C-79/72
ECLI:EU:C:1973:70
- Súd
- Súdny dvor Európskej únie
- IČS
- 61972CJ0079
- Zdroj
- eur-lex.europa.eu ↗
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF 21 JUNE 1973 1
Commission of the European Communities v the Italian Republic
'Forest reproductive material'
Case 79/72
Acts of an institution — Directive — Binding force (EEC Treaty, Art. 189)
The provisions of a directive have an effect no less binding than that of any other rule of Community law.
In Case 79/72
Commission of the European Communities , represented by its legal adviser Armando Toledano-Laredo, acting as agent, and having chosen its address for service in Luxembourg at 4 boulevard Royal, the office of its legal adviser Emile Reuter,
applicant, v
The Italian Republic, represented by Adolfo Maresca, ambassador, acting as agent, assisted by Giorgio Zagari, assistant at the Avvocatura generale dello Stato. It has chosen its address for service in Luxembourg at the Italian Embassy,
defendant,
Application for a finding that the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 18 (1) (a) of Council Directive 66/404/EEC of 14 June 1966 (OJ 125, 11. 7. 1966, p. 2326) on the marketing of forest reproductive material.
1 — Language of the Case: Italian.
JUDGMENT OF 21. 6. 1973 — CASE 79/72
THE COURT
composed of: R. Lecourt, President, R. Monaco and P. Pescatore, Presidents of Chambers, A. M. Donner (Rapporteur), J. Mertens de Wilmars, H. Kut scher, C. Ó Dálaigh, M. Sørensen and A. J. Mackenzie Stuart, Judges,
Advocate-General: K. Roemer Registrar: A. Van Houtte
gives the following
JUDGMENT
Issues of fact and of law
I — Facts and procedure the measures taken for its source-identification, reproductive The facts and procedure may be material is subject to no marketing summarised as follows: restrictions other than those laid down in the Directive. In order to eliminate the discrepancies existing between national regulations on Article 18 (1), of the above-mentioned forest reproductive material, which Directive, as amended by Council constituted an obstacle to intra-Commu Directive 69/64/EEC of 18 February nity trade, the Council issued on 14 June 1969 (OJ L 48, 26. 2. 1969, p. 12) 1966 Directive 66/404/EEC on the provides that: marketing of forest reproductive material, by virtue of which the Member 'The Member States shall bring into States are bound: force the laws, regulations or administrative provisions necessary to (a) to establish, for the various genera comply with this Directive and its and species of reproductive material, Annexes:
a list of the basic material officially approved in their territories; (a) not later than 1 July 1969 for seeds and part of plants (the list follows) (b) to delimit the regions of provenance (b)...' for reproductive material; The Italian Republic not having taken (c) to provide that reproductive material the necessary measures within the time is to be identified according to limit prescribed by the abovementioned precise criteria laid down by the Directive, the Commission commenced Directive and is to be marketed the procedure provided for in Article 169 according to specific rules; by a letter dated 24 March 1971. (d) to ensure that, as regards the genetic Having received no reply, the characters of the basic material and Commission delivered on 14 September
COMMISSION v ITALIAN REPUBLIC
1971 a reasoned opinion calling upon The Italian Government opposes those the defendant to adopt the measures submissions. required within a time limit of 30 days. By telex on 20 January 1972, the Permanent Delegation of Italy stated that III — Pleas and arguments the draft law designed to carry the directive into effect had been approved The pleas and arguments of the parties by the VIIIth Committee of the Senate, may be summarized as follows: but had not yet been enacted as a law.
