Navigation path

Left navigation

Additional tools

European Commission - Fact Sheet

November infringements package: key decisions

Brussels, 19 November 2015

Overview by policy area

Chart

In its monthly package of infringement decisions, the European Commission is pursuing legal action against Member States for failing to comply with their obligations under EU law. These decisions, covering many sectors and EU policy areas (see Annex 1), aim to ensure proper application of EU law for the benefit of citizens and businesses.

The key decisions taken by the Commission (including two letters of formal notice, 14 reasoned opinions, and 11 referrals to the Court of Justice of the European Union) are presented below and grouped by policy area. The Commission is also closing 54 cases where the issues with the Member States concerned have been solved without the Commission needing to pursue the procedure further.

For more information on the EU infringement procedure, see the full MEMO/12/12. For more detail on all decisions taken, consult the infringement decisions' register.

1. Energy

(For more information: Anna-Kaisa Itkonen - tel.: +32 229 56186, Nicole Bockstaller – tel.: +32 229 52589)

A referral to the Court of Justice of the European Union

Commission refers GREECE to the Court of Justice of the EU for failing to comply with obligations under the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive

The European Commission has decided to refer GREECE to the Court of Justice of the EU for not having calculated the cost-optimal levels of minimum energy performance requirements for buildings. According to the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (Directive 2010/31/EU), Member States have to set minimum energy performance requirements for buildings, with a view to achieving the best combination between investments and savings, also known as 'cost-optimal levels'. Calculating the cost-optimal levels is key for Member States to fully exploit the energy efficiency and renewable energy potential of the national buildings stock and to avoid citizens spending more money than necessary on efficiency improvements to their housing and offices. The lack of such calculations would also affect the ability of individual owners and tenants to take the right decisions for new constructions or renovations. Following a number of informal exchanges, Greece was officially reminded of its obligation to perform the necessary calculations and to submit a report to the Commission on 11 July 2014. Having not done this, Greece received a reasoned opinion on 27 November 2014. To date, Greece is the only Member State that did not perform the cost-optimal calculations and did not send a report to the Commission. Therefore, the Commission has decided to refer Greece to the Court of Justice of the EU.For more information, please refer to the full press release.

Reasoned opinions

Commission requests FRANCE and the NETHERLANDS to fully transpose the EU Energy Efficiency Directive

The European Commission has requested France andthe Netherlands to ensure the full transposition of the Energy Efficiency Directive (Directive 2012/27/EU). Under this Directive, Member States must achieve energy savings from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2020. They have to do this by using Energy Efficiency Obligations Schemes and/or other targeted policy measures to drive energy efficiency improvements in households, buildings, industry buildings and transport. The Directive had to be transposed into national law by 5 June 2014. Today, the Commission sent reasoned opinions to France and to the Netherlands as the Commission identified gaps in the national legislation which transposes the Directive. The Commission continues to monitor the transposition and implementation of the Directive and will address any shortcomings in the future. The two Member States have now two months to comply with their obligations, after which the Commission may decide to refer these Member States to the Court of Justice of the EU and ask for financial penalties. For an overview of the currently pending procedures aiming at ensuring complete transposition of the EU Energy Efficiency Directive by Member States, see Annex II. More information about the Energy Efficiency Directive is available on the website of DG Energy.

Commission requests FRANCE to fully transpose the Radioactive Waste Directive

The European Commission has requested France to ensure full transposition of the Radioactive Waste Directive (Council Directive 2011/70/Euratom). This Directive establishes a Community framework for ensuring responsible and safe management of spent fuel and radioactive waste to avoid imposing undue burdens on future generations. It ensures that Member States provide for appropriate national arrangements for a high level of safety in spent fuel and radioactive waste management to protect workers and the general public against the dangers arising from ionising radiation. Moreover, it requires the provision of necessary public information and participation in relation to spent fuel and radioactive waste management while having due regard to security and proprietary information issues. Member States were required to transpose the Directive by 23 August 2013. Today, the European Commission sent a reasoned opinion to France requesting it to ensure full transposition of the Directive. France has two months to comply with this obligation, after which the Commission may decide to refer them to the Court of Justice of the EU.

