# C_2004314EN.01000201.xml

| 18.12.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 314/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.12.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 314/2

---

ORDER OF THE COURT

(Second Chamber)

of 23 September 2004

in Joined Cases C-435/02 and C-103/03 (references for preliminary rulings from the Landgericht Essen and the Landgericht Hagen): Axel Springer AG v Zeitungsverlag Niederrhein GmbH & Co. Essen KG and Hans-Jürgen Weske (1)

(Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure - Partnership law and company law - Directive 90/605/EEC amending the scope of Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC - Article 54(3)(g) of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 44(2)(g) EC) - Partnerships in the form of limited partnerships all of the fully liable partners of which are constituted as private limited liability companies GmbH and Co. KG - Publication of annual accounts - Right of third parties to consult those documents - Concept of a third party - Inclusion, inter alia, of competitors - Validity - Legal basis - Principles of freedom to pursue a trade or profession, freedom of the press and equal treatment)

(2004/C 314/03)

Language of the cases: German

In Joined Cases C-435/02 and C-103/03: references for preliminary rulings under Article 234 EC from the Landgericht (Regional Court) Essen (Germany) and the Landgericht Hagen (Germany), by orders of 25 November 2002 and 11 February 2003, registered at the Court on 2 December 2002 and 5 March 2003 respectively, in the proceedings brought by Axel Springer AG against Zeitungsverlag Niederrhein GmbH & Co. Essen KG (C-435/02) and Axel Springer AG against Hans-Jürgen Weske (C-103/03), - the Court (Second Chamber), composed of: C.W.A. Timmermans (Rapporteur), President of the Chamber, J.-P. Puissochet, R. Schintgen, F. Macken and N. Colneric, Judges; F.G. Jacobs, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has made an order on 23 September 2004, the operative part of which is as follows:

| 1. | To the extent it follows from Council Directive 90/605/EEC of 8 November 1990 amending Directive 78/660/EEC on annual accounts and Directive 83/349/EEC on consolidated accounts as regards the scope of those Directives that any person may inspect the annual accounts and annual report of the types of partnerships referred to in it, without having to establish a right or an interest requiring to be protected, that directive could validly be adopted on the basis of Article 54(3)(g) of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 44(2)(g) EC). |
| --- | --- |

1.

To the extent it follows from Council Directive 90/605/EEC of 8 November 1990 amending Directive 78/660/EEC on annual accounts and Directive 83/349/EEC on consolidated accounts as regards the scope of those Directives that any person may inspect the annual accounts and annual report of the types of partnerships referred to in it, without having to establish a right or an interest requiring to be protected, that directive could validly be adopted on the basis of Article 54(3)(g) of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 44(2)(g) EC).

| 2. | Consideration of the first two questions referred in Case C-435/02 and the second and third questions referred in Case C-103/03 in the light of the general Community-law principles of freedom to pursue a trade or profession and of freedom of expression has not disclosed anything that is capable of affecting the validity of Directive 90/605. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Consideration of the first two questions referred in Case C-435/02 and the second and third questions referred in Case C-103/03 in the light of the general Community-law principles of freedom to pursue a trade or profession and of freedom of expression has not disclosed anything that is capable of affecting the validity of Directive 90/605.

| 3. | Consideration of the third question in Case C-435/02 and the fourth question in Case C-103/03 in the light of the principle of equal treatment has not disclosed anything that is capable of affecting the validity of Directive 90/605. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Consideration of the third question in Case C-435/02 and the fourth question in Case C-103/03 in the light of the principle of equal treatment has not disclosed anything that is capable of affecting the validity of Directive 90/605.

---

(1)  
  OJ C 44 of 22.2.2003.

OJ C 12 of 10.5.2003.

---