95.

Important legal notice

|

61995C0325

Opinion of Mr Advocate General Cosmas delivered on 11 July 1996.  -  Commission of the European Communities v Ireland.  -  Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directives 91/67/EEC, 91/492/EEC, 91/493/EEC and 92/48/EEC - Failure to transpose within the prescribed period.  -  Case C-325/95.  

European Court reports 1996 Page I-05615

Opinion of the Advocate-General

++++1 In this application, brought pursuant to Article 169 of the EC Treaty, the Commission asks the Court to declare that Ireland is in breach of its obligation to transpose a number of directives into its internal legal system, namely:  (a) Council Directive 91/67/EEC of 28 January 1991 concerning the animal health conditions governing the placing on the market of aquaculture animals and products, (1) Article 29 of which provides that:  `1.  The Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive before 1 January 1993.  2. (...).'  (b) Council Directive 91/492/EEC of 15 July 1991 laying down the health conditions for the production and the placing on the market of live bivalve molluscs, (2) Article 15 of which provides that:  `The Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive before 1 January 1993. They shall notify the Commission thereof.  (...).'  (c) Council Directive 91/493/EEC of 22 July 1991 laying down the health conditions for the production and the placing on the market of fishery products, (3) Article 18 of which provides that:  `The Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive before 1 January 1993.  They shall notify the Commission thereof.  (...).'  and lastly,  (d) Council Directive 92/48/EEC of 16 June 1992 laying down the minimum hygiene rules applicable to fishery products caught on board certain vessels in accordance with Article 3(1)(a)(i) of Directive 91/493/EEC, (4) Article 4 of which provides:  `The Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive before 1 January 1993.  They shall inform the Commission thereof.  (...).'  2 After the expiry of the above periods prescribed for transposition, on 12 March 1993 the Commission sent a letter of formal notice to the Irish Government in which it drew its attention to the fact that it had not yet been notified of measures transposing those directives into the national legal system nor did it have any other information on the matter; it asked Ireland to submit its observations within a period of two months from receipt of the letter.  3 On 4 May 1994 the Commission issued a reasoned opinion, in which it requested Ireland to take the measures necessary to comply with the Directives within a period of two months from receipt of the opinion.  4 Through its Permanent Representative to the Communities, Ireland had replied to the Commission's letter of formal notice by a letter dated 5 July 1993 to the effect that transposition of the directives into its internal legal system was  imminent.  5 On 16 October 1995 the Commission brought the present proceedings by application lodged at the Court Registry.  6 In the abovementioned reply, Ireland does not deny that it has not yet brought into force the necessary measures to transpose the directives into national law.  It contends simply that the relevant Ministerial Regulations are in the course of preparation.  7 According to the settled case-law of the Court, a Member State may not plead provisions, practices or circumstances existing in its internal legal system in order to justify a failure to comply with the obligations and time-limits laid down in a directive. (5)  8 In those circumstances, the fact that Ireland has not transposed the directives into its internal legal system within the prescribed period amounts to a breach of its obligations, as pleaded by the Commission.  Conclusion  9 Accordingly I suggest that the Court should:  (1) declare that, by failing to adopt within the prescribed period the laws, regulations or administrative provisions necessary to transpose into its internal legal system: Council Directive 91/67/EEC of 28 January 1991 concerning the animal health conditions governing the placing on the market of aquaculture animals and products; Council Directive 91/492/EEC of 15 July 1991 laying down the health conditions for the production and the placing on the market of live bivalve molluscs; Council Directive 91/493/EEC of 22 July 1991 laying down the health conditions for the production and the placing on the market of fishery products; Council Directive 92/48/EEC of 16 June 1992 laying down the minimum hygiene rules applicable to fishery products caught on board certain vessels in accordance with Article 3(1)(a)(i) of Directive 91/493/EEC, Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 29, 15, 18 and 4 respectively of the said Directives;  (2) order Ireland to pay the costs.  (1) - OJ 1991 L 46, p. 1.  (2) - OJ 1991 L 268, p. 1.  (3) - OJ 1991 L 268, p. 15.  (4) - OJ 1992 L 187, p. 41.  (5) - See, for instance, the judgment of 2 May 1996 in Case C-253/95 Commission v Germany [1996] ECR I-0000, paragraph 12.