2. Environment

(For more information: Enrico Brivio – tel.: +32 229 56172, Iris Petsa – tel.: +32 229 93321)

Referrals to the Court of Justice of the European Union

Commission proposes fines and refers GREECE back to the Court of Justice of the EU over persistent poor waste water treatment

The Court of Justice of the EU ruled in 2004 that Greece was violating EU law by not adequately collecting and treating waste water discharged into the Gulf of Elefsina (Judgement No C-119/02 of 24 June 2004). Eleven years later, Greece has not managed to adequately address this problem. The lack of adequate treatment systems in the area of Thriasio Pedio poses risks to human health, to inland waters and the marine environment. The Commission is asking the Court of Justice of the EU to impose a lump sum from the date of the first judgment until the Member State has rectified the infringement or in the absence of compliance until the date of the second judgment, based on a daily amount multiplied by the number of days the infringement persists, leading, up to now, to a sum of EUR 15 943 620. The Commission is also proposing a daily fine of EUR 34 974, which would be paid from the date of the Court ruling until Greece fully complies with EU law. These penalties, proposed by the Commission under the Lisbon Treaty, take into account the seriousness of the infringement, its duration, and the deterrent effect reflecting the ability to pay of the Member State. The final decision on the penalties rests with the Court. Despite some progress, only 28 % of the urban waste water is collected and treated before being discharged into the Gulf of Elefsina. The collection rate has almost not improved since July 2012 when the waste water treatment facility started operating. In view of this continued infringement, and in the absence of any indication as to when this will come to an end, the Commission has decided to refer the case back to the Court of Justice of the EU. For more information, please refer to the full press release.

Commission proposes a fine and refers ROMANIA to the Court of Justice of the EU over failure to transpose EU rules on sulphur

17 months after the deadline for transposition, Romania has not transposed EU rules on the sulphur content of marine fuels into its national legislation. The Commission is asking the Court of Justice of the EU to impose a fine. The Commission is proposing a daily fine of EUR 38,042.6, which would be paid from the date of the Court ruling until Romania fully transposes the obligations of the Directives into national law. This penalty, proposed by the Commission under the Lisbon Treaty, takes into account the seriousness of the infringement, its duration and the deterrent effect reflecting the ability to pay of the Member State. The final decision on the penalty rests with the Court which however cannot exceed the amount specified by the Commission. The sulphur legislation aims to reduce the effects of air pollution from sulphur dioxide and particulate matter. Sulphur dioxide is a pollutant mainly emitted by ships. As well as harming human health, the gas damages the environment and contributes to acid rain. Without the Sulphur Directive (Directive 2012/33/EU), emissions from shipping would soon surpass combined emissions from all land-based sources. Air pollution from docked ships is a major concern for many cities with ports in their efforts to meet the Union's air quality limit values. For more information, please refer to the full press release.

 A Reasoned opinion

Commission asks POLAND to comply with EU water legislation

The European Commission is asking Poland to ensure that its water legislation is in line with Europe-wide standards. Poland's failure to correctly apply the Water Framework Directive (Directive 2000/60/EC) and ensure that its elements are correctly transposed into national law compromises the country's ability to achieve the objectives of the legislation, with potentially negative effects for Polish citizens. The Directive, Europe's central piece of legislation for this shared resource, obliges Member States to protect and restore all bodies of ground water and surface water to achieve good status by 2015 at the latest. A letter of formal notice was sent to Poland in November 2014. Although some issues of non-compliance have been addressed, a number of issues remain. These include the designation of heavily modified water bodies, classification system for artificial and heavily modified water bodies, maintenance works carried out on a large scale on rivers, and exemptions at water body level to the environmental objectives of achieving good status by 2015. If Poland does not correct these issues, the achievement of the objectives of the Directive will be undermined. The Commission is, therefore, sending a reasoned opinion. If Poland fails to act within two months, the Commission may take the matter to the Court of Justice of the EU.

