Action brought on 12 November 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Hellenic Republic

(Case C-494/07)

(2008/C 8/17)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: M. Patakia and D. Recchia)

Defendant: Hellenic Republic

Form of order sought

The Court is asked to

Pleas in law and main argument

The Commission has examined the compatibility of the measures taken by the Hellenic Republic to transpose Directive 92/43/EEC.

Its review showed that certain provisions of the directive have not been fully implemented and/or have not been transposed correctly.

In particular, the Commission considers that the use of the phrase ‘reasons of essential public interest’ in the Greek legislation instead of the phrase ‘imperative reasons of overriding public interest’ referred to in Article 6(4) of the directive, is an incorrect transposition of the provision in question, because it widens the possibility of use of the derogation provided for and is not compatible with the need to interpret it narrowly.

The Commission also considers that the addition, in the Greek legislation, of the words ‘of particular economic significance’ to the phrase ‘imperative reasons of overriding public interest’ contained in Article 6(4) of the directive, bringing into operation the exception provided for in that provision, constitutes an incorrect transposition of Article 6(4) of the directive, because it adds further possibilities of derogation.

Lastly, the Commission ascertained that, as the Greek authorities acknowledge, the provisions of the Greek legislation transposing Articles 12 and 13 do not refer to the Annex which specifies their scope of application, so that the above articles of the directive have not been correctly transposed.

The Commission therefore considers that the Hellenic Republic has not correctly implemented Articles 6(4), 12 and 13 of the Directive on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora.

(1)  OJ L 206 of 22.7.1992.