C-348/01
ECLI:EU:C:2002:453
- Súd
- Súdny dvor Európskej únie
- IČS
- 62001CC0348
- Zdroj
- eur-lex.europa.eu ↗
COMMISSION v FRANCE
OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL TIZZANO delivered on 11 July 2002 1
1. By an action brought on 10 September (ii) failed to transpose fully Annex II to the 2001 the European Commission has Directive in so far as projects for the use of requested the Court, pursuant to uncultivated land or semi-natural areas for Article 226 EC, to declare that, by failing intensive agricultural purposes, initial to adopt all laws, regulations and adminis- afforestation and wind farms are not trative provisions necessary to comply with covered by the rules governing environ- Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March mental impact studies. 1997 amending Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environ- ment 2('the Directive'), or in any event by failing to inform the Commission fully of those provisions, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive. 3. In its defence the French Government acknowledged its failure to fulfil its obli- gations as regards the first complaint, but denied the second complaint. In its reply the Commission took account of the fact that Annex II to the Directive had in fact been transposed into the national legal 2. In these proceedings the Commission order and therefore withdrew the second complains in particular that France: complaint.
(i) failed to transpose Article 1(7) and (11) of the Directive for all public or private 4. Following the Commission's withdrawal works projects other than those relating to of the second complaint, the present case installations classified as being for the concerns solely the failure to transpose protection of the environment; Article 1(7) and 11 of the Directive. Since the failure to fulfil obligations criticised by the Commission is not disputed in that 1 — Original language: Italian. regard, I therefore consider that the action 2 — OJ1997 L 73, p. 5. must succeed.
I - 10251
OPINION OF MR TIZZANO — CASE C-348/01
5. However I consider that, in the light of two original complaints without giving Article 69(2), (3) and (5) of the Rules of specific reasons why the conduct of the Procedure, the French Government's appli- defendant government might be blamed for cation for costs should be allowed, given that withdrawal. that the Commission withdrew one of its
Conclusion
6. I therefore propose that the Court should make a declaration as follows:
(1) By failing to adopt all laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply fully with Article 1(7) and (11) of Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997 amending Directive 85/337/EEC on the assess- ment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, or in any event by failing to inform the Commission fully of those provisions, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive.
(2) The parties to bear their own costs.
I - 10252