It The Commission explains that more added that the governmental authorities than three years have passed since the would intervene so that the draft law expiration of the time limit referred to in could be passed as quickly as possible. Article 18 (1) of the Directive of 14 June By a letter dated 20 April 1972 the 1966 without the necesaary measures Commission gave notice that it was having been adopted by the Italian suspending the procedure previously Republic. The time limit prescribed by commenced, and invited the Government the reasoned opinion of 14 September of the Italian Republic to institute the 1971 having likewise not been respected necessary measures within a strict and any regularization of the situation time-limit of three months. within a brief time limit being The abovementioned draft law lapsed on unforeseeable, the conditions required to the premature dissolution of the Vth institute the action provided for by the legislature and since the necessary second paragraph of Article 169 are measures were therefore not adopted amply satisfied. within the time limit granted, the The Italian Government cannot invoke Commission brought this action before the premature dissolution of the Vth the Court on 8 December 1972. legislature to justify the failure of the The Italian Government declined to Italian Republic. On this point, the submit a rejoinder. Commission refers to the case law of the After hearing the report of the Court of Justice according to which a Judge-Rapporteur and the opinion of the Member State cannot plead provisions Advocate-General, the Court decided to or practices of its internal order to open the oral procedure without any justify failure to observe obligations and preparatory inquiry. time limits arising from Community provisions. (Judgment of 8 February The oral observations of the parties were 1973 in Case 30/72, Commission v made at the hearing on 16 May 1973. Italian Republic, as yet unpublished.) The Advocate-General presented his The Italian Government first of all opinion at the hearing on 30 May 1973. emphasizes that the adoption of the necessary measures did not come up against any difficulties of its own
II — Submissions making. After the adoption of the Directive in issue, the appropriate steps The Commission submits that the Court were taken, with the result that a draft should: law was laid before Parliament. (a) declare that the Italian Republic has The Italian Republic was not in a failed to fulfil its obligations under position to fulfil its obligations arising Article 18 (1) (a) of the Council from the Directive of 14 June 1966 Directive of 14 June 1966 on the because of the premature dissolution of marketing of forest reproductive the legislature.
material. The Italian Government emphasizes that, (b) order the Italian Republic to pay the from the formation of the new costs. Parliament, it has taken steps to ensure
JUDGMENT OF 21. 6. 1973 — CASE 79/72
that the abovementioned draft law is that it is necessary to take into account formally enacted within the shortest the circumstances (i.e. of a political possible time. Thus it can be expected nature) which have prevented the that within a short time the Italian competent Italian institutions from Republic will fulfil its obligations. putting into effect the measures required Lastly the Italian Government observes by Community law.
Grounds of judgment
1 By an application filed at the Registry on 8 December 1972, the Commission, by virtue of Article 169 of the EEC Treaty brought before the Court an action seeking to establish that the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Treaty by not bringing into force the laws, regulations, or administrative provisions necessary to comply with the provisions of Council Directive 66/404/EEC of 14 June 1966 on the marketing of forest reproductive material (OJ 125, p. 2326) within the time limit prescribed in Article 18 of that Directive, as amended by Council Directive 69/64/EEC of 18 February 1969 (OJ 1969, L 48, 12).
2 Having found that the discrepancies existing between national regulations aiming to promote the utilisation of superior forest reproductive material constituted an obstacle to trade between Member States, the Counil, by a Directive of 14 June 1966, sought to establish common rules imposing common standards in relation to marketing both in other Member States and on domestic markets.
This Directive had prescribed a time limit for the implementing of measures applying to domestic markets and expiring respectively on 1 July 1967, 1 July 1969 and 1 July 1971 for seeds and parts of plants of different genera of trees as defined in Article 18.
By a Directive of 18 February 1969, the expiry of the first time limit was postponed to 1 July 1969.
3 The defendant admits the failure to observe these time limits.
However the defendant explains that having regard to the state of Italian legislation applying to the seed and forest plantation trade a law was necessary to adapt such legislation to the provisions of the Directive.
COMMISSION v ITALIAN REPUBLIC
In pursuance of this objective, a first draft law had been laid before Parliament, but the premature dissolution of the legislature did not permit its adoption within the prescribed time.
Another draft law was introduced in September 1972, but it proved possible to enact it only during May 1973.
