ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 171/2

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 25 April 2013 — European Commission v Kingdom of Spain

(Case C-64/11) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Freedom of establishment - Article 49 TFEU - Restrictions - Tax legislation - Immediate taxation of unrealised gains - Transfer of the place of residence of a company, termination of the activities of a permanent establishment or transfer of the assets of that establishment)

2013/C 171/03

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: J. Baquero Cruz and R. Lyal, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: A. Rubio González and M. Muñoz Pérez, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: T. Henze and K. Petersen, acting as Agents), French Republic (represented by: G. de Bergues and N. Rouam, acting as Agents), Italian Republic (represented by: G. Palmieri, acting as Agent, and P. Gentili, avvocato dello Stato), Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: M. Bulterman, C. Wissels and J. Langer, acting as Agents), Portuguese Republic (represented by: L. Inez Fernandes, acting as Agent), Republic of Finland (represented by: M. Pere, acting as Agent), Kingdom of Sweden (represented by: A. Falk, acting as Agent), United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented by: L. Seeboruth, acting as Agent)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Infringement of Article 49 TFEU and Article 31 EEA — Tax provisions pursuant to which companies ceasing to have their tax residence in Spain or transferring their assets to another State must immediately pay an exit tax

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Declares that, by adopting Article 17(1)(a) and (c) of the re-cast text of the Law on corporate taxation, approved by Royal Legislative Decree 4/2004 of 5 March 2004 (Real Decreto Legislativo 4/2004 por el que se aprueba el Texto Refundido de la Ley del Impuesto sobre Sociedades), pursuant to which, in the case of a transfer to another Member State of the place of residence of a company established in Spain and of the assets of a permanent establishment situated in Spain, unrealised gains form part of the tax base for the financial year, whereas those assets have no immediate consequences in terms of tax if those transactions tax place in Spanish territory, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 49 TFEU;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay its own costs;

4. Orders the Federal Republic of Germany, the French Republic, the Italian Republic, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the Portuguese Republic, the Republic of Finland, the Kingdom of Sweden, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to pay their own costs.

(1) OJ C 113, 9.4.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 156/9

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 11 April 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Hamburg — Germany) — Novartis Pharma GmbH v Apozyt GmbH

(Case C-535/11) (1)

(Request for a preliminary ruling - Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 - Medicinal products for human use - Procedure for authorisation - Requirement for authorisation - Concept of medicinal products ‘developed’ by means of certain biotechnological processes, as referred to in point 1 of the Annex to that regulation - Repackaging process - Injectable solution distributed in single-use vials containing a larger quantity of the therapeutic solution than that actually used for the purposes of medical treatment - Part of the content of such vials drawn off, on prescription by a doctor, into syringes pre-filled with the prescribed dose, without any modification of the medicinal product)

2013/C 156/13

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landgericht Hamburg

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Novartis Pharma GmbH

Defendant: Apozyt GmbH

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Landgericht Hamburg — Interpretation of the Annex to Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 laying down Community procedures for the authorisation and supervision of medicinal products for human and veterinary use and establishing a European Medicines Agency (OJ 2004 L 136, p. 1) — Meaning of ‘hergestellt’ (‘developed’ in the English version) in point 1 of that Annex — Whether that term covers the drawing off of liquid medicinal products from the original containers and the transfer into ready-to-use syringes

Operative part of the judgment

Activities such as those at issue in the main proceedings, provided that they do not result in a modification of the medicinal product concerned and are carried out solely on the basis of individual prescriptions calling for processes of such a kind — a matter which falls to be determined by the referring court —, do not require a marketing authorisation under Article 3(1) of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 laying down Community procedures for the authorisation and supervision of medicinal products for human and veterinary use and establishing a European Medicines Agency, but remain, in any event, subject to Directive 2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 November 2001 on the Community code relating to medicinal products for human use, as amended by Directive 2010/84/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 December 2010.

(1) OJ C 13, 14.1.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 225/21

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 30 May 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État — France) — Doux Élevage SNC, Coopérative agricole UKL-ARREE v Ministère de l’Agriculture, de l’Alimentation, de la Pêche, de la Ruralité et de l’Aménagement du territoire, Comité interprofessionnel de la dinde française (CIDEF)

(Case C-677/11) (1)

(Article 107(1) TFEU - State aid - Concept of ‘State resources’ - Concept of ‘imputability to the State’ - Inter-trade organisations in the agricultural sector - Recognised organisations - Common activities decided on by those organisations in the interests of trade - Financing by means of contributions introduced on a voluntary basis by those organisations - Administrative measure making those contributions compulsory for all traders in the agricultural industry affected)

2013/C 225/35

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Conseil d’État

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Doux Élevage SNC, Coopérative agricole UKL-ARREE

Defendants: Ministère de l’Agriculture, de l’Alimentation, de la Pêche, de la Ruralité et de l’Aménagement du territoire, Comité interprofessionnel de la dinde française (CIDEF)

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Conseil d’État — Interpretation of Article 107 TFEU in the light of Case C-354/02 Pearle and Others — Decision by which a national authority extends to all the traders in an industry an agreement which introduces the levying of a contribution in an inter-trade organisation recognised by that authority and renders that contribution compulsory — Implementation of publicity activities, promotional activities, external relations activities, activities in defence of the sector’s interests — Financing of activities which are contrary to EU law — Concept of ‘aid’

Operative part of the judgment

Article 107(1) TFEU must be interpreted as meaning that a decision by which a national authority extends to all traders in an agricultural industry an agreement which, like the inter-trade agreement at issue in the main proceedings, introduces the levying of a contribution in an inter-trade organisation recognised by that national authority, thus rendering that contribution compulsory, in order to make it possible to implement publicity activities, promotional activities, external relations activities, quality assurance activities, research activities and activities in defence of the sector’s interests, does not constitute State aid.