3. Financial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Markets Union

(For more information: Vanessa Mock – tel.: +32 229 56194)

A referral to the Court of Justice of the European Union

Commission refers LUXEMBOURG to the Court of Justice of the EU over its failure to transpose EU legislation on reducing over-reliance on credit ratings

Credit ratings are opinions issued by credit rating agencies (CRAs) on the creditworthiness of a company, a financial instrument or a country. Such opinions have a direct impact on the actions of investors, borrowers, issuers and governments. For example, a corporate downgrade can have consequences on the capital a bank must hold while a downgrade of sovereign debt can make a country's borrowing more expensive. EU rules on reducing over-reliance on credit ratings (Directive 2013/14/EU) should have been transposed into national law by 21 December 2014. As Luxembourg failed to transpose the Directive, the Commission sent a letter of formal notice on 29 January 2015 followed by a reasoned opinion on 19 June 2015. With no response as of yet, the Commission has now decided to refer the country to the Court of Justice of the EU. On the basis of the procedure set out in Article 260(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), the Commission is asking the Court to impose a penalty on Luxembourg to the amount of € 6 700 per day until the law is fully transposed into national legislation. The penalties, which will be ultimately decided by the Court not exceeding the amount specified by the Commission, will take into account the seriousness and duration of the infringement and the deterrent effect reflected in the ability to pay of the Member State. In the present case, they consist of daily penalty payments proposed to be paid from the date of the judgment – assuming the Member State has still not completely transposed the obligations of the Directive until full transposition has been achieved. For more information, please refer to the full press release.

Reasoned opinions

Financial Services: Commission requests five Member States to implement EU rules in the area of insurance

The European Commission has requested Bulgaria, Greece, Luxembourg, Sloveniaand Sweden to transpose the Solvency II Directive (Directive 2009/138/EC) and the Omnibus II Directive (Directive 2014/51/EU) into their national legislation. These Directives replace the 14 insurance and reinsurance directives that were previously known as "Solvency I" (see MEMO/15/3120 of 12 January 2015). They introduce for the first time a harmonised, sound and robust prudential framework for insurance firms in the EU, including quantitative, governance and reporting rules, to facilitate the development of a single market in insurance services. These new insurance rules aim to ensure the financial soundness of insurance companies so that they can cover risks in difficult periods. They will become fully applicable on 1 January 2016. The deadline for the implementation of the Directives in national law was 31 March 2015. However, the above five countries have failed to notify the Commission of measures to implement these rules into their national law. The Commission's request takes the form of a reasoned opinion and comes after a letter of formal notice which was sent to the Member States in May 2015. If they do not comply within two months, the Commission may decide to refer these Member States to the Court of Justice of the EU.

4. Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs

(For more information: Lucia Caudet – tel.: +32 229 56182, Heli Pietila – tel.: +32 229 64950)

A letter of formal notice

Commission opens infringement against HUNGARY for lack of compliance of the Paks nuclear power plant project with EU public procurement rules

The European Commission decided today to launch an infringement procedure against Hungary concerning the implementation of the Paks II nuclear power plant project. Following exchanges of information with the Hungarian authorities and a thorough assessment of the terms of the award, the Commission still has concerns regarding the compatibility of the project with EU public procurement rules. The Hungarian government has directly awarded the construction of two new reactors and the refurbishment of two additional reactors of the Paks II nuclear power plant without a transparent procedure. The Commission considers that the direct award of the Paks II nuclear power plant project does not comply with EU legislation on public procurement (Directives 2004/17/EC and 2004/18/EC). The Directives consolidate the basic principles of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union of transparency, non-discrimination, and equal treatment. These principles seek to ensure that all economic operators have fair chances to participate in a call for tender and to win a contract. The European Commission has decided to send a letter of formal notice to Hungary, which constitutes an official request for information and is the first step in an infringement procedure. The Hungarian authorities now have two months to respond to the arguments put forward by the Commission.

A reasoned opinion

Free movement of goods: Commission asks SLOVAKIA to withdraw requirements applicable for retailers with a large turnover to publish and report information on the origin of food products

The European Commission has formally asked Slovakia to take action to ensure its food law respects free movement of goods in the Single Market. The Slovak food law obliges retailers with a large turnover to make public at the entrance of each store legibly and visibly the percentage of their turnover from sale of food products produced in Slovakia in relation to the turnover of all food sales. Retailers are also obliged to publish this information on their website and regularly report it to the national Ministry of Agriculture. The Commission considers that these requirements have the effect equivalent to quantitative restrictions on free movement of goods (Article 34 of TFEU), since they lead to consumers' prejudice against products produced outside of Slovakia and encourage retailers to sell domestic products. The Commission's request that Slovakia amends its law takes the form of a reasoned opinion. Slovakia has now two months to notify the Commission of measures taken to remedy the situation. Otherwise, the Commission may decide to refer Slovakia to the Court of Justice of the EU.

