Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 61998CJ0152

    Sommarju tas-sentenza

    Keywords
    Summary

    Keywords

    1. Actions for failure to fulfil obligations - Commission's right of action - Right exercised at the Commission's discretion

    (EC Treaty, Art. 169 (now Art. 226 EC))

    2. Actions for failure to fulfil obligations - Pre-litigation procedure - Purpose - Subject-matter of the action determined by the reasoned opinion

    (EC Treaty, Art. 169 (now Art. 226 EC))

    3. Environment - Water pollution - Directive 76/464 - Obligation to establish specific programmes to reduce pollution caused by certain dangerous substances - Scope

    (Council Directive 76/464, Arts 2, 6 and 7 and annex, Lists I and II)

    Summary

    1. Under the system laid down by Article 169 of the Treaty (now Article 226 EC), the Commission has a discretion to bring an action for failure to fulfil obligations and it is not for the Court to assess whether it was appropriate to exercise that discretion.

    ( see para. 20 )

    2. In the context of an action for failure to fulfil obligations, the purpose of the pre-litigation procedure is to give the Member State concerned an opportunity, on the one hand, to comply with its obligations under Community law and, on the other, to avail itself of its right to defend itself against the objections formulated by the Commission. The subject-matter of an action brought under Article 169 of the Treaty (now Article 226 EC) is, therefore, delimited by the pre-litigation procedure provided for by that article. Accordingly, the action cannot be founded on any objections other than those stated in the pre-litigation procedure.

    ( see para. 23 )

    3. It is clear both from the system set up by Directive 76/464 on pollution caused by certain dangerous substances discharged into the aquatic environment of the Community and from the wording of the first indent of the first paragraph of List II in the annex thereto that, so long as limit values for substances covered by List I which emission standards are not to exceed have not been determined by the Council under Article 6 of the directive, those substances are to be provisionally treated as List II substances governed by Article 7 of the directive. Even though it is true that the laying down of emission limit values by the Council is intended to eliminate water pollution caused by List I substances, while the regime prescribed in Article 7 of Directive 76/464 is designed only to establish programmes including quality objectives with a view to reducing pollution, the elimination of pollution, referred to in Article 2 of the directive, is not likely to be brought about merely by laying down the limit values because, in the end, it is entirely dependent on the level at which the values are fixed. Therefore, provisionally bringing List I substances under the regime prescribed for List II substances does not derogate from the directive's objective.

    In addition, by laying down itself in a binding manner the measures to be taken by the Member States where the Council does not lay down emission limit values for List I substances, Directive 76/464 does not dispense Member States from complying with the obligations which it imposes pending adoption of measures by the Council under Article 6.

    ( see paras 32-33, 35 )

    Top