CELEX: C1998/340/25
Language: en
Date: 1998-11-07 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 25 September 1998 by the Commission of the European Communities against the French Republic (Case C-354/98)

C 340/14               EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                     7.11.98
    4. The vehicles in respect of which aid has been                 25 September 1998 by the Commission of the European
        granted under the plan account for less than 0,5 %           Communities, represented by Michel Nolin and Laura
        of the total number of Spanish industrial vehicles           Pignataro, of its Legal Service, acting as Agents, with an
        and for a minuscule proportion of the total                  address for service in Luxembourg at the office of Carlos
        number of such vehicles in Europe.                           Gómez de la Cruz, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.
    5. 81 % of recipients of aid who have acquired
        vehicles having a greater tonnage (types A and E)            The Commission of the European Communities claims
        possess only one vehicle of that category, and 97 %          that the Court should:
        have less than 5 vehicles. The undertakings
        concerned are thus very small.
                                                                     Ð declare that, by failing within the prescribed periods to
                                                                          adopt or, at all events, to communicate the laws,
Ð Infringement of Article 92(3)(c) of the EC Treaty:                      regulations and administrative measures necessary in
                                                                          order to comply with Council Directives 95/18/EC (1)
    The Kingdom of Spain maintains that there are                         and 95/19/EC (2), respectively, the licensing of railway
    reasons relating to environmental protection and road                 undertakings and the allocation of railway
    safety which justify the application in the present case              infrastructure capacity and the charging of
    of the provisions of Article 92(3)(c) of the EC Treaty,               infrastructure fees, the French Republic has failed to
    and that the measures proposed will clearly have a                    fulfil its obligations under those directives;
    positive effect in those two areas, without any increase
    in capacity.
                                                                     Ð order the French Republic to pay the costs.
Ð Breach of the principle of the protection of legitimate
    expectations:
                                                                     Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
    The time which elapsed following the submission of
    each request for information (3 periods of total silence         Under the third paragraph of Article 189 of the EC Treaty,
    on the part of the Commission, respectively lasting 4            directives are binding, as to the result to be achieved,
    months, 7 months and 3 months) prompted the logical              upon the Member States to which they are addressed. The
    and legitimate conclusion that the Commission had no             Member States' obligations in that regard include the
    objection whatever to the measures laid down in the              obligation to comply with the time-limits laid down by the
    Plan Renove Industrial. Furthermore, although the                directives in question. In the present case, the time-limit
    Commission on one occasion gave notice that it might             expired on 27 June 1997, but the French Republic has
    have to adopt a provisional decision requiring the               failed to adopt or, at all events, to communicate the
    Spanish authorities to suspend payment of the aid in             requisite measures.
    issue, it never imposed any such requirement. The
    legitimate expectation referred to above gave rise to a
                                                                     (1) OJ L 143 of 27.6.1995, p. 70.
    substantial increase in the number of recipients of aid          (2) OJ L 143 of 27.6.1995, p. 75.
    under the Plan Renove Industrial.
Ð Absence of proportionality and absence of a statement
    of reasons:
    The fact that aid is declared to be prohibited by
    Article 92 is not enough to give rise simultaneously to          Action brought on 25 September 1998 by the Commission
    an obligation to repay that aid. Upon weighing in the            of the European Communities against the French Republic
    balance, on the one hand, the restoration of free                                         (Case C-354/98)
    competition, which the Commission claims to have
    been under threat, and, on the other, the whole series                                     (98/C 340/25)
    of actual losses which the recipients of aid under the
    Plan would suffer if they were obliged to repay such
    aid, it is clearly impossible to achieve any equilibrium.        An action against the French Republic was brought before
                                                                     the Court of Justice of the European Communities on
                                                                     25 September 1998 by the Commission of the European
                                                                     Communities, represented by Marie Wolfcarius, of its
                                                                     Legal Service, acting as Agent, with an address for service
                                                                     in Luxembourg at the office of Carlos Gómez de la Cruz,
Action brought on 25 September 1998 by the Commission                Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.
of the European Communities against the French Republic
                        (Case C-353/98)                              The Commission of the European Communities claims
                         (98/C 340/24)                               that the Court should:
An action against the French Republic was brought before             Ð declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations
the Court of Justice of the European Communities on                       and administrative measures necessary in order to
 ---pagebreak--- 7.11.98              EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                  C 340/15
    comply      with    Directive     96/97/EC     on    the       Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
    implementation of the principle of equal treatment for
    men and women in occupational social security                  Under the third paragraph of Article 189 of the EC Treaty
    schemes (1), the French Republic has failed to fulfil its      and Article 5 of the EC Treaty, together with Article 3 of
    obligations under that directive;                              Council Directive 96/97/EC, the French Republic was
                                                                   required to conform with that directive by 1 July 1997.
