Original language
Danish
Country
Denmark
Date of text
Status
Unknown
Type of court
International court
Sources
Court name
European Court of Justice
Seat of court
Luxembourg
Reference number
C-209/98
Link to full text
Justice(s)
Rodríguez Iglesias, G.C.
Moitinho de Almeida, J.C.
Edward, D.A.O.
Sevón, L.
Kapteyn, P.J.G.
Gulmann, C.
Jann, P.
Ragnemalm, H.
Wathelet,, M.
Léger, P.
Abstract
The case dealt with national rules allowing a commune, in the interest of capacity utilisation and the profitability of a limited number of undertakings, to exclude an undertaking, which is in other respects qualified, from taking part in the recycling of certain types of non-hazardous waste. Among other things, the ECJ explained that Article 34 (now: 29) stands in the way of measures that hinder the export of non-hazardous waste; neither Article 36 (now: 30) nor the rectification at source principle from Article 130R (now: 174) para 2 can alter this if the life or health of humans, animals or plants is not endangered. Article 90 (now 86) jo. 86 (now 82) does not preclude a municipal measure that aims at solving an environmental problem and limits the number of waste treatment companies in order to ensure that they receive enough waste.