# C_2015398EN.01001702.xml

| 30.11.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 398/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.11.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 398/17

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands) lodged on 7 September 2015 — Lufthansa Cargo AG; other party: Staatssecretaris van Infrastructuur en Milieu

(Case C-470/15)

(2015/C 398/22)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Referring court

Raad van State

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Lufthansa Cargo AG

Applicant:

Other party: Staatssecretaris van Infrastructuur en Milieu

Other party:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Should the first sentence of Article 3(1)(c)(ii) of the Air Transport Agreement between the European Community and its Member States, on the one hand, and the United States of America, on the other hand (OJ 2007 L 134) be interpreted as meaning that it provides an effective right for a Community airline from Member State A to unload cargo, which was loaded in a third country, in another Member State B, following a stopover in the US during which that cargo is not unloaded, and that it is to that extent not necessary to rely on bilateral agreements between Member State B and a third country? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Should the first sentence of Article 3(1)(c)(ii) of the Air Transport Agreement between the European Community and its Member States, on the one hand, and the United States of America, on the other hand (OJ 2007 L 134) be interpreted as meaning that it provides an effective right for a Community airline from Member State A to unload cargo, which was loaded in a third country, in another Member State B, following a stopover in the US during which that cargo is not unloaded, and that it is to that extent not necessary to rely on bilateral agreements between Member State B and a third country?

| 2. | Can a Community airline derive rights from the Air Transport Agreement between the European Community and its Member States, on the one hand, and the United States of America, on the other hand, in relation to Member States other than the Member State in which that airline has its principal place of establishment? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Can a Community airline derive rights from the Air Transport Agreement between the European Community and its Member States, on the one hand, and the United States of America, on the other hand, in relation to Member States other than the Member State in which that airline has its principal place of establishment?

| 3. | Does Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 847/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the negotiation and implementation of air service agreements between Member States and third countries (OJ 2004 L 195; corrigendum in OJ 2007 L 204) preclude a requirement being laid down, in the assessment as to whether the criterion of establishment referred to in Article 49 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and defined in detail in the case-law of the Court of Justice has been satisfied, that, inter alia, a Community airline having its principal place of establishment in Member State A must have part of its fleet, comprising at least two aircraft, stationed in Member State B? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Does Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 847/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the negotiation and implementation of air service agreements between Member States and third countries (OJ 2004 L 195; corrigendum in OJ 2007 L 204) preclude a requirement being laid down, in the assessment as to whether the criterion of establishment referred to in Article 49 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and defined in detail in the case-law of the Court of Justice has been satisfied, that, inter alia, a Community airline having its principal place of establishment in Member State A must have part of its fleet, comprising at least two aircraft, stationed in Member State B?

---