Brussels, 25/06/2010 (Agence Europe) - On Thursday 24 June, the European Commission carried out its monthly exercise of reviewing infringement proceedings. With regard to the internal market, it is taking 10 member states before the European Court of Justice for matters ranging from recognition of professional qualifications to the purchase of farm land and the awarding of public procurement contracts.
Luxembourg is taken before the Court because it has still not come into line with an earlier ruling (Case C-223/08) when it was requested to extend to Bulgarian and Romanian citizens application on its territory of European rules on the recognition of professional qualifications. The Commission calls on the Court to impose a daily fine of €14,280 on this member state dating from the first judgement to the date of the coming judgement, after which the daily fine would fall to €4,760 until Luxembourg complies with the directive.
Austria is to explain to the Court why the Austrian Land of Vorarlberg puts restrictions on the acquisition of farm land by persons outside the farming community through a pre-emption mechanism authorising Austrian farmers to show their interest in the purchase of the land in question. On the basis of European case law (C-452/01), the Commission considers these provisions disproportionate to the Austrian objective of sharing out the ownership of land.
Eight member states (Belgium, Cyprus, Greece, Spain, France, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Sweden) are taken before the Court for belated implementation of Directive 2007/36/EC governing the rights of shareholders of companies quoted on the stock exchange, an act that has been applicable since August 2009.
Public procurement. A) Greece is formally invited to comply with the Court's ruling (Case C-489/06) whereby awarding a public contract for acquisition of medical material (surgical gloves and thread) had infringed public procurement directives by rejecting offers from suppliers bearing the EC mark. The refusal to market products bearing the EC mark is authorised in very precise circumstances such as when there is suspicion of counterfeit or concerns relating to public health. B) Athens is also taken before the Court regarding the awarding, without being put up to competition, of a contract for the management of dangerous medical waste (blood, contaminated needles, etc) in the Attica region, for the sum of €2.2 million. C) The same is true for Slovakia on the subject of the attribution, without competition, of a legal services contract for motorway construction projects. The contract was worth €19.6 million. The Commission challenges the urgency of the contract, put forward as an argument by the Slovak authorities. D) Five member states (Bulgaria, Cyprus, Latvia, Portugal, Slovenia) will receive a reasoned opinion for incomplete transposition of Directive 2007/66/EC which amends appeal procedure accessible for companies that consider they have been injured by the awarding of a public procurement contract. The directive has been applicable since December 2009.
Through a reasoned opinion, the Commission calls on Germany to put an end to certain German joint practices that foster the purchase of land by residents at a price below that which non-residents have to pay. The Commission considers this is unjustified discrimination with regard to the fundamental principles of non-discrimination and free movement guaranteed by the Lisbon Treaty.
Services directive. Twelve member states (Germany, Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, France, Greece, Ireland, Luxembourg, Portugal, Romania, United Kingdom and Slovenia) will be receiving a reasoned opinion calling on them to complete implementation of Directive 2006/123/EC on services in the internal market, applicable since end 2009. The procedure has been effectively opened even though only one of the many national or regional legislative acts had not been adopted at the time of application of the directive.
France is formally invited by a reasoned opinion to repeal a national decree adopted without prior notification, which establishes the rules for authorisation of phyto-pharmaceutical products (e.g. the use of the words “authorised use in gardens” on the labelling regarding requirements of products for the elimination of rodents and moles). The Commission bases its action on Directive 98/34/EC whereby it must receive prior notification of any technical regulation in order to be able to guarantee that the rule in question does not introduce obstacles that run counter to trade within the internal market.
In the context of two separate cases, Estonia is expected to explain to the Court why it does not implement: - Directive 2007/47/EC which revises the procedures and criteria for assessing medical devices; - and Directive 2008/13/EC which repeals Directive 84/539/EC on electric apparata used in veterinary medicine. These two acts have been applicable since December 2008. (M.B./transl.jl)