EUR-Charts

Suggested solution:

For the reader’s information: the substance of the case has to be seen against the background of the fact that Member States used to have prohibitions on night work for women, based on an ILO (International Labour Organisation) Convention that predated E(E)C law. According to Art. 351 TFEU, the rights and obligations arising from such agreements shall not be affected by the provisions of the Treaties. However, to the extent that such agreements are not compatible with the Treaties, the Member States must take all appropriate steps to eliminate the incompatibilities.

The procedural context of the exercise question is the enforcement procedure under Art. 258 TFEU et seq., which concerns (possible) breaches of EU law by a Member State. There may be two rounds of the procedure, with a pre-litigation phase (dialogue between the Commission and the Member State in question) and a judicial phase (action before the Court of Justice) in each round. In the case under discussion, the Commission has won its case in the first round. Since the Member State did not comply with the Court’s judgment, the Commission has started the second round. In this round, the pre-litigation phase has not led to a solution, whereupon the Commission has brought another action to the Court. In this second action, the Commission is entitled to suggest a financial sanction, here a daily fine.

Alternatively, it is possible that the case concerns the special situation of Art. 260(3) TFEU: where the alleged breach consists of non-notification of national measures transposing a directive adopted under the ordinary legislative procedure, the Commission may suggest a financial sanction immediately. This is a new element introduced by the Lisbon Treaty.

[Relevant Charts: Chapter 12, in particular Charts 12/15-12/18]

[V.1.1]