C-132/9461994C01320017.00014790147912OPINION OF MR LENZ — CASE C-132/94COMMISSION v IRELAND<TI><P><HT TYPE="UC">Opinion of Advocate General</HT></P><P><HT TYPE="UC">Lenz</HT></P><P>delivered on <DATE ISO="19951116">16 November 1995</DATE><NOTE NOTE.ID="E0001" NUMBERING="STAR"><P>Original language: German.</P></NOTE></P></TI>1.In this action against Ireland for failure to fulfil obligations, the Commission asks the Court to:

(1)declare that, by failing to bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative measures necessary to comply -with Council Directive 90/675/EEC of 10 December 1990 laying down the principles governing the organization of veterinary checks on products entering the Community from third countries,

OJ 1990 L 373, p. 1.

and/or by failing to inform the Commission thereof forthwith, Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive, in particular Article 32 thereof, and under the Treaty establishing the European Community;(2)order Ireland to pay the costs.

2.Article 32 of Directive 90/675 prescribes that Member States are to bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with the directive by 31 December 1991 at the latest, and are to inform the Commission thereof forthwith.3.Since the Commission was not informed of any transposition by the Member State, it initiated the procedure for failure to fulfil obligations by a letter of formal notice dated 14 October 1992. There was no reply to the letter. The Commission thereupon delivered a reasoned opinion on 11 May 1993. By a letter of 15 July 1993 from the Permanent Representation of Ireland to the European Communities, the Irish Government informed the Commission that a transposition procedure was in progress. Since the Commission was not informed of the completion of the procedure, it brought an action before the Court on 14 April 1994. The Irish Government observed in its defence that by Statutory Instrument No 255 of 1994, signed by the Irish Minister for Agriculture on 26 July 1994, Ireland had transposed the directive, with the exception of provisions relating to fish and fishery products.4.It is certain that the directive was not completely transposed into the law of the Member State within the time-limit set by the Commission. The directive does not provide for any exceptions to the time-limit.5.The Commission's application with reference to failure to transpose the directive within the prescribed period must therefore be upheld.6.In accordance with Article 69(2) of the Rules of Procedure, the unsuccessful party must be ordered to pay the costs.<TI><P>Conclusion</P></TI>7.In conclusion, I suggest that the Court rule as follows:

(1)By failing to bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative measures necessary to comply with Council Directive 90/675/EEC of 10 December 1990 laying down the principles governing the organization of veterinary checks on products entering the Community from third countries, and/or by failing to inform the Commission thereof forthwith, Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive, in particular Article 32 thereof, and under the Treaty establishing the European Community.(2)Ireland is ordered to pay the costs.