Action brought on 12 July 2023 – European Commission v Kingdom of Spain
(Case C-433/23)
Language of the case: Spanish
Parties
Applicant: European Commission (represented by: C. Hermes and E. Sanfrutos Cano, acting as Agent)
Defendant: Kingdom of Spain
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court of Justice should:
(1) declare that
by failing to adopt the necessary measures in relation to the collection of urban waste water from the agglomerations of Acorán; Adeje-Arona; Añaza; Candelaria-Casco; Candelaria-Punta Larga; Golf del Sur; Guía de Isora Litoral; La Esperanza-La Laguna Sur-Santa Cruz-Valles (La Laguna, El Rosario, Santa Cruz); Puerto de Santiago-Playa la Arena; San Isidro-Litoral; Sueño Azul; and Valle de la Orotava in the Canary Islands, and in Medio-Andarax in Andalucía, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 3 of Directive 91/271/EEC; 1
by failing to adopt the necessary measures in relation to the treatment of urban waste water from the agglomerations of de Acantilado de los Gigantes; Adeje-Arona; Almansa; Almodóvar del Campo; Almodóvar del Río; Alto Nerbioi-Amurrio; Alto Nerbioi-Laudio; Candelaria-Casco; Candelaria-Punta Larga; Consuegra; Donostia-San Sebastián; Estepa; Genil-Cubillas; Golf del Sur; Guareña-Oliva de Mérida-Cristina; Guía de Isora Litoral; Jódar; La Esperanza-La Laguna Sur-Santa Cruz-Valles (La Laguna, El Rosario, Santa Cruz); Lora del Río; Los Yébenes; Martos; Medio-Andarax; Posadas; Puerto de Santiago-Playa la Arena; Quintanar de la Orden; Rambla (La)-Montalbán; San Isidro-Litoral; San Roque; Santoña; Sueño Azul; Torredonjimeno; Trebujena; Trujillo; Valle de la Orotava; Venta de Baños, and Villanueva del Río-Alcolea del Río, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 4(1) and (3) of Directive 91/271/EEC;
by failing to adopt the necessary measures in relation to the treatment of urban waste water from the agglomerations of Almodóvar del Campo; Argamasilla de Alba; Cáceres; Condado de Huelva II (Chucena-Escacena-Paterna-Manzanilla); Consuegra; Don Benito-Villanueva de la Serena; Guareña-Oliva de Mérida-Cristina; Guillena; Los Yébenes; Madridejos; Mérida; Montcada; Montijo-Puebla Calzada; Palma del Condado; Quintanar de la Orden; Rubí; Sonseca; Soria; Trujillo; Venta de Baños, and Villafranca de los Barros, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 5 and Annex I.B to Directive 91/271/EEC;
the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 15 of Directive 91/271/EEC, read in conjunction with Annex I.D to that directive, with regard to the agglomerations of Acantilado de los Gigantes, Adeje-Arona, Almansa, Almodóvar del Campo, Almodóvar del Río, Alto Nerbioi-Amurrio, Alto Nerbioi-Laudio, Argamasilla de Alba, Bargas-Cabañas-Mocejón-Olías-Magán-Villaseca, Cáceres, Candelaria-Casco, Candelaria-Punta Larga, Condado de Huelva II (Chucena-Escacena-Paterna-Manzanilla), Consuegra, Don Benito-Villanueva de la Serena, Donostia-San Sebastián, Estepa, Genil-Cubillas, Golf del Sur, Guareña-Oliva de Mérida-Cristina, Guía de Isora Litoral, Guillena, Jódar, La Esperanza-La Laguna Sur-Santa Cruz-Valles (La Laguna, El Rosario, Santa Cruz), Lora del Río, Los Yébenes, Madridejos, 77 Martos, Medio-Andarax, Mérida, Montijo-Puebla Calzada, Montcada, Palma del Condado, Posadas, Puerto de Santiago-Playa la Arena, Quintanar de la Orden, Rambla (La)-Montalbán, Rubí, San Isidro-Litoral, San Roque, Santoña, Sonseca, Soria, Sueño Azul, Torredonjimeno, Trebujena, Trujillo, Valle de la Orotava, Villanueva del Río-Alcolea del Río, Venta de Baños, and Villafranca de los Barros;
(2) order Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.
Pleas in law and main arguments
In support of its action, the Commission relies on four pleas in law alleging failure to fulfil obligations under Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning urban waste-water treatment, as amended by Council Directive 2013/64/EU 1 of 17 December 2013.
By its first plea in law, the Commission claims that, by failing to adopt the necessary measures in relation to the collection of urban waste water from the agglomerations of Acorán; Adeje-Arona; Añaza; Candelaria-Casco; Candelaria-Punta Larga; Golf del Sur; Guía de Isora Litoral; La Esperanza-La Laguna Sur-Santa Cruz-Valles (La Laguna, El Rosario, Santa Cruz); Puerto de Santiago-Playa la Arena; San Isidro-Litoral; Sueño Azul; and Valle de la Orotava in the Canary Islands, and in Medio-Andarax in Andalucía, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 3 of Directive 91/271/EEC.
