CELEX: C2000/259/06
Language: en
Date: 2000-09-09 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 15 June 2000 in Case C-13/99 P: TEAM Srl v Commission of the European Communities (Appeal — PHARE programme — Decision to annul an invitation to tender and to issue a new invitation to tender — Action for damages — Categorisation of reparable damage — Causal link — Measures of organisation of procedure — Measures of inquiry)

C 259/4                 EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                         9.9.2000
                 JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                     Action brought on 7 June 2000 by the Commission of the
                                                                           European Communities against the Federal Republic of
                                                                                                        Germany
                          (Fifth Chamber)
                                                                                                     (Case C-228/00)
                          of 15 June 2000
                                                                                                     (2000/C 259/07)
in Case C-13/99 P: TEAM Srl v Commission of the
                   European Communities (1)                                An action against the Federal Republic of Germany was
                                                                           brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communi-
                                                                           ties on 7 June 2000 by the Commission of the European
(Appeal — PHARE programme — Decision to annul an                           Communities, represented by Götz zur Hausen, Legal Adviser,
invitation to tender and to issue a new invitation to tender               with an address for service in Luxembourg at the offices of
— Action for damages — Categorisation of reparable                         Carlos Gómez de la Cruz, a Member of the Commission’s
damage — Causal link — Measures of organisation of                         Legal Service, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.
               procedure — Measures of inquiry)
                                                                           The Commission claims that the Court should:
                          (2000/C 259/06)
                                                                           1.    Declare the Federal Republic of Germany in breach of
                                                                                 its obligations under Article 7(2) and (4) of Council
                                                                                 Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 of 1 February 1993 on the
                    (Language of the case: Italian)                              supervision and control of shipments of waste within,
                                                                                 into and out of the European Community (1) for raising
                                                                                 unwarranted objections to certain waste shipments to
                                                                                 other Member States for use principally as fuel;
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                   in the European Court Reports)
                                                                           2.    order the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs.
In Case C-13/99 P: TEAM Srl, established in Rome, represented
initially by A. Tizzano and G.M. Roberti, of the Naples Bar,
and, subsequently, by F. Caruso, also of the Naples Bar, 39 Via            Pleas in law and main arguments
Santa Teresa a Chiaia, Naples — appeal against the judgment
of the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber) of 29 October
1998 in Case T-13/96 TEAM v Commission [1998] ECR                          The Commission objects to the administrative practice of
II-4073, seeking to have that judgment set aside, the other                the competent authorities in Nordrhein-Westfalen, Baden-
party to the proceedings being Commission of the European                  Württemberg, Niedersachsen and Rheinland-Pfalz as incom-
Communities (Agents: M.-J. Jonczy and L. Gussetti) — the                   patible with the Treaty. The practice manifests itself in decrees
Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of: L. Sevón, President of the            of the relevant ministries and individual decisions of the
First Chamber, acting as President of the Fifth Chamber,                   competent authorities, whereby, partly on the basis of the
P.J.G. Kapteyn, P. Jann (Rapporteur), H. Ragnemalm and                     decrees, objections under Article 4 of Regulation (EEC)
M. Wathelet, Judges; F.G. Jacobs, Advocate General; L. Hewlett,            No 259/93 were made against certain planned waste ship-
Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on                  ments. In the cases in question, it was planned to ship a
15 June 2000, in which it:                                                 mixture of waste for use as fuel in the Belgian cement industry.
                                                                           The Commission argues that such use is to be classified as a
                                                                           recovery operation falling within the procedure referred to in
1.    Dismisses the appeal;                                                Point R 9 of Annex II B to Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July
                                                                           1975 on waste, namely ‘use principally as a fuel or other
                                                                           means to generate energy’. The description of the recovery
2.    Orders TEAM Srl to pay the costs.                                    operation in Point R 9 of Annex II B to the directive contains
                                                                           no quantitative criteria for determining whether or not a waste
                                                                           serves as fuel, but merely refers to the principal use. There is, the
                                                                           Commission argues, nothing in Article 3(1)(b)(i) of Directi-
                                                                           ve 75/442/EEC (2) to support the conclusion that burning of
(1) OJ No C 71 of 13.3.1999.                                               wastes constitutes a recovery operation only if its main
                                                                           purpose is the generation of energy or the waste has a certain
                                                                           minimum heating value. Nor can a requirement be inferred
                                                                           from the directive that energy recovery may be regarded as
                                                                           present only if a benefit equivalent in value to the recycling of
                                                                           materials is derived from the burning.