CELEX: C1998/278/49
Language: en
Date: 1998-09-05 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 17 July 1998 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Kingdom of Belgium (Case C-262/98)

5.9.98                EN                Official Journal of the European Communities                                  C 278/27
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                Article 7 of the Directive. However, the Commission
                                                                   also points out that the national decision to adopt an
                                                                   integrated strategy to combat pollution rather than
Under Article 20 of Directive 78/686/EEC, Member States            evaluating the situation substance by substance makes it
which require their own nationals to complete a                    difficult to verify whether Article 7 is being complied
preparatory training period in order to become eligible for        with, in particular as regards the 99 priority substances, if
appointment as a dental practitioner of a social security          the information forwarded to the Commission is not set
scheme could, for a period of eight years following                out in an orderly and transparent or at least non-
notification of the Directive, impose a training period of a       contradictory fashion.
maximum of six months on nationals of other Member
States. That eight-year period expired on 28 July 1986.
However, under Article 17 of the Zulassungsordnung für             In any event, the Commission has reason to conclude that
Vertragszahnärzte (Rules on Admission for Appointed                the Portuguese Republic has not completed identification
Dental Practitioners) the German authorities require               of the substances existing in Portugal which appear on
applicants from other Member States to attend one or               the list of 99 substances and, in relation to those which
three-day courses, in which linguistic proficiency and             it has identified, it has not adopted genuine reduction
knowledge of German social security law are also tested.           programmes and has only partially set quality objectives.
                                                                   In that respect, the Commission considers that the few
(1) OJ L 233, 24.8.1978, p. 1.                                     voluntary agreements with some industrial sectors are
(2) OJ L 233, 24.8.1978, p. 10.                                    not binding and cannot in any event be regarded as
                                                                   programmes within the meaning of Article 7 of the
                                                                   Directive. But even if they were, they do not cover all the
                                                                   industrial sectors and still less do they reduce pollution
                                                                   deriving from various sources.
Action brought on 17 July 1998 by the Commission of the            In addition, as far as the plans for de-pollution of the
  European Communities against the Portuguese Republic             River A Â gueda, Bacia do Guadiana and Bacia de Alcanena
                       (Case C-261/98)                             are concerned, although they may contribute to improving
                                                                   water quality, they do not constitute, from the point of
                        (98/C 278/48)                              view either of geographical cover or of content, timetabled
                                                                   programmes for the reduction of pollution from the 99
                                                                   priority substances, with clear quality objectives and
An action against the Portuguese Republic was brought              emission standards.
before the Court of Justice of the European Communities
on 17 July 1998 by the Commission of the European
Communities, represented by Francisco de Sousa Fialho,             (1) OJ L 129, 18.5.1976, p. 23.
of its Legal Service, acting as Agent, with an address for
service in Luxembourg at the office of Carlos Gómez de la
Cruz, also of its Legal Service, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.
The applicant claims that the Court of Justice should:
                                                                   Action brought on 17 July 1998 by the Commission of the
                                                                     European Communities against the Kingdom of Belgium
Ð declare that, by failing to adopt and/or communicate
    to the Commission summaries of the programmes for                                     (Case C-262/98)
    the reduction of pollution incorporating quality
    objectives and the corresponding results in respect of                                 (98/C 278/49)
    the 99 priority substances mentioned in the first indent
    of List II in the Annex to Council Directive 76/464/
    EEC of 4 May 1976 on pollution caused by certain               An action against the Kingdom of Belgium was brought
    dangerous substances discharged into the aquatic               before the Court of Justice of the European Communities
    environment of the Community (1), the Portuguese               on 17 July 1998 by the Commission of the European
    Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under            Communities, represented by Frank Benyon, Legal
    Article 7 of that Directive and the third paragraph of         Adviser, acting as Agent, with an address for service in
    Article 189 of the EC Treaty,                                  Luxembourg at the office of Carlos Gómez de la Cruz,
                                                                   Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.
Ð order the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.
