CELEX: C1999/071/22
Language: en
Date: 1999-03-13 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 18 December 1998 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Federal Republic of Germany (Case C-476/98)

13.3.1999                EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                      C 71/13
The pleas in law and main arguments in support are                             radically amended and thus replaced agreements
similar to those in Case C-471/98 (5).                                         previously concluded, the Federal Republic of
                                                                               Germany has failed to comply with its obligations
                                                                               under Article 234 of the EC Treaty, with regard to
(1 ) OJ L 240, 24.8.1992, pp. 1, 8 and 15 respectively.                        agreements concluded before the EC Treaty entered
(2 ) OJ L 220, 29.7.1989, p. 1.
(3 ) OJ L 278, 11.11.1993, p. 1.
                                                                               into force, and under secondary law, with regard to
(4 ) OJ L 14, 22.1.1993, p. 1.                                                 those agreements which were concluded after the EC
(5 ) See p. 10 of the present Official Journal.                                Treaty entered into force, by not rescinding the
                                                                               provisions contained in those previously concluded
                                                                               agreements which are incompatible with the EC
                                                                               Treaty, in particular Article 52, and with the
                                                                               secondary law adopted thereunder, and by failing to
                                                                               take all legally possible steps to that end;
Action brought on 18 December 1998 by the Commission                      3. Order the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the
of the European Communities against the Federal                                costs of the present proceedings.
                       Republic of Germany
                          (Case C-476/98)
                                                                          The pleas in law and main arguments in support are
                           (1999/C 71/22)                                 similar to those in Case C-471/98 (5).
                                                                          (1) OJ L 240, 24.8.1992, pp. 1, 8 and 15 respectively.
                                                                          (2) OJ L 220, 29.7.1989, p. 1.
An action against the Federal Republic of Germany was                     (3) OJ L 278, 11.11.1993, p. 1.
brought before the Court of Justice of the European                       (4) OJ L 14, 22.1.1993, p. 1.
Communities on 18 December 1998 by the Commission                         (5) See p. 10 of the present Official Journal.
of the European Communities, represented by Jörn Sack
and Frank Benyon, Legal Advisers, acting as Agents, with
an address for service in Luxembourg at the office of
Carlos Gómez de la Cruz, of the European Commission's
Legal Service, Wagner Centre C 254, Kirchberg.
                                                                          Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Court of Appeal
The applicant claims that the Court should:                               in Northern Ireland, by order of that court of 9 November
                                                                          1998, in the case of Eurostock Meat Marketing Ltd
                                                                          against the Department of Agriculture for Northern
                                                                                                        Ireland
1. Declare that, by having individually negotiated, signed
      and concluded, in 1994 and 1996, an Open Skies'                                             (Case C-477/98)
      agreement with the USA in the air-transport sector, the
                                                                                                    (1999/C 71/23)
      Federal Republic of Germany acted in breach of its
      obligations under the EC Treaty, including Articles 5
      and 52 thereof, and also contrary to the secondary law
      adopted thereunder, in particular Council Regulation                Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
      (EEC) No 2407/92 (1) of 23 July 1992 on licensing of                European Communities by an order of the Court of
      air carriers, Council Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92 (1)               Appeal in Northern Ireland of 9 November 1998, which
      of 23 July 1992 on access for Community air carriers                was received at the Court Registry on 21 December 1998,
      to intra-Community routes, Council Regulation (EEC)                 for a preliminary ruling in the case of Eurostock Meat
      No 2409/92 (1) of 23 July 1992 on fares and rates for               Marketing Ltd against the Department of Agriculture for
      air services, Council Regulation (EEC) No 2299/89 (2)               Northern Ireland, on the following questions:
      of 24 July 1989, as amended by Regulation (EEC)
      No 3089/93 (3) of 29 October 1993, on a code of
      conduct for computerised reservation systems, and                   (1) May a Member State take interim protective measures
      Council Regulation (EEC) No 95/93 (4) of 18 January                      in accordance with Article 9(1) of Council Directive
      1993 on common rules for the allocation of slots at                      89/662/EEC (1) when the Commission has made
      Community airports;                                                      Decision 97/534/EC (2) under Article 9(4) of the said
                                                                               Directive but postponed the coming into effect of that
                                                                               Decision?
2. In the alternative to part of the claim under (1),
      declare that:
                                                                          (2) If the answer to Question 1 is Yes, before the Member
                                                                               State may take such interim protective measures what,
                                                                               if any, degree of certainty, probability or possibility is
      In so far as the 1994 and 1996 agreements cannot, in                     required that the Commission will put into effect the
      view of specific provisions, be regarded as having                       said Decision?