C-205/96
ECLI:EU:C:1996:475
- Súd
- Súdny dvor Európskej únie
- IČS
- 61996CC0205
- Zdroj
- eur-lex.europa.eu ↗
OPINION OF MR FENNELLY — CASE C-205/96
OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL FENNELLY delivered on 5 December 1996*
1. The Commission has brought the present 3. Belgium has not disputed its failure to infringement proceedings pursuant to Article implement the Directive, which it attributes 169 of the EC Treaty. By application of to institutional difficulties arising from the 17 June 1996, it seeks a declaration that by necessity to organize coordination, on the failing to adopt within the prescribed period one hand, between the Regions, in so far as the laws, regulations and administrative pro- they are responsible for the matters concern- visions necessary to comply with Council ing the rational use of energy, and, on the Directive 92/42/EEC of 21 May 1992 on other hand, between the Regions and the efficiency requirements for new hot-water Federal Government, which is responsible boilers fired with liquid or gaseous fuels for regulating the marketing of the boilers in (hereinafter 'the Directive'), 1the Kingdom question. of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Treaty.
4. Article 189 of the Treaty obliges Member States to adopt the measures necessary to ensure the attainment of the objectives of each directive. This specific requirement is reinforced by their general duty pursuant to Article 5 of the Treaty 'to take all appropri- ate measures, whether general or particular, to ensure fulfilment of the obligations arising out of this Treaty or resulting from action taken by the institutions of the Community'. It is undisputed that the Directive was not 2. Member States were required by implemented by Belgium within the pre- Article 9(1) of the Directive to 'adopt and scribed time-limit. The Court has consis- publish the provisions necessary to comply tently held that Member States may not with' the Directive by 1 January 1993 and to plead provisions, practices or circumstances inform the Commission forthwith. Belgium existing in its internal legal system in order has not informed the Commission of any to justify a failure to comply with the obliga- measures it has taken to comply with the tions and time-limits laid down by a direc- Directive. tive. 2
* Original language: English. 2 — See, for example, Case C-312/95 Commission v Luxembourg 1 — OJ 1992 L 167, p. 17. [1996] ECR I-5143, paragraph 9 of the judgment.
I-796
COMMISSION v BELGIUM
Conclusion
5. I therefore recommend that the Court:
(1) declare that, by failing to adopt within the prescribed period the provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 92/42/EEC of 21 May 1992 on efficiency requirements for new hot-water boilers fired with liquid or gaseous fuels, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Treaty;
(2) order the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs of these proceedings.
I-797