Court of Justice of the European Communities (including Court of First Instance Decisions)

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Sixth Chamber)
7 October 2004 (1)

applicant,

v

defendant,

THE COURT (Sixth Chamber),

gives the following

Judgment

1. By its application, the Commission of the European Communities asks the Court for a declaration that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2001/12/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2001 amending Council Directive 91/440/EEC on the development of the Community-™s railways (OJ 2001 L 75, p. 1), Directive 2001/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2001 amending Council Directive 95/18/EC on the licensing of railway undertakings (OJ 2001 L 75, p. 26) and Directive 2001/14/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2001 on the allocation of railway infrastructure capacity and the levying of charges for the use of railway infrastructure and safety certification (OJ 2001 L 75, p. 29) or, in any event, by failing to notify those provisions to it, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under those directives.
2. Under Article 2 of Directive 2001/12, Article 2 of Directive 2001/13 and the first paragraph of Article 38 of Directive 2001/14, the Member States were required to bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with those three directives by 15 March 2003. They were forthwith to inform the Commission thereof.
3. The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland did not inform the Commission of any measures taken to transpose Directives 2001/12, 2001/13 and 2001/14 into national law within the prescribed period. Since the Commission was not in possession of any other evidence to show that the necessary provisions had been adopted, it initiated the procedure for failure to fulfil obligations under Article 226 EC.
4. By letter of formal notice of 3 April 2003, the Commission called upon the United Kingdom to submit its observations to it within two months. According to information communicated to it on 6 June 2003 by the United Kingdom authorities, the provisions necessary to transpose the three directives in question were then being prepared.
5. On 11 July 2003, the Commission delivered a reasoned opinion calling on that Member State to take the measures necessary to comply with the reasoned opinion within two months of its notification.
6. In its reply of 16 September 2003 to the reasoned opinion, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland stated that, with regard to its main railway system, national law was in compliance with the directives in question, as explained in a detailed table provided to the Commission at a meeting of 16 July 2003. The United Kingdom added that, even though some minor elements of transposition remained to be completed, given the highly liberalised rail market there were already substantial opportunities for those seeking access to the British railway network. Finally, it stated that, in any event, full transposition of the three directives was to be completed by March 2004.
7. Not having received any further information from that Member State, the Commission has brought the present action.
8. The Commission submits that, by failing to adopt the provisions necessary to comply with Directives 2001/12, 2001/13 and 2001/14 or, in any event, by failing to notify those provisions to it, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under the relevant provisions of those directives.
9. The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland concedes that while the main objectives and requirements of the three directives in question have been met, a number of measures must still be taken to complete their transposition.
10. In that regard, it must be remembered that, according to settled case-law, the question whether a Member State has failed to fulfil its obligations must be determined by reference to the situation prevailing in the Member State at the end of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion (see, inter alia, Case C-143/02 Commission v Italy [2003] ECR I-2877, paragraph 11; Case C-446/01 Commission v Spain [2003] ECR I-6053, paragraph 15; and Case C-398/02 Commission v Spain, not published in the ECR, paragraph 17).
11. In the present case, the United Kingdom Government accepts that it did not completely transpose the three directives within the prescribed period.
12. The Commission-™s action must thus be considered well founded.
13. Therefore, it must be held that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directives 2001/12, 2001/13 and 2001/14, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under those directives.

Costs
14. Article 69(2) of the Rules of Procedure provides that 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 costs and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has been unsuccessful, the latter must be ordered to pay the costs.




On those grounds, the Court (Sixth Chamber) hereby:
1. Declares that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directives 2001/12/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2001 amending Council Directive 91/440/EEC on the development of the Community-™s railways, Directive 2001/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2001 amending Council Directive 95/18/EC on the licensing of railway undertakings and Directive 2001/14/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2001 on the allocation of railway infrastructure capacity and the levying of charges for the use of railway infrastructure and safety certification, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under those directives;
2. Orders the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to pay the costs.

Signatures.

---

1 - Language of the case: English.