5. Migration and Home Affairs

(For more information: Tove Ernst – tel.: +32 229 86764, Tim McPhie - tel.: +32 229 58602)

A referral to the Court of Justice of the European Union

Commission refers BELGIUM to the Court of Justice of the EU regarding the Single Permit Directive

The 'Single Permit Directive' (Directive 2011/98/EU) introduces a single application procedure for the issuing of single permits for non-EU nationals to reside and work in the territory of an EU Member State, and a common set of rights for non-EU workers legally residing in a Member State. The European Commission is referring Belgium to the Court of Justice of the EU for failing to transpose the Directive. The Single Permit Directive enables non EU workers to obtain work and residence permits via a single procedure, rather than requiring separate applications for residence and work permits. It also aims at providing a clear set of rules for third country nationals working legally within the EU so that they can benefit from common rights, similar to those of EU nationals, regarding working conditions, pensions, social security and access to public services. The Directive complements other measures on legal migration such as the EU Blue Card[1], the Intra-Corporate Transferees[2] and Seasonal Workers' Directives[3], and is designed to facilitate legal migration where it meets the needs of the EU labour market. It does not harmonise admission conditions for labour immigrants, which will remain in the hands of the Member States. Member States were required to transpose this Directive in full by 25 December 2013. By that date, Belgium had notified the Commission that it had only partially transposed Directive 2011/98/EU. As a result, the Commission sent a letter of formal notice for non-communication to Belgium in March 2014 and, subsequently a reasoned opinion in April 2015. To date, Belgium has not notified the Commission of the full transposition of the Directive into its national law. In referring Belgium to the Court of Justice of the EU, the Commission proposes a daily penalty of € 52,828.16.The amount of the penalty has been calculated taking into account the seriousness, the duration of the infringement and the deterrent effect reflected in the ability to pay of the Member State. For more information, please refer to the full press release.

A letter of formal notice

Commission urges CYPRUS to implement the Recast Eurodac Regulation    

The "Eurodac" database was already established in 2003 and is an EU asylum fingerprint database. When someone applies for asylum or is apprehended having crossed an external border irregularly having come from a third country, no matter where they are in the EU, their fingerprints are transmitted to the Eurodac central system. The recast "Eurodac" (Regulation (EU) No 603/2013) entered into force on 20 July 2015 and introduced updates to the system, in particular, to ensure data is transmitted within 72 hours to the Central System, to address data protection concerns and to help combat terrorism and serious crime. Despite the letters of concern addressed by the European Commission to Cyprus, Cyprus continues not to fulfil its obligations to fully implement the Recast Eurodac Regulation. The European Commission has decided to address a letter of formal notice to Cyprus. If no reply to the letter of formal notice is received, or if the observations presented by the Member State in reply to that notice cannot be considered satisfactory, the Commission may decide to move to the next stage of the infringement procedure, and send a 'reasoned opinion' to Cyprus. If necessary, the Commission may then refer the case to the Court of Justice of the EU.

6. Mobility and Transport

(For more information: Jakub Adamowicz – tel.: +32 229 50595, Alexis Perier - tel.: +32 229 69143)

Referrals to the Court of Justice of the European Union

Transport: Commission refers POLAND to the Court of Justice of the EU over the interconnection of electronic transport registers

The European Commission has decided to refer Poland to the Court of Justice of the European Union for not having established a national electronic register of road transport undertakings and for not having connected it with the national electronic registers of the other EU Member States as required by Article 16(1) and (5) of Regulation (EC) No 1071/2009. National registers should have been established and connected with each other on 31 December 2012 at the latest. Since Poland has not yet complied with these obligations, which results in an inefficient functioning of the interconnection of the registers at the Union level, the Commission has decided to refer Poland to the Court of Justice of the EU. For more information, please refer to the full press release.

Transport: Commission refers the CZECH REPUBLIC to the Court of Justice of the EU for failing to prevent "driving licence tourism"; ESTONIA, ITALY, PORTUGAL and SLOVENIA for not connecting to driving licences network

The European Commission has decided to refer the Czech Republic, Estonia, Italy, Portugal and Slovenia to the Court of Justice of the European Union for failing to correctly transpose the European rules on driving licences (Directive 2006/126/EC).

