C-137/99
ECLI:EU:C:1999:543
- Súd
- Súdny dvor Európskej únie
- IČS
- 61999CC0137
- Zdroj
- eur-lex.europa.eu ↗
OPINION OF MR FENNELLY — CASE C-137/99
OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL FENNELLY delivered on 28 October 1999 *
Legal and factual background also provides for exchanges of information between the Member States and the Com- mission. Article 4(1) of the Directive pro- vides for the timely transposition of the Directive as follows:
1. The Commission has brought the pre- sent action against the Hellenic Republic under Article 169 of the EC Treaty (now Article 226 EC) in respect of its alleged non-transposition of Council Directive 'Member States shall bring into force laws, 96/43/EC of 26 June 1996 amending and regulations and administrative provisions consolidating Directive 85/73/EEC in order necessary to comply with: to ensure financing of veterinary inspec- tions and controls on live animals and certain animal products and amending Directives 90/675/EEC and 91/496/EEC 1 (hereinafter 'the Directive').
(i) the provisions of Article 7 and of Chapter I(1)(e) of Annex A by 1 July 1996;
2. The provisions of the Directive require the Member States to ensure, in accordance with detailed arrangements specified for different sectors and activities, that a Community fee is collected to cover the costs occasioned by veterinary inspections (ii) the provisions of Chapter II, Section II of and controls on the products concerned. of Chapter III of Annex A and Chap- The permissible amount of fees is set out in ter II of Annex C by 1 January 1997; detail, while Member States are entitled to vary the fees, in accordance with specified methods, provided that they do not exceed the actual cost of inspections. The Directive
* Original language: English. 1 — OJ 1996 L 162, p. 1. (iii) other amendments by 1 July 1997.
I - 9010
COMMISSION V GREECE
Member States shall have a further period tive provisions necessary to comply with which can extend to 1 July 1999 within the Directive and to require the Hellenic which to comply with the provisions of Republic to pay the costs of the action. Section I of Chapter III of Annex A ... .'
4. It is clear from the summary of Arti- cle 4(1) of the Directive given at the outset of its application that the Commission does not seek — as it could not — any declara- tion regarding the obligations which are set out in Section I of Chapter III of Annex A to the Directive, in respect of which the Member States had a period for compliance 3. Having received no communication extending to 1 July 1999. Although the regarding measures taken to transpose the declaration sought is in general terms, it is Directive, the Commission issued to the clear that the latter must be excluded from Hellenic Republic a letter of formal notice the subject-matter of these proceedings.2 of 5 November 1997, seeking the latter's comments within two months. It seems clear that this letter must be interpreted as referring to the obligations set out in Article 4(1), paragraphs (i), (ii) and (iii) of the Directive and not to those compliance with which was postponed to 1 July 1999. The Commission was dissatisfied with the reply of 8 January 1998 that the necessary 5. In its defence, the Greek Government measures were being prepared and issued a requests the Court to dismiss the action. It reasoned opinion on 29 July 1998 to the states that a provision has been inserted in effect that the Hellenic Republic had failed a draft law, which has already been signed, to fulfil its obligations under the Directive. permitting the Ministers for Finance and In the absence of any response, the Com- for Agriculture to issue joint decrees, whe- mission commenced these proceedings on ther or not pursuant to acts of the institu- 19 April 1999. They are based on Article 4 tions of the European Union, imposing of the Directive, Article 5 of the EC Treaty charges for veterinary inspections and con- (now Article 10 EC) and the third para- trols, fixing the amount of such charges, graph of Article 189 of the EC Treaty (now identifying the persons subject to pay such the third paragraph of Article 249 EC). The charges and the authorities which are to Commission requests the Court to declare collect them, specifying the use to which that the Hellenic Republic is in breach of its obligations under the Treaty and the Direc- tive by virtue of its failure to bring into 2 — See Case 31/69 Commission v Italy [1970] ECR 25, force the laws, regulations and administra- paragraphs 11 to 14.
I - 9011
OPINION OF MR FENNELLY — CASE C-137/99
such charges are to be put and regulating provision of a 'draft law' clearly implies all other incidental matters. the contrary.
6. This does not appear to me to constitute 7. As the Commission has, in my view, an adequate defence to the Commission's successfully proved its case regarding the action. The Greek Government has not Hellenic Republic's non-compliance with indicated that the provision in question has its obligation to transpose the Directive, entered into force, or had done so at the with the exception of Section I of Chap- expiry either of any of the various imple- ter III of Annex A thereof, it should be mentation dates specified for different parts awarded its costs pursuant to Article 69(2) of the Directive or of the period fixed in the of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of reasoned opinion. Its description as a Justice.
Conclusion
8. In the light of the foregoing, I propose that the Court:
(1) Declare that, by not adopting the legislative, regulatory and administrative measures necessary to comply with its obligations under Article 4(1), paragraphs (i), (ii) and (iii) of Council Directive 96/43/EC of 26 June 1996 amending and consolidating Directive 85/73/EEC in order to ensure financing of veterinary inspections and controls on live animals and certain animal products and amending Directives 90/675/EEC and 91/496/EEC, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Treaty;
(2) Order the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs of these proceedings.
I - 9012