Important legal notice

61998C0213

European Court reports 1999 Page I-06973

Opinion of the Advocate-General

1 In these proceedings the Commission of the European Communities seeks a declaration that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 92/100/EEC of 19 November 1992 on rental right and lending right and on certain rights related to copyright in the field of intellectual property (1) (OJ 1992 OJ L 346, p. 61) and by failing to inform the Commission thereof, Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under the EC Treaty. It has asked for costs.

2 The Commission states that, under Article 15 of Directive 92/100, the Member States were to bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with the Directive no later than 1 July 1994 and were to inform the Commission thereof forthwith.

3 Having determined that that period had expired without its having been informed of any implementing measure adopted by Ireland, the Commission initiated the procedure provided for by Article 226 EC (ex Article 169).

4 By letter of 20 January 1995, it formally called on the Irish Government to submit its observations concerning the alleged infringements of Community law within a period of two months.

5 By letter of 22 March 1995, the Irish Government informed the Commission that a total review of the Copyright Act 1963 had been initiated in Ireland in 1994 and that a new bill was being prepared which would update Irish copyright law, embodying the provisions of Directive 92/100.

6 In the absence of further information, on 1 July 1977 the Commission sent Ireland a reasoned opinion, reiterating the fact that the period set for transposition had expired on 1 July 1994 and that Ireland was required to inform it of any implementing measure that it had adopted.

7 The Commission, having received no information concerning the stage reached in the implementation of Directive 92/100, commenced the present Treaty-infringement proceedings.

8 The Office of the Irish Permanent Representative to the European Union responded to the reasoned opinion by letter of 26 August 1997 informing the Commission that significant progress had been made in the drafting of the bill.

9 The Commission considers that Ireland's obligation under Article 15 of Directive 92/100 to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with that directive by 1 July 1994 is undisputed. It states that that obligation also derives from the third paragraph of Article 249 EC (ex Article 189 EC) and from Article 10 EC (ex Article 5 EC).

10 Ireland recognises its obligation to comply with that directive. It states that Irish copyright law has remained unchanged since 1963 and it has therefore had to carry out a complete revision of the Copyright Act 1963. The Irish Government adds that the Law is at an advanced stage of preparation and should very shortly be ready for publication. It therefore requests that the Court suspend the proceedings for a period of six months.

11 It is undisputed that the period for implementation laid down in Article 15 of Directive 92/100 expired over five years ago. The Irish Government does not deny that Directive 92/100 has not been transposed. Furthermore, according to settled case-law of this Court, a Member State may not plead technical difficulties associated, in particular, with the need to undertake a comprehensive reform of legislation and with the time needed to do so. (2) In those circumstances, it is appropriate to uphold the Commission's application for a finding that the obligations laid down by Directive 92/100 have not been fulfilled and to reject the request for suspension of these proceedings.

12 Under Article 69(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court, the unsuccessful party is to be ordered to pay the costs if they have been applied for in the successful party's pleadings.

Conclusion

13 Consequently, I suggest that the Court declare that:

(1)OJ 1992 L 346, p. 61.

(2)Case C-329/96 Commission v Greece [1997] ECR I-I-3749.