In particular, the Czech Republic failed to ensure in the period 2004-2011 that driving licences are only issued to persons residing in the Czech Republic. This is crucial to combat so-called "driving licence tourism". Driving licences issued in the past in contradiction with the Directive 2006/126/EC which are still valid pose a risk to the credibility of the EU driving licence system and to road safety. The Czech Republic has also failed to fulfil several other obligations such as ensuring that the categories of certain vehicles correspond to those of the Directive. In addition, the European Commission has decided to refer Estonia, Italy, Portugal, the Czech Republic and Slovenia to the Court of Justice of the EU for failing to connect to the EU driving licences network ("RESPER") as required by Directive 2006/126/EC. RESPER can help Member States cooperate with each other and ensure that licences are issued in accordance with EU rules. The exchange of information through RESPER should have started on 19 January 2013. The European Commission opened infringement proceedings in July 2014, and sent a reasoned opinion to the Member States concerned in February 2015. As it stands today, the Member States have still failed to fulfil their obligations under Directive 2006/126/EC, and therefore the Commission has decided to refer the cases to the Court of Justice of the EU. For more information, please refer to the full press release.

A reasoned opinion

Road transport: Commission asks POLAND to implement EU legislation on electronic tolling

The European Commission has asked Poland to bring its national rules in line with the Commission Decision on the definition of the European Electronic Toll Service (EETS; 2009/750/EC). EETS will allow users to drive through the electronic toll systems set up throughout Europe using a single on-board unit and signing a single contract with the EETS provider, thus considerably facilitating cross-border trade and reducing costs. By 8 October 2012, the European Electronic Toll Service should have been offered to the users of lorries in the Member States which have put in place national systems of electronic toll collection. Poland failed to put in place the necessary measures for the effective establishment of EETS providers. Poland has two months to inform the Commission of measures taken to ensure full compliance with EU law; otherwise, the Commission may decide to refer Poland to the Court of Justice of the EU.

7. Taxation and Customs Union

(For more information: Vanessa Mock – tel.: +32 229 56194, Patrick Mc Cullough – tel.: +32 229 87183)

Reasoned opinions

Taxation: Commission asks GERMANY to bring its inheritance tax rules on special maintenance allowances in line with EU law

The European Commission asked Germany today to bring its inheritance tax rules on special maintenance allowances in line with EU law. German legislation allows German tax authorities to grant a special maintenance allowance to surviving spouses or registered partners of a deceased individual only if either one or both of them are tax residents in Germany. The allowance is not available to surviving spouses or registered partners when they inherit an estate or an investment that is located in Germany but the deceased and the heir are tax resident in another Member State. The Commission considers this to be an unjustified restriction on the free movement of capital (Article 63 (1) of TFEU) as the value of the inheritance is reduced in cases where these tax residence criteria are not fulfilled. Moreover, it may deter other EU nationals from investing their capital in German properties and investments. The Commission's request takes the form of a reasoned opinion. In the absence of a satisfactory response within two months, the Commission may refer Germany to the Court of Justice of the EU.

Taxation: Commission asks SPAIN to end discriminatory tax treatment of foreign non-profit entities and of their contributors

The European Commission asked Spain today to amend its rules on the taxation of certain income obtained by foreign non-profit entities and of certain contributions to such entities. Currently, Spanish non-profit entities can benefit from certain tax exemptions. Taxpayers, who contribute financially to those entities, also have access to several tax incentives in respect of their contributions. However, the same rules do not apply to foreign non-profit entities that derive comparable income from Spain, but which are established in another EU/European Economic Area state without a branch in Spain. These entities cannot benefit from such tax exemptions and their financial contributors from Spain are also denied access to similar tax incentives. The Commission considers this to be discriminatory and a restriction of the free movement of capital as interpreted by the Court of Justice (cases "Centro di Musicologia Walter Stauffer" C-386/04 and Persche - C-318/07). A Spanish individual making a financial gift to a comparable foundation established in another Member State should be allowed to deduct the same amount from his tax base as if the same gift had been made to a Spanish foundation. A foreign foundation deriving income, e.g. rent, from Spain should be exempt from taxation on that income, in the same way that a Spanish foundation would be. The Commission has, therefore, asked Spain to amend its rules to bring them into line with EU law. The request takes the form of a reasoned opinion. In the absence of a satisfactory response within two months, the Commission may refer Spain to the Court of Justice of the EU.

