- 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-273/08: Action brought on 25 June 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62008CN0273
62008CN0273
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
15.8.2008
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 209/36
(Case C-273/08)
(2008/C 209/55)
Language of the case: French
Parties
Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: G. Rozet and A. Alcover San Pedro, Agents)
Defendant: Grand Duchy of Luxembourg
Form of order sought
—declare that, by failing to communicate to the Commission of the European Communities its programmes for the reduction of national emissions of sulphur dioxide (SO₂), nitrogen oxides (NOₓ), volatile organic compounds (VOC) and ammonia (NH₃), its national emission inventories of SO₂, NOₓ, VOC and NH₃, and its annual projections for SO₂, NOₓ, VOC and NH₃ for 2010, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 6(1), (2) and (3), Article 7(1) and (2) and Article 8(1) and (2) of Directive 2001/81/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2001 on national emission ceilings for certain atmospheric pollutants (1);
—order the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to pay the costs.
Pleas in law and main arguments
The Commission submits that the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to communicate, within the time-limits prescribed in Directive 2001/81/EC, three types of document concerning the establishment of national emission ceilings for sulphur dioxide (SO₂), nitrogen oxides (NOₓ), volatile organic compounds (VOC) and ammonia (NH₃).
First, the defendant failed to fulfil its obligation, set out in Article 6(1), (2) and (3) of the directive, to draw up programmes for the progressive reduction of national emissions of the aforementioned pollutants.
Secondly and thirdly, the defendant did not comply, in respect of the same pollutants, with the provisions of Article 7(1) and (2) concerning the preparation and annual updating of the national emission inventories and emission projections for 2010.
Finally, it failed to fulfil its obligation to communicate these three types of document to the Commission within the time-limits prescribed in Article 8(1) and (2) of the directive.
* * *
(1) OJ 2001 L 309, p. 22.