Action brought on 5 June 2024 – European Commission v Italian Republic

(Case C-394/24)

(C/2024/4318)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: G. Gattinara, M. Ioan, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Italian Republic

Form of order sought

The Commission claims that the Court should:

Pleas in law and main arguments

By its first plea, the Commission submits that the interpretation and application of the Article 168-bis(1) of the DPR of 30 May 2002 n. 115 as excluding rental service for consideration of equipment for telephone and environmental wiretapping from the definition of ‘commercial transaction’ within the meaning of Article 2(1) of Directive 2011/7/EU is incompatible with the obligations incumbent on Italy under that provision. According to the Commission, this is the consequence of a literal, contextual and teleological interpretation of the provision concerned.

By its second plea, the Commission argues that the average time for payment of rental services for consideration of equipment for telephone and environmental wiretapping observed by the Italian authorities from 2018 to 2023 exceeds the time limit of 30 days laid down in Article 4(3) of that directive. As a result, according to the Commission, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil the obligations under that provision.

(1)   OJ 2011 L 48, p. 1.