You are on page 1of 2

C 278/4 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 5.9.

98

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
(Sixth Chamber) (Sixth Chamber)
of 18 June 1998 of 25 June 1998
in Case C-208/97: Commission of the European in Case C-192/96 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
Communities v. Portuguese Republic (1) the Netherlands Raad van State): Beside BV and I. M.
(Failure to fulfil obligations Ð Directive 84/156/EEC Ð Besselsen v. Minister van Volkshuisvesting, Ruimtelijke
Failure to transpose within the prescribed period) Ordening en Milieubeheer (1)

(98/C 278/06) (Management, transport and storage of municipal/
household waste Ð Illegal traffic)

(98/C 278/07)
(Language of the case: Portuguese)

(Language of the case: Dutch)
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be
published in the European Court Reports)

In Case C-208/97: Commission of the European (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be
Communities (Agent: Francisco de Sousa Fialho) v. published in the European Court Reports)
Portuguese Republic (Agents: Luís Fernandes and JoaÄo
Lopes Fernandes) Ð application for a declaration that, by
failing to adopt within the period prescribed the laws,
regulations and administrative provisions necessary to In Case C-192/96: reference to the Court under Article 177
comply with Council Directive 84/156/EEC of 8 March of the EC Treaty from the Netherlands Raad van State
1984 om limit values and quality objectives for mercury (Council of State), for a preliminary ruling in the
discharges by sectors other than the chlor-alkali proceedings pending before that court between Beside BV
electrolysis industry (OJ L 74, 17.3.1984, p. 49), and, in and I. M. Besselsen and Minister van Volkshuisvesting,
particular, by failing to draw up the specific programmes Ruimtelijke Ordening en Milieubeheer Ð on the
required by that Directive, and in the alternative, by interpretation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 of
failing forthwith to inform the Commission of such 1 February 1993 on the supervision and control of
measures, the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its shipments of waste within, into and out of the European
obligations under the third paragraph of Article 189 of the Community (OJ L 30, 6.2.1993, p. 1) and of Council
EC Treaty and under that Directive Ð the Court (Sixth Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste (OJ L 194,
Chamber), composed of: H. Ragnemalm, President of the 25.7.1975, p. 39), as amended by Council Directive 91/
Chamber, G. F. Mancini, J. L. Murray, G. Hirsch and 156/EEC of 18 March 1991 amending Directive 75/442/
K. M. Ioannou (Rapporteur), Judges; P. LeÂger, Advocate- EEC on waste (OJ L 78, 26.3.1991, p. 32) Ð the Court
General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment on (Sixth Chamber), composed of: H. Ragnemalm
18 June 1998, in which it: (Rapporteur), President of the Chamber, G. F. Mancini,
P. J. G. Kapteyn, J. L. Murray and G. Hirsch, Judges: F. G.
Jacobs, Advocate-General; H. A. Rühl, Principal
Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on
1. declares that, by failing to adopt within the period 25 June 1998, in which it has ruled:
prescribed the laws, regulations and administrative
provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive
84/156/EEC of 8 March 1984 on limit values and
quality objectives for mercury discharges by sectors
1. The expression municipal/household waste' referred
other than the chlor-alkali electrolysis industry and, in
to under AD 160 in the amber list in Annex III to
particular, by failing to draw up the specific
Council Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 of 1 February
programmes required by that directive, the Portuguese
1993 on the supervision and control of shipments of
Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under
waste within, into and out of the European
Article 4(1) of the said Directive;
Community, as amended by Commission Decision
94/721/EC of 21 October 1994 adapting, pursuant to
Article 42(3), Annexes II, III and IV to Council
2. orders the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs. Regulation (EEC) No 259/93, includes both waste
which for the most part consists of waste mentioned
on the green list in Annex II to the Regulation,
(1) OJ C 228, 26.7.1997. mixed with other categories of waste appearing on
that list, and waste mentioned on the green list mixed
with a small quantity of materials not referred to on
that list.
5.9.98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 278/5

2a. The reference to the storage of materials in point R 13 (Netherlands Council of State) for a preliminary ruling in
of Annex II B to Council Directive 75/442/EEC of the proceedings pending before that court between Chemi-
15 July 1975 on waste, as amended by Directive 91/ sche Afvalstoffen Dusseldorp BV and Others and Minister
156/EEC of 18 March 1991, must be interpreted as van Volkshuisvesting, Ruimtelijke Ordening en Milieube-
covering not only cases in which storage takes place heer Ð on the interpretation of Articles 34, 86, 90 and
in the undertaking in which the other operations 130t of the EC Treaty, of Council Directive 75/442/EEC
mentioned in that Annex must be carried out but also of 15 July 1975 on waste (OJ L 194, 25.7.1975, p. 39), as
cases in which storage precedes transport to such an amended by Directive 91/156/EEC of 18 March 1991 (OJ
undertaking, regardless of whether the latter is L 78, 26.3.1991, p. 32), and of Council Regulation (EEC)
established inside or outside the Community. No 259/93 of 1 February 1993 on the supervision and
control of shipments of waste within, into and out of the
European Community (OJ L 30, 6.2.1993, p. 1) Ð the
Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of: H. Ragnemalm
2b. The information listed in Article 11(1) of Regulation (Rapporteur), President of the Chamber, G. F. Mancini,
(EEC) No 259/93 constitutes the minimum evidence P. J. G. Kapteyn, J. L. Murray and G. Hirsch, Judges;
which the competent authority may, in the absence of F. G. Jacobs, Advocate-General; H. A. Rühl, Principal
notification, require in order to establish that green Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on
waste' is intended for recovery. 25 June 1998, in which it has ruled:

3. Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 must be interpreted as
meaning that the Member State of destination may
not unilaterally return waste to the Member State of 1. Council Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on
dispatch without prior notification to the latter; the waste, as amended by Directive 91/156/EEC of
Member State of dispatch may not oppose its return 18 March 1991 and Council Regulation (EEC)
where the Member State of destination produces a No 259/93 of 1 February 1993 on the supervision and
duly motivated request to that effect. control of shipments of waste within, into and out of
the European Community cannot be interpreted as
(1) OJ C 233, 10.8.1996. meaning that the principles of self-sufficiency and
proximity are applicable to shipments of waste for
recovery. Article 130t of the EC Treaty does not
permit Member States to extend the application of
those principles to such waste when it is clear that
they create a barrier to exports which is not justified
either by an imperative measure relating to protection
of the environment or by one of derogations provided
for by Article 36 of that Treaty.
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
(Sixth Chamber)

of 25 June 1998

in Case C-203/96 (reference for a preliminary ruling from 2. Article 90 of the EC Treaty, in conjunction with
the Nederlandse Raad van State): Chemische Afvalstoffen Article 86, precludes rules such as the long-term plan
Dusseldorp BV and Others v. Minister van Volkshuis- whereby a Member State requires undertakings to
vesting, Ruimtelijke Ordening en Milieubeheer (1) deliver their waste for recovery, such as oil filters, to a
national undertaking on which it has conferred the
(Shipments of waste for recovery Ð Principles of self-
exclusive right to incinerate dangerous waste unless
sufficiency and proximity)
the processing of their waste in another Member State
(98/C 278/08) is of a higher quality than that performed by that
undertaking if, without any objective justification and
without being necessary for the performance of a task
in the general interest, those rules have the effect of
(Language of the case: Dutch) favouring the national undertaking and increasing its
dominant position.

(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be (1) OJ C 247, 24.8.1996.
published in the European Court Reports)

In Case C-203/96: reference to the Court under Article 177
of the EC Treaty from the Nederlandse Raad van State