«(Free movement of goods – Alarm systems and networks – Interpretation of Articles 28 EC and 30 EC – Interpretation of Directives 73/23/EEC, 89/336/EEC and 1999/5/EEC – Compatibility of national legislation making marketing subject to a prior approval procedure)»

1.. Approximation of laws – Electrical equipment designed for use within certain voltage limits Directive 73/23 – Electromagnetic compatibility – Directive 89/336 – Radio equipment and telecommunications terminal equipment and the mutual recognition of their conformity – Directive 1999/5 – Complete harmonisation – National provisions making the placing on the market of alarm systems and networks, despite their conformity with the directive, subject to a prior approval procedure – Not permissible (Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council 1999/5, Arts 6 and 8; Council Directives 73/23, Art. 3, and 89/336, Art. 5)

2.. Free movement of goods – Quantitative restrictions – Measures having equivalent effect – National legislation imposing additional controls on goods lawfully manufactured and marketed in another Member State – Justification – Conditions and limits (Arts 28 EC and 30 EC)

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Sixth Chamber) 8 May 2003 (1)

((Free movement of goods – Alarm systems and networks – Interpretation of Articles 28 EC and 30 EC – Interpretation of Directives 73/23/EEC, 89/336/EEC and 1999/5/EEC – Compatibility of national legislation making marketing subject to a prior approval procedure))

In Case C-14/02,

REFERENCE to the Court under Article 234 EC by the Conseil d'État (Belgium) for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between

and

on the interpretation of Articles 28 and 30 EC, of Council Directive 73/23/EEC of 19 February 1973 on the harmonisation of the laws of Member States relating to electrical equipment designed for use within certain voltage limits (OJ 1973 L 77, p. 29), as amended by Council Directive 93/68/EEC of 22 July 1993 amending Directives 87/404/EEC (simple pressure vessels), 88/378/EEC (safety of toys), 89/106/EEC (construction products), 89/336/EEC (electromagnetic compatibility), 89/392/EEC (machinery), 89/686/EEC (personal protective equipment), 90/384/EEC (non-automatic weighing instruments), 90/385/EEC (active implantable medicinal devices), 90/396/EEC (appliances burning gaseous fuels), 91/263/EEC (telecommunications terminal equipment), 92/42/EEC (new hot-water boilers fired with liquid or gaseous fuels) and 73/23/EEC (electrical equipment designed for use within certain voltage limits) (OJ 1993 L 220, p. 1), of Council Directive 89/336/EEC of 3 May 1989 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to electromagnetic compatibility (OJ 1989 L 139, p. 19), as amended by Directive 93/68, and of Directive 1999/5/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 1999 on radio equipment and telecommunications terminal equipment and the mutual recognition of their conformity (OJ 1999 L 91, p. 10),

THE COURT (Sixth Chamber),,

composed of: J.-P. Puissochet, President of the Chamber, R. Schintgen, V. Skouris, F. Macken and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues (Rapporteur), Judges,

Advocate General: L.A. Geelhoed,

after considering the written observations submitted on behalf of:

having regard to the Report for the Hearing,

after hearing the oral observations of ATRAL SA, represented by E. de Cannart d'Hamale and B. Raevens, the Belgian State, represented by L. Defalque, of the French Government, represented by R. Loosli-Surrans, acting as Agent, and the Commission, represented by X. Lewis, acting as Agent, assisted by B. van de Walle de Ghelcke, at the hearing on 3 October 2002,

after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 12 December 2002,

gives the following

Community legislation

.

The national legislation

The applicant shall affix to the equipment, at his own cost, a label of conformity corresponding to the prototype to be marketed or made available to users....The departments responsible for monitoring the application of the abovementioned 1990 Law and of its implementing decrees may require compliance of the equipment marketed or made available to users to be checked by one of the bodies mentioned in Article 4(1) of this decree. Such a body shall forward an examination report to the equipment committee which, on the basis of such a report, shall declare whether the equipment is in compliance.The cost of examination shall be borne by the person who commissions approval tests which may lead to approval.

...

To that end, the equipment shall undergo the tests listed in Annexes 3 and 4 to this decree. Those tests may be applied to the various types of components.Equipment which uses radio transmission is, moreover, subject to the tests listed in Annex 6.

On those grounds,

THE COURT (Sixth Chamber),

in answer to the questions referred to it by the Conseil d'État by judgment of 8 January 2002, hereby rules:

Puissochet

Schintgen

Skouris

Macken

Cunha Rodrigues

Delivered in open court in Luxembourg on 8 May 2003.

R. Grass

J.-P. Puissochet

Registrar

President of the Sixth Chamber