Fishery, waste management and persistent and general failure to fulfil control obligations: The role of lump sums and penalty payments in enforcement actions under community law: Failure of a member state to fulfil obligations-control obligations placed on the member states-articles 226 and 228 EC-payment of a lump sum-imposition of a penalty payment

Journal of Environmental Law

Volumn 18, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 289-299

  Schrauwen, Annette ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; FISHERY MANAGEMENT; LAW ENFORCEMENT; WASTE MANAGEMENT;

EID: 33745467357     PISSN: 09528873     EISSN: 1464374X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/jel/eql002     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Council Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste, OJ L194/39, as amended by Council Directive 91/156/EEC of 18 March 1991, OJ L78/32.
2. See, for example, §st 127, 139 and 193.
3. Regulation 2057/82/EEC of 29 June 1982, OJ L220/1, Regulation 2241/87/ EEC of 23 July 1987, OJ L207/1and Regulation 2847/93/EEC of 12 October 1993, OJ L261/1.
4. See also Regulation 2371/2002/EC of 20 December 2002 on the conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources under the Common Fisheries Policy, OJ L358/59.
5. See §52 of the judgment.
6. A version of this appeared in Dutch as A. Schrauwen, 'Dwangsom of boete; wat als een lidstaat zijn verplichtingen uit EG-recht verwaarloost?', in NTER November 2005, pp. 236-240.
7. Case C-387/97 Commission v Greece [2000] ECR I-5047
8. and Case C-278/01 Commission v Spain [2003] ECR I-14141.
9. See a.o. Case C-206/96 Commission v Luxemburg [1998] ECR I-3401
10. and Case C-328/96 Commission v Austria [1999] ECR I-7479.
11. The Court itself refers to Case C-387/99 Commission v Germany [2004] ECR I-3773 and the case law mentioned therein.
12. Case C-265/95 Commission v France [1997] ECR I-6959.
13. §52 of the ruling.
14. See §st 127, 139 and 193.
15. §27.
16. §28 refers to Case C-387/99, Commission v Germany [2004] ECR I-3751,
17. and the case law cited here: Case 21/84, Commission v France [1985] ECR 1355
18. Case C-187/96, Commission v Greece [1998] ECR I-1095
19. and Case C-185/95, Commission v Greece [1998] ECR I-6601.
20. Case 21/84, above.
21. Case C-287/03, Commission v Belgium, judgment of 12 May 2005, nyr.
22. §28, my emphasis. In Case C-129/00 Commission v Italy [2003] ECR I-14637, the Court states in para 32 that in order to declare that the practice of administrative courts is incompatible with Community law, 'isolated or numerically insignificant judicial decisions in the context of case law taking a different direction, or still more a construction disowned by the national supreme court, cannot be taken into account. That is not true of a widely held judicial construction which has not been disowned by the supreme court, but rather confirmed by it'.
23. See especially §st 36-39 of Case C-494/01.
24. As the Court confirms in §136.
25. Point 48 of the Opinion in Case C-494/01.
26. Specifically: 'If the Court of Justice finds that the Member State concerned has not complied with its judgment it may impose a lump sum or penalty payment on it'.
27. European Commission, Information from the Commission-Memorandum on Applying Article 171 of the EC Treaty, OJ 1996, C242/6. See especially point 4 of the Memorandum.
28. Point 94 of his Opinion of 29 April 2004. In point 43 of his Opinion of 18 November 2004 however, he states that 'it is beside the point whether or not the imposition of a sanction should be qualified as a punitive measure'.
29. §81.
30. See for example N. Haekkerup, Controls and Sanctions in the EU Law (Copenhagen, 2001) DJØF at 231.
31. See §st 91 and 92 respectively.
32. §91.
33. See the Opinion of 18 November 2004, point 17.
34. §114.
35. §86.
36. §88 of his Opinion of 29 April 2004.
37. §84.
38. §19 of the Opinion of 18 November 2004.
39. See Case C-387/97 Commission v Greece [2000] ECR I-5047 §89
40. and Case C-278/01 Commission v Spain [2003] ECR I-14141 §41.
41. See §85. The Court ordered France to pay a lump sum of 20,000,000 Euros, considerably less than the Advocate General proposed (e.g. the amount of the periodic penalty payment proposed by the Commission calculated over one year).
42. §90.
43. My italics.
44. In §83.
45. The Court qualifies them as inter partes proceedings in §93 and § 98.
46. §97.
47. COM(2005)570 final, 31.12.2005.
48. See for Article 228 procedures Annexe II, SEC (2005)1447, table 2.4.
49. See I. Härtel, 'Durchsetzbarkeit von Zwangsgeld-Urteilen des EuGH gegen Mitgliedstaaten', Europarecht Heft 4 (2001) 617-630.