British
and Irish Legal Information Institute
Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information
[
Home]
[
Databases]
[
World Law]
[
Multidatabase Search]
[
Help]
[
Feedback]
Court of Justice of the European Communities (including Court of First Instance Decisions)
You are here:
BAILII >>
Databases >>
Court of Justice of the European Communities (including Court of First Instance Decisions) >>
Commission v France (Social policy) [1999] EUECJ C-354/98 (08 July 1999)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/EUECJ/1999/C35498.html
Cite as:
[1999] EUECJ C-354/98,
[1999] ECR I-4927
[
New search]
[
Help]
IMPORTANT LEGAL NOTICE - The source of this judgment is the web site of the Court of Justice of the European Communities. The information in this database has been provided free of charge and is subject to a Court of Justice of the European Communities disclaimer and a copyright notice. This electronic version is not authentic and is subject to amendment.
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (First Chamber)
8 July 1999 (1)
(Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Failure to implement
Directive 96/97/EC)
In Case C-354/98,
Commission of the European Communities, represented by Marie Wolfcarius, of
its Legal Service, acting as Agent, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the
office of Carlos Gómez de la Cruz, also of the Legal service, Wagner Centre,
Kirchberg,
applicant,
v
French Republic, represented by Kareen Rispal-Bellanger, Head of the
Subdirectorate for International Economic Law and Community Law in the Legal
Affairs Directorate of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and Anne de Bourgoing,
Chargé de Mission in the same directorate, acting as Agents, with an address for
service in Luxembourg at the French Embassy, 8B Boulevard Joseph II,
defendant,
APPLICATION for a declaration that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and
administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 96/97/EC of
20 December 1996 amending Directive 86/378/EEC on the implementation of the
principle of equal treatment for men and women in occupational social security
schemes (OJ 1997 L 46, p. 20), the French Republic has failed to fulfil its
obligations under that directive,
THE COURT (First Chamber),
composed of: P. Jann, President of the Chamber, D.A.O. Edward (Rapporteur)
and L. Sevón, Judges,
Advocate General: A. La Pergola,
Registrar: R. Grass,
having regard to the report of the Judge-Rapporteur,
after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 20 May 1999,
gives the following
Judgment
- By application lodged at the Registry of the Court on 25 September 1998, the
Commission of the European Communities brought an action under Article 169 of
the EC Treaty (now Article 226 EC) for a declaration that, by failing to adopt the
laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council
Directive 96/97/EC of 20 December 1996 amending Directive 86/378/EEC on the
implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women in
occupational social security schemes (OJ 1997 L 46, p. 20, hereinafter 'the
Directive'), the French Republic had failed to fulfil its obligations under the
Directive.
- The Directive amended the provisions of Council Directive 86/378/EEC of 24 July
1986 (OJ 1986 L 225, p. 40) which were affected by the judgment in Case C-262/88
Barber v Guardian Royal Exchange Assurance Group [1990] ECR I-1889.
- Under Article 3(1) of the Directive, the Member States were to adopt the
necessary measures to comply with the Directive by 1 July 1997 and to inform the
Commission thereof forthwith.
- Having noted that that date had passed without it being informed of any measures
adopted by the French Republic, the Commission gave France formal notice by
letter of 9 September 1997 to submit its observations within two months.
- By letter of 26 November 1997 the French authorities indicated that the measures
needed to comply with the Directive were in the process of being drawn up.
- In view of the fact that it had not been informed of the provisions adopted to
comply with the Directive, the Commission sent a reasoned opinion to the French
Republic by letter of 22 April 1998, requesting it to adopt the necessary measures
to fulfil its obligations under the Directive within two months of notification of the
opinion.
- By letter of 17 July 1998 the French authorities replied that the legislative
provisions relating to employed persons would appear in the next draft law
introducing a number of social security measures, which was shortly to be laid
before Parliament. The French authorities also pointed out that the occupational
schemes in question were freely determined and modified by workers and
employers both in the national legislative context and in accordance with
Community law and that a large proportion of the private schemes had undergone
the necessary modifications prior to adoption of the Directive as a direct result of
the Barber case, with which those responsible for the schemes were now familiar.
- The Commission received no further communication from the French Republic and
therefore brought the present action.
- The French Government does not dispute the fact that the Directive has not been
implemented within the prescribed period. It states that a draft law which will
implement the Directive is about to be adopted by Parliament.
- None the less it maintains, first, that the occupational schemes in question are
freely determined and modified by workers and employers both in the national
legislative context and in accordance with Community law, secondly, that a large
proportion of the private schemes had already undergone the necessary
modifications prior to adoption of the Directive, and lastly that, in accordance with
the principles of the direct effect and primacy of Community law, the last
paragraph of Article L 913-1 of the Social Security Code, which permits
discrimination in the determination of retirement age and the conditions for
awarding reversionary pensions, may not be relied upon by parties to proceedings
in French courts.
- It is enough to observe in this regard that the Court has consistently held that the
incompatibility of national legislation with Community provisions, even provisions
which are directly applicable, can be finally remedied only by means of national
provisions of a binding nature which have the same legal force as those which must
be amended, and that the provisions of a directive must be implemented with
unquestionable binding force and with the specificity, precision and clarity required
in order to satisfy the requirement of legal certainty, under which, in the case of a
directive intended to confer rights on individuals, persons concerned must be
enabled to ascertain the full extent of their rights (Case C-197/96 Commission v
France [1997] ECR I-1489, paragraphs 14 and 15).
- In those circumstances it must be held that, as the Directive has not been
transposed within the period it lays down, the Commission's action is well founded.
- Consequently, it must be held that, by failing to adopt all the laws, regulations and
administrative provisions necessary to comply with the Directive, the French
Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Directive.
Costs
14. Under Article 69(2) of the Rules of Procedure, the unsuccessful party is to be
ordered to pay the costs if they have been applied for in the successful party's
pleadings. Since the Commission has applied for the French Republic to be
ordered to pay the costs and the latter has been unsuccessful, it must be ordered
to pay the costs.
On those grounds,
THE COURT (First Chamber),
hereby:
1. Declares that, by failing to adopt all the laws, regulations and
administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive
96/97/EC of 20 December 1996 amending Directive 86/378/EEC on the
implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women in
occupational social security schemes, the French Republic has failed to
fulfil its obligations under that directive;
2. Orders the French Republic to pay the costs.
Delivered in open court in Luxembourg on 8 July 1999.
R. Grass
P. Jann
Registrar
President of the First Chamber
1: Language of the case: French.