                                                                   The Commission of the European Communities claims
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                that the Court should:
The Commission recognises that the Portuguese                      Ð declare that, by failing to communicate the laws,
authorities have been making efforts to comply with                     regulations and administrative measures necessary in
 ---pagebreak--- C 278/28                EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                    5.9.98
     order to comply with Council Directive 93/65/EEC of                   financing for the sum of BEF 382 208 436 by way of
     19 July 1993 on the definition and use of compatible                  expenditure incurred for the advance payment of
     technical specifications for the procurement of                       export refunds;
     air-traffic management equipment and systems (1),
     alternatively by failing to take the measures necessary          2. order the Commission to pay the costs of the
     to comply therewith, the Kingdom of Belgium has                       proceedings.
     failed to fulfil its obligations under that Directive,
                                                                      Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
Ð order the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.
                                                                      The pleas in law and main arguments are identical to
                                                                      those in Case C-242/97 (2).
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
                                                                      (1) OJ L 163, 6.6.1998, p. 28.
                                                                      (2) OJ C 271, 6.9.1997, p. 6.
The pleas in law and main arguments are analogous to
those in Case C-250/98 (2); the time limit laid down by
Article 9 of the Directive expired on 20 July 1994.
                                                                      Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de
The Commission asserts, in the alternative, that the                  PremieÁre Instance de Charleroi by judgment of that court
Directive confers on nationals of the Member States the               of 2 July 1998 in the case of Tibor Balog v. ASBL Royal
right to respond to invitations to tender prepared in                                Charleroi Sporting Club (RCSC)
accordance with the standards laid down pursuant to
and in accordance with the Directive. For that reason,                                       (Case C-264/98)
internal memoranda circulated by State ministries or                                           (98/C 278/51)
administrative authorities do not constitute an adequate
transposition measure.
                                                                      Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
                                                                      European Communities by a judgment of the Tribunal de
(1) OJ L 187, 27.7.1993, p. 52.                                       PremieÁre Instance (Court of First Instance), Charleroi, of
(2) See page 22 of this Official Journal.                             2 July 1998, which was received at the Court Registry on
                                                                      20 July 1998, for a preliminary ruling in the case of Tibor
                                                                      Balog v. ASBL Royal Charleroi Sporting Club on the
                                                                      following question:
                                                                      Is it compatible with Article 85 of the EC Treaty and/or
                                                                      with Article 53 of the Agreement on the European
Action brought on 17 July 1998 by the Kingdom                         Economic Area for a football club established in the
of Belgium against the Commission of the European                     territory of a Member State of the European Union to
                            Communities                               claim, on the basis of the rules and circulars of the
                          (Case C-263/98)                             national and international federations (URBSFA, UEFA,
                                                                      FIFA), payment of a transfer sum' on the occasion of the
                           (98/C 278/50)                              engagement of one of its former players, a professional
                                                                      footballer of non-Community nationality who has reached
                                                                      the end of his contract, by a new employer established in
An action against the Commission of the European                      the same Member State, in another Member State of the
Communities was brought before the Court of Justice of                European Union or the European Economic Area, or in a
the European Communities on 17 July 1998 by the                       non-member country?
Kingdom of Belgium, represented by J. Devadder, General
Adviser in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Foreign Trade
and Development Cooperation, and H. Gilliams, of the
Brussels Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at
the Belgian Embassy, 4 rue des Girondins.
                                                                      References for preliminary rulings by Juzgado de Primera
                                                                      Instancia No 35, Barcelona, by orders of that court of
The applicant claims that the Court should:                           31 March 1998 in the cases of Salvat Editores SA and
                                                                               Others and J. CompanÄ Calbuig and Others
                                                                                      (Cases C-265/98 to C-272/98)
1. annul Commission Decision 98/358/EC of 6 May
                                                                                               (98/C 278/52)
     1998 on the clearance of the accounts presented by the
     Member States in respect of the expenditure for 1994
     on the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural            Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
     Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) (1) in so far                European Communities by orders of Juzgado de Primera
     as it disallows, in respect of the applicant, Community          Instancia (Court of First Instance) No 35, Barcelona, of