As regards the 12 agglomerations in the Canary Islands, the Commission claims in essence that those agglomerations use individual systems without, however, satisfying the conditions under the third subparagraph of Article 3(1) of Directive 91/271/EEC, which makes that exception to the rule on collecting systems subject to two cumulative conditions being met. First, the authorities are required to justify, on a case-by-case basis, that the establishment of a collecting system is not justified either because it would produce no environmental benefit or because it would involve excessive cost. Second, individual systems or other appropriate systems are required to achieve the same level of environmental protection. As regards the agglomeration of Medio Andarax in Andalucía, the Commission claims that that agglomeration does not have a collecting system for all its waste water.
By its second plea in law, the Commission claims that by failing to adopt the necessary measures in relation to the treatment of urban waste water from the agglomerations of de Acantilado de los Gigantes; Adeje-Arona; Almansa; Almodóvar del Campo; Almodóvar del Río; Alto Nerbioi-Amurrio; Alto Nerbioi-Laudio; Candelaria-Casco; Candelaria-Punta Larga; Consuegra; Donostia-San Sebastián; Estepa; Genil-Cubillas; Golf del Sur; Guareña-Oliva de Mérida-Cristina; Guía de Isora Litoral; Jódar; La Esperanza-La Laguna Sur-Santa Cruz-Valles (La Laguna, El Rosario, Santa Cruz); Lora del Río; Los Yébenes; Martos; Medio-Andarax; Posadas; Puerto de Santiago-Playa la Arena; Quintanar de la Orden; Rambla (La)-Montalbán; San Isidro-Litoral; San Roque; Santoña; Sueño Azul; Torredonjimeno; Trebujena; Trujillo; Valle de la Orotava; Venta de Baños, and Villanueva del Río-Alcolea del Río, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 4(1) and (3) of Directive 91/271/EEC.
According to the provisions of Article 4(1) of Directive 91/271/EEC, Member States are to ensure that urban waste water entering collecting systems is before discharge to be subject to secondary treatment or an equivalent treatment. Article 4(3) requires that discharges from urban waste water treatment plants satisfy the relevant requirements of Annex I.B of Directive 91/271/EEC. The Commission takes the view that there has been failure to fulfil those obligations in the agglomerations referred to in the preceding paragraph, either because waste water is not collected in accordance with Article 3 of that directive and hence cannot be treated, or because not all the waste water collected is subject to the level of treatment required under Article 4 Directive 91/271/EEC, and discharges also do not satisfy the requirements laid down in Annex I.B to that directive, as required by Article 4(3).
By its third plea in law, the Commission requests that the Court declare that, by failing to adopt the necessary measures in relation to the treatment of urban waste water from the agglomerations of Almodóvar del Campo; Argamasilla de Alba; Cáceres; Condado de Huelva II (Chucena-Escacena-Paterna-Manzanilla); Consuegra; Don Benito-Villanueva de la Serena; Guareña-Oliva de Mérida-Cristina; Guillena; Los Yébenes; Madridejos; Mérida; Montcada; Montijo-Puebla Calzada; Palma del Condado; Quintanar de la Orden; Rubí; Sonseca; Soria; Trujillo; Venta de Baños, and Villafranca de los Barros, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 5 and Annex I.B to Directive 91/271/EEC.
The Commission claims, in essence, that those urban agglomerations of more than 10 000 population equivalents which discharge into sensitive areas do not ensure, in respect of all their waste water, more stringent treatment than that described in Article 4 of Directive 91/271/EEC, as required under Article 5(2) of that directive, or that the discharges in sensitive areas from plants treating waste water from those agglomerations satisfy the relevant requirements under Annex I.B to that directive.
By its fourth plea in law, the Commission claims that the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 15 of Directive 91/271/EEC, read in conjunction with Annex I.D to that directive, with regard to the agglomerations of Acantilado de los Gigantes, Adeje-Arona, Almansa, Almodóvar del Campo, Almodóvar del Río, Alto Nerbioi-Amurrio, Alto Nerbioi-Laudio, Argamasilla de Alba, Bargas-Cabañas-Mocejón-Olías-Magán-Villaseca, Cáceres, Candelaria-Casco, Candelaria-Punta Larga, Condado de Huelva II (Chucena-Escacena-Paterna-Manzanilla), Consuegra, Don Benito-Villanueva de la Serena, Donostia-San Sebastián, Estepa, Genil-Cubillas, Golf del Sur, Guareña-Oliva de Mérida-Cristina, Guía de Isora Litoral, Guillena, Jódar, La Esperanza-La Laguna Sur-Santa Cruz-Valles (La Laguna, El Rosario, Santa Cruz), Lora del Río, Los Yébenes, Madridejos, 77 Martos, Medio-Andarax, Mérida, Montijo-Puebla Calzada, Montcada, Palma del Condado, Posadas, Puerto de Santiago-Playa la Arena, Quintanar de la Orden, Rambla (La)-Montalbán, Rubí, San Isidro-Litoral, San Roque, Santoña, Sonseca, Soria, Sueño Azul, Torredonjimeno, Trebujena, Trujillo, Valle de la Orotava, Villanueva del Río-Alcolea del Río, Venta de Baños, and Villafranca de los Barros. Valle de la Orotava, Villanueva del Río-Alcolea del Río, Venta de Baños and Villafranca de los Barros.
____________
1 Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning urban waste-water treatment (OJ 1991 L 135, p. 40).
1 Council Directive 2013/64/EU of 17 December 2013 amending Council Directives 91/271/EEC and 1999/74/EC, and Directives 2000/60/EC, 2006/7/EC, 2006/25/EC and 2011/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council, following the amendment of the status of Mayotte with regard to the European Union (OJ 2013 L 353, p. 8).