Thus the delay in implementing the obligations in issue is primarily due to unforeseeable political circumstances occurring at the end of 1971 and the beginning of 1972.
4 From the time Directive 66/404/EEC was passed, all the Member States knew that, for the first group of seeds and parts of plants, they were bound to bring into effect the necessary measures at the latest by 1 July 1967.
Certain Member States not having succeeded in complying by 1 July 1967 with the provisions of this Directive, Directive 69/64/EEC granted them a further time limit, thus reminding the defaulting Member States of their obligation to institute the measures provided.
Accordingly, having failed to implement the provisions required by Directive 66/404/EEC before 1 July 1969, the defendant has since that date failed in the obligations arising from that Directive.
5 The defendant cannot invoke, to justifiy its conduct, obstacles or circumstances which arose at a time largely subsequent to that of the obligation which it is accused of not having fulfilled.
The political situation invoked thus cannot, in any case, be accepted as justifiying this delay.
Moreover, if this draft law is passed in a short time, it does not follow that the failure to observe the provisions of the Directive will cease, the regulations and administrative provisions necessary for its application having still not been brought into force.
6 At the hearing, the defendant again claimed that in any event it is a question of the non-observance of a directive, and submitted that the provisions of a directive cannot be accorded the same binding force as those of a Regulation.
JUDGMENT OF 21. 6. 1973 — CASE 79/72
7 By Article 189 of the Treaty, a directive 'shall be binding' as to the result to be achieved upon each Member State to which it is addressed, but leaves to the national authorities the choice of form and methods.
The precise application of directives is all the more important as implementation is left to the discretion of Member States and such acts would lose all effectiveness if the objectives in view were not attained within the prescribed time limits.
If, in respect of Member States to which it is addressed, the provisions of a diretive have no less binding an effect than that of any other rule of Community law, such an effect applies all the more to provisions relating to the time limits for implementing the measures provided for.
8 It follows that by failing to adopt the provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 66/404 on the marketing of forest reproductive material within the prescribed time limit, as amended by Directive 69/64, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Treaty.
Costs
9 By Article 69 (2) of the Rules of Procedure, the unsuccessful party shall be ordered to pay the costs.
The defendant has failed in its pleas.
On those grounds, Upon reading the pleadings; Upon hearing the report of the Judge-Rapporteur; Upon hearing the oral observations of the parties; Upon hearing the opinion of the Advocate-General; Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, especially Articles 169, 171 and 189; Having regard to Council Directives 66/404/EEC and 69/64/EEC; Having regard to the Protocol on the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Economic Community; Having regard to the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice of the European Communities;
COMMISSION v ITALIAN REPUBLIC
THE COURT
hereby:
1. Declares that the Italian Republic, by failing to adopt the provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 66/404 on the marketing of forest reproductive material within the prescribed time limit, as amended by Directive 69/64, has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Treaty;
2. Orders the defendant to pay the costs.
Lecourt Monaco Pescatore Donner Mertens de Wilmars
Kutscher Ó Dalaigh Sørensen Mackenzie Stuart
Delivered in open court in Luxembourg on 21 June 1973.
A. Van Houtte R. Lecourt
Registrar President
OPINION OF MR ADVOCATE-GENERAL ROEMER
DELIVERED ON 30 MAY 1973 1
Mr President, Council of Ministers on 14 June 1966 Member of the Court, issued a Directive 'on the marketing of forest reproductive material (OJ 125, 11.7.1966, p. 2326). Having regard to the increasing need for forest reproductive material for the As a consequence, a number of purpose of restocking of forests and for obligations are imposed upon Member States. new afforestation, having regard to the necessity in this connection of using Thus Member States have to make genetically superior reproductive ma Regulations pursuant to which terial, as well as realizing that it is in the 'reproductive material may not be placed interest of all Community States by on the market unless it is derived from means of common rules in this field to officially approved basic material' ensure the free movement of goods, the (Article 4). Pursuant to Article 5 they
1 — Translated from the German.