- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case C-217/19: Action brought on 8 March 2019 — European Commission v Republic of Finland
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62019CN0217
62019CN0217
With us you find everything. Try it now!
I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 172/20
(Case C-217/19)
(2019/C 172/23)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: European Commission (represented by: C. Hermes, E. Ljung Rasmussen, Agents)
Defendant: Republic of Finland
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—declare that by recurrently granting authorizations for spring hunting of male Common Eiders (Somateria mollissima) in the province of Åland since 2011, the Republic of Finland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 7(4) and 9(l)(c) of Directive 2009/147/EC (1) of the European parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds;
—order Republic of Finland to pay the costs.
Pleas in law and main arguments
Since 2011, the regional government of the Åland Islands, an autonomous region in Finland, has recurrently each year authorized ‘derogation spring hunting’ of male Common Eider ducks with a total quota of 2000 to 3800 birds during two to three weeks in May. This time period coincides with the period of reproduction of Common Eiders.
Article 7(4) of Directive 2009/147/EC prohibits hunting during the period of reproduction.
Finland claims that the spring hunting of Common Eiders in the Åland Islands is justified by the derogation provision of Article 9(1)(c) of Directive 2009/147/EC. According to the case-law of the Court, Member States bear the burden of proof for establishing that the conditions of this provision are met.
The Commission considers that Finland, first, has not established that the derogation regime constitutes ‘judicious use’ within the meaning of Article 9(1)(c) of Directive 2009/147/EC. Finland has, in particular, not substantiated with sound scientific evidence that it is ensured that the relevant population of Common Eider ducks is maintained at a satisfactory level.
Secondly, Finland has not demonstrated that the authorized spring hunting only concerns the use of birds ‘in small numbers’ pursuant to Article 9(1)(c) of Directive 2009/147/EC.
(1) Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds (OJ 2010, L 20, p-7)