CELEX: C1999/100/22
Language: en
Date: 1999-04-10 00:00:00
Title: Case C-45/99: Action brought on 16 February 1999 by the Commission of the European Communities against the French Republic

10.4.1999              EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                  C 100/13
Germany, and not that received by him in his last                       provisions in order to comply with the directive referred
employment in Germany.                                                  to in the Commission's application.
                                                                        (1) OJ L 216, 20.8.1994, p. 12.
That method of calculation clearly penalises the worker
concerned on account of the fact that he is resident in a
Member State other than that in which he has worked,
and is incompatible with the main objective of Regulation
(EEC) No 1408/71, which is to facilitate freedom of
movement for workers.
(1) Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of 14 June 1971 on
    the application of security schemes to employed persons and         Action brought on 16 February 1999 by the Commission
    to members of their families moving within the Community            of the European Communities against the French Republic
    (OJ, English Special Edition 1971 (II), p. 416).
                                                                                                (Case C-46/99)
                                                                                               (1999/C 100/23)
                                                                        An action against the French Republic was brought before
                                                                        the Court of Justice of the Euroepan Communities on
Action brought on 16 February 1999 by the Commission                    16 February 1999 by the Commission of the European
of the European Communities against the French Republic                 Communities, represented by Dimitrios Gouloussis, Legal
                                                                        Adviser, acting as Agent, with an address for service in
                          (Case C-45/99)                                Luxembourg at the office of Carlos Gómez de la Cruz,
                                                                        Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.
                         (1999/C 100/22)
                                                                        The Commission of the European Communities claims
An action against the French Republic was brought before
                                                                        that the Court should:
the Court of Justice of the European Communities on
16 February 1999 by the Commission of the European
Communities, represented by Dimitrios Gouloussis, Legal
                                                                        Ð declare that, by failing within the prescribed period to
Adviser, acting as Agent, with an address for service in
                                                                            adopt, alternatively to communicate to the
Luxembourg at the Office of Carlos Gómez de la Cruz,
                                                                            Commission, the laws, regulations and administrative
Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.
                                                                            measures necessary in order fully to comply with
                                                                            Council Directive 93/104/EEC of 23 November 1993
                                                                            concerning certain aspects of the organisation of
The Commission of the European Communities claims
                                                                            working time (1), the French Republic has failed to
that the Court should:
                                                                            fulfil its obligations under the Treaty and under that
                                                                            directive;
Ð declare that, by failing within the prescribed period to
     adopt, alternatively to communicate to the
     Commission, the laws, regulations and administrative               Ð order the French Republic to pay the costs.
     measures necessary in order fully to comply with
     Council Directive 94/33/EC of 22 June 1994 on the
     protection of young persons at work (1), the French                Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support
     Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under the
     EC Treaty and under that directive;
                                                                        Under Article 189 of the EC Treaty, according to which a
Ð order the French Republic to pay the costs.                           directive is to be binding, as to the result to be achieved,
                                                                        upon each Member State to which it is addressed,
                                                                        Member States are required to observe the time-limits laid
                                                                        down in directives for their transposition. The time-limit
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support
                                                                        in the present case expired on 23 November 1996 without
                                                                        the French Republic having brought into force the
                                                                        necessary provisions in order to comply with the directive
Under Article 189 of the EC Treaty, according to which a
                                                                        referred to in the Commission's application.
directive is to be binding, as to the result to be achieved,
upon each Member State to which it is addressed,
Member States are required to observe the time-limits laid              (1) OJ L 307, 13.12.1993, p. 18.
down in directives for their transposition. The time-limit
in the present case expired on 22 June 1996 without the
French Republic having brought into force the necessary