C-240/89
ECLI:EU:C:1990:411
- Súd
- Súdny dvor Európskej únie
- IČS
- 61989CC0240
- Zdroj
- eur-lex.europa.eu ↗
COMMISSION v ITALY
OPINION OF MR ADVOCATE GENERAL JACOBS delivered on 20 November 1990 *
My Lords, 3. Not having received any communication from Italy regarding the implementation of the directive, the Commission addressed a letter to the Italian Government on 16 November 1987 inviting it to submit obser vations pursuant to Article 169 of the 1. In these proceedings the Commission Treaty. seeks a declaration, under Article 169 of the EEC Treaty, that Italy has failed to comply with its obligations under the Treaty by not adopting within the prescribed period the measures necessary to implement Council Directive 83 / 477 / EEC of 19 September 4. In its reply to that letter the Italian 1983 on the protection of workers from the Government referred to a number of risks related to exposure to asbestos at work internal problems posed by the transposition (Official Journal 1983 L 263, p. 25). of the directive into Italian law. It also mentioned certain provisions of Italian law which, in its opinion, would ensure that workers were protected against asbestos pending implementation of the directive. On 18 January 1989 the Commission issued a 2. Article 18 of the directive provides that: reasoned opinion, to which the Italian Government did not respond. On 31 July 1989 the Commission lodged an application at the Court. The Commission has expressly excluded from the scope of the application '(1) Member States shall adopt the laws, measures relating to asbestos-mining acti regulations and administrative vities on the ground that the period for the provisions necessary to comply with adoption of such measures did not expire this directive before 1 January 1987. until 1 January 1990. They shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof. The date 1 January 1987 is, however, postponed until 1 January 1990 in the case of asbestos-mining activities. 5. In its defence the Italian Government again refers to certain provisions of Italian law designed to ensure the protection of workers against the dangers of asbestos. It recognizes, however, that further legislation (2) Member States shall communicate to is required in order to implement the the Commission the provisions of directive fully. It states that a bill is before national law which they adopt in the the Chamber of Deputies the purpose of field covered by this directive.' which is to delegate to the executive the
* Original language: English.
I-4857
OPINION OF MR JACOBS —CASE C-240/89
power to adopt legislation implementing Government's defence and from those a number of directives, including observations, however, that the failure to Directive 83/477. implement the directive is not contested. Moreover, as the Court has consistently held, a Member State may not plead provisions, practices or circumstances in its 6. The Agent of the Italian Government internal legal system in order to justify a provided further information at today's failure to comply with its obligations under hearing. It is clear from the Italian Community law.
7. I therefore conclude that the Court should declare that, by not adopting before 1 January 1987 the measures necessary to implement Council Directive 83 / 477 / EEC , other than measures relating to asbestos-mining activities, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under the EEC Treaty. The Italian Republic should be ordered to pay the costs, in accordance with Article 69(2) of the Rules of Procedure.
I-4858