The Court of Justice of the European Communities has sat to hear the first two sets of infringement proceedings relating to the 1989 Framework Directive. One is against Italy, the other concerns Germany.

In the first case (C-49/00), the European Commission contends that Italy has failed to transpose the Framework Directive properly on three counts:

1. In Decree-Law No 626/1994, the risk assessment refers to a series of specified risks. The Decree fails to make it clear that this list is for guidance only and that the employer must evaluate all the risks.
2. The enlisting of external preventive services is not expressly made compulsory for firms that do not have all the requisite expertise.
3. Italy failed to define the capabilities and aptitudes of the workers designated to form the internal preventive service and failed to defined the external expertise. The Italian legislation leaves employers too much discretion.

The Opinion delivered by Advocate General Christine Stix-Hackl sides with the Commission's views.

In the other case (C-5/00), the Commission submitted that the German legislation had failed to transpose the Framework Directive properly because it relieves employers who employ no more than 10 workers from the duty of having a written statement of the results of the risk assessment. The Commission's arguments centre on three issues:

1. the requirement to have a written evaluation of risks, regardless of the size of the firm;
2. the employer's responsibility in regard to evaluating risks;
3. the method of transposition used in Germany, where some of the Framework Directive's obligations have been enacted through compulsory rules laid down by the Berufsgenossenschaften (employer's liability insurance associations).

Advocate General Geelhoed supports the Commission's view as to the need for a written risk assessment. But he feels that the Commission has failed to prove that the method of transposition used in Germany was improper. He also agrees with the German government's argument that rules which require preventive services to carry out a risk assessment are inherently the same as the aims set in the Directive obliging employers to evaluate workplace risks.

• Reference: Case C-49/00, Commission v Italy
                  Case C-5/00, Commission v Germany