Taxation: Commission asks the NETHERLANDS to amend the Limitation on Benefits clause in the Dutch-Japanese Tax Treaty for the Avoidance of Double Taxation

The European Commission asked the Netherlands today to amend the Limitation on Benefits (LOB) clause in the Dutch-Japanese Tax Treaty for the Avoidance of Double Taxation, which entered into force on 1 January 2012. The Commission believes that, on the basis of previous cases such as C-55/00 Gottardo and C-466/98 Open Skies, a Member State concluding a treaty with a third country cannot agree better treatment for companies held by shareholders resident in its own territory, than for comparable companies held by shareholders who are resident elsewhere in the EU/EEA. Similarly, it cannot agree better conditions for companies traded on its own stock exchange than for companies traded on stock exchanges elsewhere in the EU/EEA. However, under the current terms of the LOB clause, some entities are excluded from the benefits of the tax treaty. This means that they suffer higher withholding taxes on dividends, interest and royalties received from Japan than similar companies with Dutch shareholders or whose shares are listed and traded on “recognised stock exchanges”, which include certain EU and even third-country stock exchanges. The Commission's request takes the form of a reasoned opinion. In the absence of a satisfactory response within two months, the Commission may refer the Netherlands to the Court of Justice of EU.

 

Annex I

Overview by Member State

Member State/
EU policy

Energy

Environment

Financial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Markets Union

Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs

Migration and Home Affairs

Mobility and Transport

Taxation and Customs Union

Total

BE





1



1

BG



1





1

CY





1



1

CZ






1


1

DE







1

1

EE






1


1

EL

1

1

1





3

ES







1

1

FR

2







2

HU




1




1

IT






1


1

LU



2





2

NL

1






1

2

PL


1




2


3

PT






1


1

RO


1






1

SE



1





1

SI



1



1


2

SK




1




1

Total

4

3

6

2

2

7

3

27

 

Annex II

The Commission's procedures for lack of complete transposition of the EU Energy Efficiency Directive among the Member States (decision dates of the European Commission)

Member State (code)

Formal notice (Article 258 of TFEU)

Additional formal notice (Article 258 of TFEU)

Reasoned opinion (Article 258 of TFEU)

Additional reasoned opinion (Article 258 of TFEU)

Referral to the Court (Articles 258 and 260(3) of TFEU - Decision)

AT

22/07/2014

-

29/04/2015

-

-

BE

22/07/2014

-

22/10/2015

-

-

BG

22/07/2014

-

26/11/2014

22/10/2015

-

CY

22/07/2014

-

22/10/2015

-

-

CZ

22/07/2014

-

22/10/2015

-

-

DE

22/07/2014

-

18/06/2015

-

-

DK

22/07/2014

29/04/2015

-

-

-

EE

22/07/2014

-

24/09/2015

-

-

EL

22/07/2014

-

26/02/2015

-

18/06/2015, IP/15/5196 [C-540/15]

ES

23/07/2014

-

22/10/2015

-

-

FI

22/07/2014

-

22/10/2015

-

-

FR

22/07/2014

-

-

-

-

FR

22/07/2014

-

19/11/2015

-

-

HR

22/07/2014

-

29/04/2015

-

-

HU

22/07/2014

-

 

22/10/2015

26/03/2015, IP/15/4668

IE

22/07/2014

-

29/04/2015

-

-

IT

26/02/2015

-

-

-

-

LT

22/07/2014

-

22/10/2015

-

-

LU

22/07/2014

-

22/10/2015

-

-

LV

22/07/2014

-

29/04/2015

-

-

NL

22/07/2014

-

19/11/2015

-

-

PL

22/07/2014

-

22/10/2015

-

-

PT

22/07/2014

-

26/02/2015

22/10/2015

-

RO

22/07/2014

-

29/04/2015

-

-

SE

26/02/2015

-

-

-

-

SI

22/07/2014

-

26/02/2015; 24/09/2015

-

-

[1] Directive 2009/50/EC

[2] Directive 2014/66/EU

[3] Directive 2014/36/EU

MEMO/15/6006

Press contacts:

General public inquiries: Europe Direct by phone 00 800 67 89 10 11 or by email


Side Bar