C-218/94

OPINION OF MR LENZ — CASE C-2I8/94

OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL LENZ delivered on 23 February 1995 *

1. In the present proceedings for failure to than 6 November 1992 and forthwith to fulfil Treaty obligations, the Commission inform the Commission of those measures. claims that the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to meet its obligations under the third paragraph of Article 189 of the EC Treaty and under Article 17 of Council Directive 91/263/EEC of 29 April 1991 on the approx­ 3. The Kingdom of Belgium does not con­ imation of the laws of the Member States test the failure of which it stands accused. It concerning telecommunications terminal merely points out that it has drawn up pro­ equipment, including the mutual recognition visions for transposing the directive. How­ of their conformity, 1 through its failure to ever, at the relevant point in time — the adopt the legal and administrative measures expiry of the two-month period given to the necessary to comply with that directive. In Kingdom of Belgium in the Commission's the alternative, the Commission seeks a dec­ reasoned opinion of 7 February 1994 — laration by the Court that the Kingdom of those draft measures had not yet been Belgium has at least failed to fulfil its obliga­ adopted by the relevant authorities. So far as tions under those provisions by not inform­ can be ascertained, there has been no change ing the Commission without delay of the in this situation up to the present. measures adopted to that end.

4. In those circumstances I can only propose that the Court should uphold the Commis­ 2. Article 17 of Directive 91/263 required sion's main application and order the King­ Member States to take the measures neces­ dom of Belgium to pay the costs of the pro­ sary to comply with the directive not later ceedings.