![]() |
[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 Ireland (Environment and consumers) [2001] EUECJ C-354/99 (18 October 2001) URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/EUECJ/2001/C35499.html Cite as: [2001] EUECJ C-354/99, Case C-354/99, ECLI:EU:C:2001:550, EU:C:2001:550, [2001] ECR I-7657 |
[New search] [Help]
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Fifth Chamber)
18 October 2001 (1)
(Failure to fulfil obligations - Directive 86/609/EEC - Incomplete implementation)
In Case C-354/99,
Commission of the European Communities, represented by R. Wainwright, acting as Agent, with an address for service in Luxembourg,
applicant,
v
Ireland, represented initially by M.A. Buckley, and subsequently by L.A. Farrell, acting as Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg,
defendant,
APPLICATION for a declaration that, by failing to take all the measures necessary to ensure the correct implementation of Articles 2(d), 11 and 12 of Council Directive 86/609/EEC of 24 November 1986 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States regarding the protection of animals used for experimental and other scientific purposes (OJ 1986 L 358, p. 1) and by failing to provide for an adequate system of penalties for non-compliance with the requirements of Directive 86/609, Ireland has failed to comply with the Directive, in particular Article 25 thereof, and has failed to fulfil its obligations under the EC Treaty, in particular Article 5 thereof (now Article 10 EC),
THE COURT (Fifth Chamber),
composed of: P. Jann, President of the Chamber, S. von Bahr, D.A.O. Edward, A. La Pergola (Rapporteur) and C.W.A. Timmermans, Judges,
Advocate General: L.A. Geelhoed,
Registrar: R. Grass,
having regard to the report of the Judge-Rapporteur,
after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 5 April 2001,
gives the following
The Community legislation
For the purposes of this Directive the following definitions shall apply:
...
(d) experiment means any use of an animal for experimental or other scientific purposes which may cause it pain, suffering, distress or lasting harm, including any course of action intended, or liable, to result in the birth of an animal in any such condition, but excluding the least painful methods accepted in modern practice (i.e. humane methods) of killing or marking an animal; an experiment starts when an animal is first prepared for use and ends when no further observations are to be made for that experiment; the elimination of pain, suffering, distress or lasting harm by the successful use of anaesthesia or analgesia or other methods does not place the use of an animal outside the scope of this definition. Non experimental, agricultural or clinical veterinary practices are excluded.
Notwithstanding the other provisions of this Directive, where it is necessary for the legitimate purposes of the experiment, the authority may allow the animal concerned to be set free, provided that it is satisfied that the maximum possible care has been taken to safeguard the animal's well-being, as long as its state of health allows this to be done and there is no danger for public health and the environment.
Member States shall establish procedures whereby experiments themselves or the details of persons conducting such experiments shall be notified in advance to the authority.
National law
Notwithstanding the other provisions of these regulations where it is necessary for the legitimate purposes of the experiment, the animal concerned may be set free, provided that the maximum possible care has been taken to safeguard the animal's well-being, as long as its state of health allows this to be done and there is no danger for public health and the environment.
The pre-litigation procedure
The action
- there is no definition of experiment (incorrect implementation of Article 2(d) of the Directive);
- no national competent authority has been designated to authorise the setting free of animals (incorrect implementation of Article 11 of the Directive);
- there are no procedures for notification in advance of experiments or the details of persons conducting such experiments to the competent national authority (incorrect implementation of Article 12(1) of the Directive); and
- there is no adequate system of penalties for non-compliance with the requirements of the Directive.
Absence of a definition of the term experiment
Failure to designate a competent national authority to authorise the setting free
of animals
Absence of procedures for notifying a competent authority in advance of experiments or the details of persons conducting such experiments
Absence of an adequate system of penalties for non-compliance with the requirements of the Directive
Costs
50. 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 costs and Ireland has been unsuccessful, the latter must be ordered to pay the costs.
On those grounds,
THE COURT (Fifth Chamber)
hereby rules:
1. By failing to adopt all the measures necessary to ensure the correct implementation of Articles 2(d), 11 and 12 of Council Directive 86/609/EEC of 24 November 1986 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States regarding the protection of animals used for experimental and other scientific purposes, and by failing to provide for an adequate system of penalties for non-compliance with the requirements of Directive 86/609, Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Directive, in particular Article 25 thereof, and under the EC Treaty, in particular Article 5 thereof (now Article 10 EC).
2. Ireland is ordered to pay the costs.
Jann
La PergolaTimmermans
|
Delivered in open court in Luxembourg on 18 October 2001.
R. Grass P. Jann
Registrar President of the Fifth Chamber
1: Language of the case: English.