21.3.2009

Official Journal of the European Union

C 69/27

Action brought on 14 January 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Spain

(Case C-18/09)

(2009/C 69/49)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: K. Simonsson and L. Lozano Palacios, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of Spain

Form of order sought

—

declare that, by maintaining in force Ley 48/2003, de 26 noviembre, de regimen económico y de prestación de servicios de los puertos de interés general (Law 48/2003 of 26 November 2003 on the economic rules and supply of services for ports of general interest) and, in particular Article 24(5) and Article 27(1), (2) and (4) thereof, which establish a system of rebates and exemptions for harbour dues, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under Community Law (1) and, in particular, Article 1 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4055/86 of 22 December 1986 applying the principle of freedom to provide services to maritime transport between Member States and between Member States and third countries;

—	order Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Spanish law provides for a series of exemptions and rebates relating to harbour dues. Those exemptions and rebates depend on the ports of departure or destination of the vessels and have the consequence that more favourable tariffs are applied, first, to traffic between the Spanish archipelagos and Ceuta and Melilla and, second, to traffic between those ports and ports of the European Union and, third, between ports of the European Union. The Commission takes the view that that legislation is discriminatory.

The Kingdom of Spain, which invoked the particular geographic situation of the ports concerned, has not justified either the need for or the proportionality of that measure. Despite having promised to amend the legislation at issue, as far as the Commission is aware, no legislation has been adopted to put an end to the infringement.

(1) OJ L 378, p. 1.