Commission v Greece (Environment and consumers) [1997] EUECJ C-329/96 (26 June 1997)

Judgment By application lodged at the Court Registry on 8 October 1996, the Commission of the European Communities brought an action under Article 169 of the EC Treaty for a declaration that, by failing, within the prescribed period, to adopt and/or notify to it the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (OJ 1992 L 206, p. 7, hereinafter 'the Directive'), the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under the EC Treaty and that directive. Member States were required under Article 23 of the Directive to bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with it within two years of its notification and forthwith to inform the Commission thereof. Since the Directive was notified to the Greek authorities on 5 June 1992, the period laid down for its implementation expired on 5 June 1994. Noting that this period had expired, and not having been informed of the measures for transposing the Directive into Greek law, the Commission initiated proceedings for a declaration of failure to fulfil obligations under Article 169 of the Treaty. By letter of 9 August 1994 it put the Greek Government on formal notice to submit to it its observations within two months. Since the Greek Government did not reply to that letter, the Commission sent to it, on 21 June 1995, a reasoned opinion requesting it to adopt the measures necessary for compliance within two months of notification. In the absence of any notification of transposition measures by the Hellenic Republic, the Commission brought the present action. In its defence the Greek Government does not deny that the Directive was not transposed within the prescribed period. It merely points out that the delay in transposing the Directive has been attributable to technical legislative problems. Since the Directive was not transposed within the period which it prescribed, the action brought by the Commission must be held to be well founded. It must accordingly be held that, by failing to adopt within the prescribed period the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with the Directive, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 23 thereof. Costs Under Article 69(2) of the Rules of Procedure, the unsuccessful party is to be ordered to pay the costs. Since the Hellenic Republic has been unsuccessful, it must be ordered to pay the costs. On those grounds, THE COURT (Fifth Chamber) hereby: Declares that, by failing to adopt within the prescribed period the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 23 thereof; Orders the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs. Moitinho de AlmeidaSevón Gulmann Edward Jann Delivered in open court in Luxembourg on 26 June 1997. R. Grass J. C. Moitinho de Almeida Registrar President of the Fifth Chamber 1: Language of the case: Greek. BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII