C-273/82

In Case 273/82

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, represented by Alberto Irozzülo a member of its Legal Department, acting as Agent, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the office of Oreste Montako, Jean Monnet Building, Kirchberg,

applicant, v

ITALIAN REPUBLIC, in the person of its Agent, A. Squillante, Head of the Department for Contentious Diplomatic Legal Affairs, Treaties and Legislative Matters, represented and assisted by Pier Giorgio Ferri, Avvocato dello Stato, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Italian Embassy, 5 Rue Marie-Adélaïde,

defendant, 1 — Language of the Case: Italian.

JUDGMENT OF 11. 10. 1983 — CASE 273/82

Facts and Issues

The facts of the case, the course of the other evidence of formal qualifications procedure and the conclusions, sub­ for goods haulage operators and road missions and arguments of the parties passenger transport operators, including may be summarized as follows : measures intended to encourage these operators effectively to exercise their right to freedom of establishment I — Facts and procedure provides that Member States are to take certain measures in relation to the 1. Council Directive 77/796/EEC of establishment in their territory of the 12 December 1977 aiming at the mutual natural persons and undertakings recognition of diplomas, certificates and referred to in Title I of the General

COMMISSION v ITALY

Programme for the abolition of Italy to the European Communities restrictions on freedom of establishment the Italian Government acknowledged for the activities of goods haulage receipt of that opinion. operators and road passenger transport operators (Journal Officiel 1962 of 15. 1. 1962, p. 36). The measures contemplated related to the production and acceptance of documents certifying II — Conclusions of the parties that operators were of good repute, not bankrupt, of sound financial standing and professionally competent. 1. In its application filed on 6 October 1982 the Commission claims that the Court should: Article 7 (1) of the directive provides:

By letter dated 17 January 1983 the By letter dated 22 January 1982 from the Commission stated that it would not Deputy Permanent Representative of submit a reply.

JUDGMENT OF 11. 10. 1983 — CASE 273/82

Upon hearing the report of the Judge- The Italian Government does not specify Rapporteur and the views of the whether the said draft law refers only to Advocate General the Court decided to goods haulage operators but that is open the oral procedure without any apparent from the fact that the Italian preparatory inquiry. Government states that another draft law is in course of preparation for road passenger transport operators. IV — Submissions and arguments of the parties The Italian Government acknowledges the delay in preparing the measures 1. In its application the Commission necessary to implement Directive refers to the various approaches it made 77 / 796 / EEC but affirms its commitment to the Italian Government urging the to bringing its legislative procedures to a latter to bring into force the measures successful conclusion as soon as possible. necessary to comply with Directive 77 / 796 / EEC and alleges that it is plain 3. In its letter of 14 January 1983 the that Italy ought to have adopted those Commission submits that in its defence measures and that by omitting to do so it the Italian Government recognizes the has, according to the case-law of the breach and in those circumstances the Court, failed to fulfil its obligations Commission states that it is not under the EEC Treaty. submitting a reply.

2 By virtue of Article 7 (1) of that directive the Member States had to bring into force the measures necessary to comply with the directive before 1 January 1979.

3 The Italian Government states that it has been at pains to initiate the legislative procedure for the adoption of the measures necessary to implement the directive but nevertheless does not deny that it has not satisfied the obligation to implement the directive within the prescribed period.

4 In particular the Italian Government explains that it had to prepare and submit to Parliament a draft law containing the appropriate provisions to give effect to the part of the directive concerning diplomas and other evidence of formal qualifications for goods haulage operators, that the draft law has been approved by the 10th Committee of the Chamber of Deputies and for the legislative procedure to be complete the draft law needs only to have the approval of the Senate which may be given very shortly.

5 As regards the implementation of the part of the directive relating to road passenger transport operators the Italian Government states that another draft law is in preparation.

6 Those circumstances do not expunge the failure to fulfil one of its obligations with which the Italian Republic is charged. According to established case-law of the Court, a Member State may not plead provisions, practices or circumstances in its internal legal system to justify a failure to comply with obligations under Community directives.

7 The Court must therefore declare that by not adopting within the prescribed period the provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive

hereby:

1. Declares that by not adopting within the prescribed period the provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 77/796/EEC of 12 December 1977 aiming at the mutual recognition of diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications for goods haulage operators and road passenger transport operators, including measures intended to encourage these operators effectively to exercise their right to freedom of establishment, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under the EEC Treaty;

2. Orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs.

Mertens de Wilmars Koopmans Galmot

O'Keeffe Bosco Everling Kakouris

Delivered in open court in Luxembourg on 11 October 1983.