C-73/81

J U D G M E N T OF T H E C O U R T 2 FEBRUARY 1982 1

Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Belgium

(Failure of a State to fulfil its obligations — Non-implementation of a directive concerning the quality required of surface water intended for the abstraction of drinking water in the Member States)

Case 73/81

Member States — Obligations — Implementation of directives — Failure to comply — Justification — Not possible (EEC Treaty, Art. 169)

A Member State may not plead to comply with obligations under provisions, practices or circumstances in Community directives. its internal legal system to justify failure

THE COURT

composed of: J. Mertens de Wilmars, President, G. Bosco, A. Touffait and O. Due (Presidents of Chambers), P. Pescatore, Lord Mackenzie Stuart, A. O'Keeffe, T. Koopmans, U. Everling, A. Chloros and F. Grévisse, Judges,

Advocate General: F. Capotorti Registrar: A. Van Houtte

gives the following

JUDGMENT

Facts and Issues

on the other hand by wider regulations which had been unable to work for to achieve one of the aims of the several weeks. Community in the sphere of protection of the environment and improvement of the quality of life. On 23 July 1979 the Commission delivered the reasoned opinion provided for in the first paragraph of Article 169 Article 10 of the directive provides: of the Treaty. The opinion stated "that "Member States shall bring into force in not adopting the laws, regulations and the laws, regulations and administrative administrative provisions needed to provisions needed in order to comply comply with Council Directive 75/440/ with this directive within two years of its EEC of 16 June 1975 concerning the notification. They shall forthwith inform quality required of surface water the Commission thereof." intended for the abstraction of drinking water in the Member States, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil Since the directive was notified to the its obligations under the directive". On Kingdom of Belgium on 18 June 1975, 27 July 1979 the opinion was transmitted that period expired on 18 June 1977. to the Belgian Government which was invited to comply with its terms within a period of two months. At that date provisions adapting national law had not yet been adopted by the Kingdom of Belgium. In any event the On 1 August 1979 the Permanent Commission had received no information Representation of Belgium acknow- to that effect. ledged receipt of the reasoned opinion. By a letter dated 14 November 1979 the Belgian Minister for Public Health and the Environment requested an additional 2. By a letter dated 9 January 1979 period of one year to incorporate the the Commission invited the Belgian directive into the national legal system Government to submit within a period of because of the reform of the institutions two months its observations pursuant to which was in progress and which gave, the first paragraph of Article 169 of the at least partly, powers to the regions to Treaty. determine water policy.

I I — C o n c l u s i o n s of t h e p a r t i e s ([1979] ECR 771), 42/80 ([1980] ECR 3635) and 43/80 ([1980] ECR 3643) compliance with the provisions of the Treaty or secondary Community law cannot depend on difficulties en- The Commission claims that the Court countered in the alteration of the distri- should: bution of powers between central government and the regional or local authorities. There is an infringement of the Treaty by a Member State whatever 1. Declare that by failing to bring into the institution of the State whose acts force within the prescribed period the and omissions have led to the failure to provisions needed in order to comply perform the obligation. In the present with Council Directive 75/440/EEC case the failure on the part of Belgium is of 16 June 1975 concerning the confirmed by the absence of precise quality required of surface water information regarding the period within intended for the abstraction of which the Belgian authorities will be in a drinking water in the Member States, position to adopt the provisions needed the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to to implement the directive. fulfil its obligations under the EEC Treaty; The Belgian Government admits that according to the case-law of the Court a 2. Order the defendant to pay the costs. Member State may not plead internal difficulties to justify disregard of periods laid down for implementation of directives. It nevertheless stresses that the exceptional situation with which it is The Kingdom of Belgium lodged a confronted ought to be taken into defence but presented no formal account by the Community authorities in conclusions. so far as the failure is due to the impossibility of adopting new rules before the competent administrative bodies arising from the reform of the institutions have begun to function.

2 Article 10 of the directive provides that Member States are to bring into force the measures needed in order to comply with the directive within two years of notification thereof. That period expired, in this case, on 18 June 1977.

3 The Belgian Government does not deny that it has not fulfilled that obligation. Although the Belgian Government asked the Court "to take note that the directive in question has already been the subject of measures implementing it in part", it is clear from the particulars subsequently given by that Government that the measures which it has adopted are not designed to implement Council Directive 75/440.

4 Essentially, the Belgian Government justifies its failure by the fact that important institutional reforms concerning redistribution of powers and responsibilities between national and regional institutions are in progress, especially in the area covered by the directive in question. So long as the new institutions are not yet in a position to exercise their powers it will not be possible, according to the Belgian Government, to implement the directive.

5 Although those circumstances may explain the difficulty in applying the directive they do not expunge the failure of the Kingdom of Belgium to fulfil its obligations. According to established case-law of the Court a Member State may not plead provisions, practices or circumstances in its internal legal

JUDGMENT OF 2. 2. 1982 — CASE 73/81

system to justify failure to comply with obligations under Community directives.

hereby:

1. Declares that by not adopting within the prescribed period the provisions needed to comply with Council Directive 75/440/EEC of 16 June 1975 concerning the quality required of surface water

COMMISSION v BELGIUM

intended for the abstraction of drinking water in the Member States (Official Journal L 194, p. 26), the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Treaty;

2. Orders the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.

Mertens de Wilmars Bosco Touffait Pescatore Mackenzie Stuart O'Keeffe Koopmans Everling Chloros Grévisse