CELEX: C2001/348/22
Language: en
Date: 2001-12-08 00:00:00
Title: Case C-375/01: Action brought on 27 September 2001 by the Commission of the European Communities against Ireland

C 348/12                EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                    8.12.2001
(Federal Social Court) of 2 August 2001, received at the Court           The Commission claims that the Court should:
Registry on 25 September 2001, for a preliminary ruling in
the case of Nadi Sahin against Bundesanstalt für Arbeit (Federal         —     declare that, by failing to adopt and to notify to the
Labour Office) on the following question:                                      Commission, within the time-limit laid down, the laws,
                                                                               regulations and administrative provisions necessary to
1.     Is Article 41(1) of the Additional Protocol of 23 Novem-                comply fully with Council Directive 98/81/EC (1) of
       ber 1970 to the Agreement establishing an Association                   26 October 1998 amending Directive 90/219/EEC on
       between the European Economic Community and Turkey                      the contained use of genetically modified micro-organ-
       to be interpreted as meaning:                                           isms, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obli-
                                                                               gations under the EC Treaty;
       (a)  that a Turkish worker is entitled to plead a restriction
            on the freedom to provide services which is contrary         —     order the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.
            to the Additional Protocol and, if so,
       (b) that there is also a restriction on the freedom to
            provide services where a Member State of the                 Pleas in law and main arguments
            Community abolishes an existing work permit
            exemption for Turkish drivers engaged in inter-
            national haulage who are employed by a (Turkish)             In accordance with the third paragraph of Article 249 of the
            employer with its seat in Turkey?                            Treaty establishing the European Community, directives are
                                                                         binding, as to the result to be achieved, upon each Member
                                                                         State to which they are addressed.
2.     Does such a restriction concern exclusively the freedom
       to provide services or does it also or solely concern
       conditions of access to employment within the meaning
       of Article 13 of Decision No 1/80 of the Association              Under the first paragraph of Article 10 of the Treaty, Member
       Council of 19 September 1980 on the development                   States are to take all appropriate measures, whether general or
       of the Association between the European Economic                  particular, to ensure fulfilment of the obligations arising out
       Community and Turkey?                                             of the Treaty or resulting from action taken by the institutions
                                                                         of the Community.
3.     Is Article 13 of Decision No 1/80 of the Association
       Council of 19 September 1980 on the development                   It is not disputed by the Hellenic Republic that it must adopt
       of the Association between the European Economic                  measures to comply with the abovementioned directive.
       Community and Turkey also to be applied to Turkish
       employees of an employer with its seat in Turkey who,
       as long-distance lorry drivers engaged in international           The Commission records that until now the Hellenic Republic
       haulage, regularly pass through a Member State of the             has not adopted the appropriate measures for the full incorpor-
       Community without belonging to the (legitimate) labour            ation of the Directive at issue into Greek law.
       force of that Member State?
                                                                         (1) OJ L 330, 5.12.1998, p. 13.
Action brought on 26 September 2001 by the Com-
mission of the European Communities against the Hellen-
                            ic Republic                                  Action brought on 27 September 2001 by the Com-
                                                                            mission of the European Communities against Ireland
                         (Case C-371/01)
                                                                                                  (Case C-375/01)
                         (2001/C 348/21)
                                                                                                  (2001/C 348/22)
An action against the Hellenic Republic was brought before
the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 26 Sep-              An action against Ireland was brought before the Court of
tember 2001 by the Commission of the European Communi-                   Justice of the European Communities on 27 September 2001
ties, represented by Götz zur Hausen, Legal Adviser, and Panos           by the Commission of the European Communities, represented
Panagiotopoulos, a national civil servant on secondment to its           by Richard Wainwright, acting as agent, with an address for
Legal Service.                                                           service in Luxembourg.
 ---pagebreak--- 8.12.2001                EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                       C 348/13
The Applicant requests that the Court should:                                  79/409/EEC (1) and subsequent amendments thereto and
                                                                               other migratory species which regularly return to Italy,
                                                                               and by failing to send to the Commission all the
—     declare that by failing to adopt the laws, regulations
                                                                               appropriate information relevant to most of the special
      or administrative provisions necessary to comply with                    protection areas classified by it, the Italian Republic has
      Council Directive 97/43/Euratom of 30 June 1997 laying                   failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 4(1), (2) and
      down provisions concerning health protection of individ-
                                                                               (3) of that Directive.
      uals against the dangers of ionising radiation in relation
      to medical exposure, and repealing Directive
      84/466/Euratom (1) or in any event by failing to com-
                                                                         —     Order the Italian Republic to pay the costs.
      municate them to the Commission, Ireland has failed to
      fulfil its obligations under that Directive,
—     order Ireland to pay the costs.
                                                                         Pleas in law and main argument
Pleas in law and main argument
                                                                         In spite of the efforts made by the Italian authorities to
Article 249 EC under which a directive shall be binding as to            fulfil their obligations under Article 4 of the Directive,
the result to be achieved, upon each Member State, carries by            the Commission finds that the classification of the special
implication an obligation on the Member States to observe the            protection areas (SPA) still does not meet the requirements of
period for compliance laid down in the Directive. That period            that provision, either in so far as concerns the species of birds
expired on 13 May 2000 without Ireland having enacted the                mentioned in Annex 1 to the Directive or in so far as concerns
provisions necessary to comply with the Directive referred to            the other species of migratory birds which return regularly.
in the conclusions of the Commission.
(1) OJ L 180, 9.7.1997, p. 22.                                           In view of the present number and surface of the SPAs in Italy,
                                                                         it is clear that many bird species listed in Annex I to the
                                                                         Directive and many other migratory species are not adequately
                                                                         protected. Another factor which shows the inadequacy of the
                                                                         classification of the SPAs carried out by the Italian authorities
                                                                         is the fact that a large number of internationally important
                                                                         wetlands have not been designated. Moreover, a comparison
                                                                         between the number of ‘Important bird areas’ (IBA) and the
                                                                         number of IBAs partly or wholly covered by SPAs, so far as
Action brought on 2 October 2001 by the Commission                       certain autonomous regions and provinces are concerned,
of the European Communities against the Italian Republic                 shows that, notwithstanding that the situation has improved
                                                                         for a number of regions, there remain some substantial aspects
                                                                         in which they fall short, in particular in respect of some
                          (Case C-378/01)                                regions which are extremely important for wild birds.
                          (2001/C 348/23)
                                                                         Finally, the information sent by Italy to the Commission is in
                                                                         many ways inadequate. In particular, the ornithological data is
                                                                         often inadequate inasmuch as it is both incomplete and
An action against the Italian Republic was brought before the
                                                                         inaccurate. Those deficiencies infringe Article 4(3) of the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 2 October
                                                                         Directive and prevent the Commission from being able to
2001 by the Commission of the European Communities,
                                                                         carry out its coordinating role in order to ensure that the
represented by Gregorio Valero Jordana and Roberto Amorosi,
                                                                         SPAs form a coherent whole which meets the protection
acting as Agents.
                                                                         requirements of the affected species.
The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                         (1) OJ 1979 L 103 of 25.4.1979, p. 1.
—     Declare that, by failing adequately to classify as special
      protection areas the most suitable zones, in terms of
      number and surface area, for the protection of those
      species mentioned in Annex I to Council Directive