C-262/95

OPINION OF MR LÉGER — CASE C-262/95

OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL LÉGER delivered on 12 September 1996

1. In the present action for failure to fulfil sectors other than the chlor-alkali elec­ 4 obligations, the Commission complains that trolysis industry; the Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its obligations by not adopting the laws, regulations or administrative provi­ sions necessary to comply with Article 3 of the following five directives, adopted on the basis of Article 6 of Council Directive — Council Directive 84/491/EEC of 9 76/464/EEC of 4 May 1976 on pollution October 1984 on limit values and quality caused by certain dangerous substances dis­ objectives for discharges of hexachloro- 5 charged into the aquatic environment of the cyclohexane; Community: 1

— Council Directive 86/280/EEC of 12 — Council Directive 82/176/EEC of 22 June 1986 on limit values and quality March 1982 on limit values and quality objectives for discharges of certain dan­ objectives for mercury discharges by the gerous substances included in List I of 6 chlor-alkali electrolysis industry; 2 the Annex to Directive 76/464/EEC.

— Council Directive 83/513/EEC of 26 September 1983 on limit values and qual­ 2. Under each of the aforementioned direc­ ity objectives for cadmium discharges; 3 tives, the Member States are to bring into force the laws, regulations or administrative provisions necessary to comply with:

— Council Directive 84/156/EEC of 8 March 1984 on limit values and quality objectives for mercury discharges by — Directive 82/176, before 1 July 1983 (Article 6(1)),

— Directive 86/280, before 1 January 1988 4. The defendant docs not deny that the (Article 7(1)). transposition of the abovementioned direc­ tives by means of administrative circulars of no binding effect cannot be considered to be adequate. It claims that transposition by However, under Article 3 of Council Direc­ means of legislative measures could be tive 90/656/EEC of 4 December 1990 on the achieved by inserting into the law on the use transitional measures applicable in Germany and protection of water an enabling provi­ with regard to certain Community provi­ sion for the adoption of regulations. It sions relating to the protection of the envi­ expects the amending legislation to be 7 ronment, the Federal Republic of Germany adopted in spring 1996.

5. In the circumstances, I cannot but propose that the Court should declare that, by not adopting within the prescribed period the laws, regulations or administrative measures to transpose Council Directive 82 / 176 / EEC of 22 March 1982 on limit values and quality objectives for mercury discharges by the chlor-alkali electrolysis industry, Council Directive 83 / 513 / EEC of 26 September 1983 on limit values and quality objectives for cadmium discharges, Council Directive 84 / 156 / EEC of

7 — OJ 1990 L 353, p. 59.

I-5731

OPINION OF MR LÉGER — CASE C-262/95

8 March 1984 on limit values and quality objectives for mercury discharges by sec­ tors other than the chlor-alkali electrolysis industry, Council Directive 84/491/EEC of 9 October 1984 on limit values and quality objectives for discharges of hexachlo- rocyclohexane and Council Directive 86/280/EEC of 12 June 1986 on limit values and quality objectives for discharges of certain dangerous substances included in List I of the Annex to Directive 76/464/EEC, the Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its obligations under those directives. I further propose that the Fed­ eral Republic of Germany should be ordered to pay the costs.