Lexploria - Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Lexploria beta Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Menu
Browsing history:

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 29 April 2004. Plato Plastik Robert Frank GmbH v Caropack Handelsgesellschaft mbH.

C-341/01 • 62001CJ0341 • ECLI:EU:C:2004:254

  • Inbound citations: 13
  • Cited paragraphs: 0
  • Outbound citations: 3

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 29 April 2004. Plato Plastik Robert Frank GmbH v Caropack Handelsgesellschaft mbH.

C-341/01 • 62001CJ0341 • ECLI:EU:C:2004:254

Cited paragraphs only

Case C-341/01

Plato Plastik Robert Frank GmbH

v

Caropack Handelsgesellschaft mbH

(Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Landesgericht Korneuburg (Austria))

(Directive 94/62/EC – Packaging and packaging waste – Plastic carrier bags – National legislation on the collection and recovery of used packaging and packaging waste – Collection and recovery of used packaging and packaging waste – Obligation to use an authorised undertaking or to organise a collection system – Admissibility)

Summary of the Judgment

1. Environment – Packaging and packaging waste – Directive 94/62 – Packaging – Definition – Plastic carrier bags – Included

(European Parliament and Council Directive 94/62, Art. 3(1))

2. Environment – Packaging and packaging waste – Directive 94/62 – Producer – Definition

(European Parliament and Council Directive 94/62, Art. 3(1)

1. Article 3(1) of Directive 94/62 on packaging and packaging waste must be interpreted as meaning that the plastic carrier bags handed to customers in shops, whether free of charge or not, constitute packaging within the meaning of the directive since those plastic bags are intended to contain the goods purchased by customers and are designed to facilitate the transport of sales units in order to prevent physical handling and transport damage, they meet the two conditions laid down in Article 3(1) of the directive. Their exclusion from the definition of packaging would, first, run counter to a broad interpretation of that term and, second, would be likely to impede the attainment of the aims of the directive, which seeks to prevent and reduce the impact of packaging and packaging waste on the environment of Member States and non-member countries and thus to provide a high level of environmental protection.

(see paras 52-53, 55-57, 59, operative part 1)

2. In the context of the first subparagraph of Article 3(1) of Directive 94/62 on packaging and packaging waste ‘producer’ refers to the producer of the goods, not the manufacturer of the packaging products.

(see para. 74, operative part 2)

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Fifth Chamber) 29 April 2004 (1)

(Directive 94/62/EC – Packaging and waste packaging – Plastic carrier bags – National legislation on the collection and recovery of used packaging and packaging waste – Collection and recovery of used packaging and packaging waste – Obligation to use an authorised undertaking or to organise a collection system – Admissibility)

In Case C-341/01,

REFERENCE to the Court under Article 234 EC by the Landesgericht Korneuburg (Austria) for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between

and

on the interpretation of Article 3(1) of European Parliament and Council Directive 94/62/EC of 20 December 1994 on packaging and packaging waste (OJ 1994 L 365, p. 10) and of other Community provisions,

THE COURT (Fifth Chamber),,

composed of: C.W.A. Timmermans, acting as President of the Fifth Chamber, A. Rosas (Rapporteur) and S. von Bahr, Judges,

Advocate General: P. Léger,

after considering the written observations submitted on behalf of:

after hearing the oral observations of de Plato Plastik Robert Frank GmbH, represented by M. Deuretsbacher and P. Angst, retired judge, of Caropack Handelsgesellschaft mbH, represented by K. Berger, of the Austrian Government, represented by T. Kramler, acting as Agent, and of the Commission, represented by G. zur Hausen, at the hearing on 22 May 2003,

after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the hearing of 11 September 2003,

gives the following

‘… all products made of any materials of any nature to be used for the containment, protection, handling, delivery and presentation of goods, from raw materials to processed goods, from the producer to the user or the consumer. ‘Non-returnable’ items used for the same purposes shall also be considered to constitute packaging.’

(a)

(b)

(c)

‘Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that systems are set up to provide for:

(a)

(b)

in order to meet the objectives laid down in this directive.

…’

‘1.

2.

3.

4.

5.…’

‘A system for the collection and recovery of transportation or sales packaging shall ensure the collection and recovery of packaging materials for which contracts are concluded with undertakings referred to in Paragraphs 3, 4 and 13(3). The collection and recovery systems shall be required to conclude contracts, in the context of their sphere of operation as laid down in their licence, with each undertaking referred to in Paragraph 3, in so far as this is desired by the undertaking and is objectively justified.’

‘(1)(a)

On those grounds,

THE COURT (Fifth Chamber),

in answer to the questions referred to it by the Landesgericht Korneuburg by order of 4 September 2001, hereby rules:

Timmermans

Rosas

von Bahr

Delivered in open court in Luxembourg on 29 April 2004.

R. Grass

V. Skouris

Registrar

President

© European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2024
Active Products: EUCJ + ECHR Data Package + Citation Analytics • Documents in DB: 393980 • Paragraphs parsed: 42814632 • Citations processed 3216094