Ð order the French Republic to pay the costs.                      (1) OJ L 46 of 17.2.1997, p. 20.
                                                  COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
  JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE                          21 September 1994 relating to a proceeding pursuant to
                                                                   Article 85 of the EC Treaty and Article 53 of the EEA
                   of 15 September 1998                            Agreement (IV/34.600 Ð Night Services) (OJ L 259 of
in Joined Cases T-374/94, T-375/94, T-384/94 and                   7.10.1994, p. 20) Ð the Court of First Instance (Second
T-388/94: European Night Services Ltd (ENS) and Others             Chamber), composed of: A. Kalogeropoulos, President,
      v. Commission of the European Communities (1)                C. W. Bellamy and J. Pirrung, Judges; H. Jung, Registrar,
                                                                   has given a judgment on 15 September 1998, in which it:
(Competition Ð Transport by rail Ð Agreements on
overnight rail services through the Channel Tunnel Ð
Restrictions on competition Ð Directive 91/440/EEC Ð               1. annuls       Commission       Decision    94/663/EC    of
Appreciable effect on trade Ð Supply of necessary services             21 September 1994 relating to a proceeding pursuant
Ð Essential facilities' Ð Statement of reasons Ð                      to Article 85 of the EC Treaty and Article 53 of the
                       Admissibility)                                  EEA Agreement (IV/34.600 Ð Night Services);
                       (98/C 340/26)
                                                                   2. orders the Commission to pay the costs;
         (Language of the case: English and French)
                                                                   3. orders the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
                                                                       Northern Ireland, as intervener, to bear its own costs.
In Joined Cases T-374/94: European Night Services Ltd              (1) OJ C 392 of 31.12.1994 and OJ C 386 of 31.12.1994.
(ENS), established in London, T-375/94: Eurostar (UK)
Ltd, formerly European Passenger Services Ltd (EPS),
established in London, represented by Thomas Sharpe
QC, of the Bar of England and Wales, and Alexandre
Nourry, Solicitor, with an address for service in
Luxembourg at the Chambers of Elvinger, Hoss &
Prussen, 15 Côte d'Eich, supported by SocieÂteÂ Nationale
des Chemins de Fer FrancËais (SNCF), established in Paris,           JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
represented by Chantal MomeÁge, of the Paris Bar, with an                              of 15 September 1998
address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of
Alex Schmitt, 62 Avenue Guillaume, T-384/94: Union                 in Case T-11/95: BP Chemicals Limited v. Commission of
Internationale des Chemins de Fer (UIC), established in                            the European Communities (1)
Paris, and NV Nederlandse Spoorwegen (NS), established             (State aid Ð Action for annulment Ð Time-limits Ð
in Utrecht, the Netherlands, represented by Erik H.                Persons individually concerned Ð Private market economy
Pijnacker Hordijk, of the Amsterdam Bar, with an address           investor principle Ð Opening of the procedure provided
for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Luc                                 for in Article 93(2) of the Treaty)
Frieden, 62 Avenue Guillaume, and T-388/94: SocieÂteÂ
Nationale des Chemins de Fer FrancËais (SNCF),                                             (98/C 340/27)
established in Paris, represented by Chantal MomeÁge, of
the Paris Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg
at the Chambers of Alex Schmitt, 62 Avenue Guillaume,                             (Language of the case: English)
supported by United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Northern Ireland (Agents: Lindsey Nicoll and Paul Lasok),
against Commission of the European Communities                     In Case T-11/95: BP Chemicals Limited, established in
(Agents: initially Francisco Enrique GonzaÂlez Díaz, then          London, represented by James Flynn, Barrister, of the Bar
Giuliano Marenco and Ami Barav) Ð application for                  of England and Wales, and Alec Burnside, Solicitor, with
annulment of Commission Decision 94/663/EC of                      an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of