Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Belgium (C-65/94)

Contents

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber)28 September 1994^noteIn Case C-65/94,Commission of the European Communities, represented by Gerard Rozet, Legal Adviser, acting as Agent, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the office of Georgios Kremlis, of the Legal Service, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg,vKingdom of Belgium, represented by Jan Devadder, Director of Administration in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, acting as Agent, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Belgian Embassy, 4 Rue des Girondins,THE COURT (Sixth Chamber),composed of: G. F. Mancini, President of the Chamber, M. Diez de Velasco, C. N. Kakouris, F. A. Schockweiler and P. J. G. Kapteyn (Rapporteur), Judges,Advocate General: M. Darmon,Registrar: R. Grass,having regard to the report of the Judge-Rapporteur,after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 12 July 1994,gives the following

Judgment

1By application lodged at the Court Registry on 15 February 1994, the Commission of the European Communities brought an action under Article 169 of the EC Treaty for a declaration by the Court that, by failing to bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary in order to comply with Council Directive 90/167/EEC of 26 March 1990 laying down the conditions governing the preparation, placing on the market and use of medicated feedingstuffs in the Community (OJ 1990 L 92, p. 42), apart from Article 11(2), and/or by failing to communicate them to the Commission, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 15 of the said directive and Articles 5 and 189 of the EC Treaty.

2Article 15 of the directive provides:‘Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply— with the requirements of Article 11(2) on the date on which they must conform with the Community rules on the protection of feedingstuffs against pathogenic agents, but at the latest by 31 December 1992,— before 1 October 1991, with the other provisions of this Directive.They shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof.’

3The Kingdom of Belgium does not deny its failure to transpose the directive within the prescribed period. It merely states that a draft Royal Decree is at present in the course of preparation and is the subject of consultation between the departments concerned.

4Since the directive has not been transposed within the period prescribed by Article 15, it must be held that the defendant has failed to fulfil its obligations, as alleged by the Commission.

5Given that the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil the specific obligations incumbent on it under the directive, there is no need to examine whether it has thereby also failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 5 of the Treaty (see the judgments in Cases C-374/89 Commission v Belgium [1991] ECR I-367 and C-378/92 Commission v Spain [1993] ECR I-5095).

6It must be held, therefore, that, by failing to bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary in order to comply with Council Directive 90/167/EEC of 26 March 1990 laying down the conditions governing the preparation, placing on the market and use of medicated feedingstuffs in the Community, apart from Article 11(2), and/or by failing to communicate them to the Commission, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 15 of the said directive.

Costs

7Under Article 69(2) of the Rules of Procedure, the unsuccessful party is to be ordered to pay the costs. Since the Kingdom of Belgium has been unsuccessful, it must be ordered to pay the costs.

Operative part

On those grounds,THE COURT (Sixth Chamber)hereby:

1.Declares that, by failing to bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary in order to comply with Council Directive 90/167/EEC of 26 March 1990 laying down the conditions governing the preparation, placing on the market and use of medicated feedingstuffs in the Community, apart from Article 11(2), and/or by failing to communicate them to the Commission, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 15 of the said directive;

2.Orders the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.

Delivered in open court in Luxembourg on 28 September 1994.