C-444/99
ECLI:EU:C:2001:118
- Súd
- Súdny dvor Európskej únie
- IČS
- 61999CC0444
- Zdroj
- eur-lex.europa.eu ↗
OPINION OF MR GEELHOED — CASE C-444/99
OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL GEELHOED delivered on 22 February 2001 1
1. The Commission of the European Com- ment because a system of quotas and munities has brought this action before the authorisations for combined transport Court under Article 226 EC seeking a operations still applied in Italy. It brought declaration that the Italian Republic has this action on 15 November 1999. The failed to fulfil its obligations under Council Italian Government admitted its failure and Directive 92/106/EEC of 7 December 1992 stated, both in its defence and its rejoinder, on the establishment of common rules for that it would comply with its obligations certain types of combined transport of from 1 January 2001 through the adoption goods between Member States (hereinafter of Decree No 85 of 14 March 1998, which 'the Directive'). 2 entered into force on 22 May 1998. That Decree provides for a complete liberalisa- tion of combined transport operations on 1 January 2001 and a transitional system until that date. According to the Italian Government that measure deprives this action of any purpose.
2. Article 2 of the Directive requires each Member State to liberalise the combined transport operations referred to in Article 1 from all quota systems and systems of authorisations no later than 1 July 1993.
4. The Commission considers, on the other hand, that the Italian Republic is still guilty of failure to fulfil its obligations, in any event until 1 January 2001. Both the legis- 3. On 28 July 1998, the Commission sent a lation applying until the entry into force of reasoned opinion to the Italian Govern- Decree No 85 and the transitional system which it established (from April 1998 until 1 January 2001) are incompatible with the 1 — Original language: Dutch. Directive. The Italian Republic should have 2 — OJ 1992 L 368, p. 38. complied with those obligations from
I - 3790
COMMISSION V ITALY
1 July 1993. Moreover, the Directive did failed to fulfil its obligations must be not allow a transitional system. determined by reference to the situation in the Member State as it stood at the end of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion. The Court cannot therefore take account of any subsequent changes. 3Since the Commission has not discontinued the 5. In an action based on Article 226, the proceedings, its action must be held to be question whether a Member State has well founded.
3 — Joined Cases C-232/95 and C-233/95 Commission v Greece [1998] ECU I-3343; Case C-364/97 Commission v Ireland [1998] ECR I-6593, and Case C-185/96 Commission v Greece [1998] ECR I-6601.
I - 3791
OPINION OF MR GEELHOED — CASE C-444/99
Conclusion
Having regard to the foregoing considerations, I propose that the Court should:
(a) declare that by failing to bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary for the timely implementation of Council Directive 92/106/EEC of 7 December 1992 on the establishment of common rules for certain types of combined transport of goods between Member States, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive, and
(b) order the Italian Republic to pay the costs in accordance with Article 69(2) of the Rules of Procedure.
I - 3792