You are on page 1of 1

5.9.

98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 278/13

Ð the view taken by the Court of First Instance, programmes provided for by Article 6 of Council
according to which the Commission had three months Directive 91/157/EEC (1) of 18 March 1991 on
in which to complete its examination, is consistent batteries and accumulators containing certain
neither with the Aids Code nor with the need, dangerous substances, the Hellenic Republic has failed
recognised by case-law, to complete that examination to fulfil its obligations under the Treaty and that
expeditiously, Directive,

Ð infringement of Article 6(6) of the Steel Aids Code and Ð order the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.
breach of the general principles of law relating to aid:
in proceeding on the basis of the legally erroneous
premise that the Commission's competence is limited Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
in time, the Court of First Instance disregarded the
case-law of the Court of Justice, according to which a
Under the third paragraph of Article 189 of the EC Treaty,
definitive order for the repayment of aid must
directives are binding, as to the result to be achieved,
invariably be preceded by a conclusive opinion of the
upon each Member State to which they are addressed.
Commission finding the aid substantively illegal. By
Under the first paragraph of Article 5 of the Treaty,
concluding from a failure to comply with a time-limit
Member States are to take all appropriate measures,
Ð which not even the Commission regards as a
whether general or particular, to ensure fulfilment of the
prescriptive deadline, and which it has in numerous
obligations arising out of the Treaty or resulting from
parallel cases treated as a mere administrative deadline
action taken by the institutions of the Community.
for notification purposes Ð that the aid was
substantively illegal, the Court of First Instance
unlawfully confused the formal and the substantive It is not disputed that, up until the time when this
aspects of the aid procedure, application was drafted, the Hellenic Republic still had
not drawn up programmes for the period from 18 March
Ð breach of the prohibition of discrimination: in dealing 1993 to 18 March 1997 as provided for by Article 6 of the
extremely summarily with this head of claim, the Directive, nor had it communicated to the Commission
Court of First Instance failed to comment on the programmes to secure the objectives laid down by that
comparison made by the appellant between its own Article.
situation and the aid case of EKO Stahl,
The Commission is therefore obliged to find that the
Ð breach of the principle of protection of legitimate Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under
expectations, the Treaty and Directive 91/157/EEC.

Ð breach of the obligation to provide a statement of (1) OJ L 78, 26.3.1991, p. 38.
reasons.

(1) OJ C 166, 30.5.1998, p. 14.
(2) Decision No 3855/91/ECSC (OJ L 362, 31.12.1991, p. 57).

Action brought on 16 June 1998 by the Commission of
the European Communities against the French Republic
(Case C-221/98)
Action brought on 10 June 1998 by the Commission of (98/C 278/23)
the European Communities against the Hellenic Republic
(Case C-215/98)
An action against the French Republic was brought before
(98/C 278/22) the Court of Justice of the European Communities on
16 June 1998 by the Commission of the European
Communities, represented by Marie Wolfcarius, of its
An action against the Hellenic Republic was brought Legal Service, acting as Agent, with an address for service
before the Court of Justice of the European Communities in Luxembourg at the office of Carlos Gómez de la Cruz,
on 10 June 1998 by the Commission of the European Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.
Communities, represented by Maria Kondou-Durande,
of its Legal Service, with an address for service in
Luxembourg at the office of Carlos Gómez de la Cruz, of The Commission of the European Communities claims
its Legal Service, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg. that the Court should:

The Commission claims that the Court should: 1. declare that:

Ð declare that, by failing to adopt or to communicate Ð by not allowing students, who are nationals of
to the Commission within the prescribed period the other Member States and seek to have their right