(1) OJ C 89, 24.3.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 252/9

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 11 July 2013 — European Commission v Stichting Administratiekantoor Portielje, Gosselin Group NV

(Case C-440/11 P) (1)

(Appeal - Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement - International removal services market in Belgium - Direct or indirect fixing of prices, market sharing and the manipulation of the procedure for the submission of tenders - Unlawful conduct imputable to the entity controlling the shareholdings - Definition of ‘undertaking’ - Presumption of actual exercise of decisive influence - Restriction of competition by object - Guidelines on the effect on trade between Member States - Guidelines on the method of setting fines (2006) - Mitigating circumstances)

2013/C 252/13

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Appellant: European Commission (represented by: A. Bouquet, S. Noë and F. Ronkes Agerbeek, Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings: Stichting Administratiekantoor Portielje (represented by: D. Van hove, F. Wijckmans, S. De Keer and H. Burez, advocaten), Gosselin Group NV

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment delivered by the General Court (Eighth Chamber) on 16 June 2011 in Joined Cases T-208/08 and T-209/08 Gosselin Group and Stichting Administratiekantoor Portielje v Commission, by which that court, in Case T-208/08, annulled Commission Decision C(2008) 926 final of 11 March 2008 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/38.543 — International Removal Services) in so far as that decision finds that Gosselin Group NV participated in an infringement of Article 81(1) EC from 30 October 1993 to 14 November 1996, and, in Case T-209/08, annulled Decision C(2008) 926, as amended by Decision C(2009) 5810, in so far as it relates to Stichting Administratiekantoor Portielje

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls paragraphs 4 and 6 of the operative part of the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 16 June 2011 in Joined Cases T-208/08 and T-209/08 Gosselin Group and Stichting Administratiekantoor Portielje v Commission.

2. Dismisses the action brought by Stichting Administratiekantoor Portielje in Case T-209/08.

3. Orders Stichting Administratiekantoor Portielje to pay the costs of both the proceedings at first instance in Case T-209/08 and the appeal proceedings.

(1) OJ C 331, 12.11.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 325/4

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 12 September 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf — Germany) — IVD GmbH & Co. KG v Ärztekammer Westfalen-Lippe

(Case C-526/11) (1)

(Public procurement - Directive 2004/18/EC - Article 1(9), second subparagraph, point (c) - Concept of ‘body governed by public law’ - Condition relating to the financing of the activity, or to management supervision, or to supervision of the activity by the State, by regional or local authorities or other bodies governed by public law - Association of medical practitioners - Financing provided for by law by means of contributions paid by the members of that association - Amount of the contributions fixed by the assembly of that association - Independence of that association in determining the scope and the rules for the performance of its statutory duties)

2013/C 325/05

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: IVD GmbH & Co. KG

Defendant: Ärztekammer Westfalen-Lippe

intervening party: WWF Druck + Medien GmbH

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf — Interpretation of the second paragraph of Article 1(9)(c) of Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts (OJ 2002 L 134, p. 114) — Concept of ‘public authorities’ — Conditions of being financed, for the most part, by the State and subject to management supervision by the State — Professional association, which has the right by law to raise contributions from its members, the amount and use of those contributions having to be set by regulations requiring State approval

Operative part of the judgment

On a proper construction of point (c) of the second subparagraph of Article 1(9) of Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts, a body such as a professional association governed by public law satisfies neither the criterion relating to financing for the most part by the public authorities when that body is financed for the most part by contributions paid by its members, in respect of which it is authorised by law to fix and collect the amount, if that law does not determine the scope of, and procedures for, the actions undertaken by that body in the performance of its statutory tasks, which those contributions are intended to finance, nor the criterion relating to management supervision by the public authorities simply because the decision by which that body sets the amount of those contributions must be approved by a supervisory authority.

(1) OJ C 25, 28.1.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 260/8

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 18 July 2013 — European Commission v French Republic

(Case C-520/11) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Decision 2009/726/EC - Non-compliance - Imports of milk and milk products - Origin - At-risk holdings in terms of cases of spongiform encephalopathies - National prohibitions)

2013/C 260/14

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: F. Jimeno Fernández and D. Bianchi, acting as Agents)

Defendant: French Republic (represented by: G. de Bergues and S. Menez, and by C. Candat and R. Loosli-Surrans, acting as Agents)

Re:

Failure to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Arts 4(3) TEU and 288 TFEU — Failure to comply with Commission Decision 2009/726/EC of 24 September 2009 concerning interim protection measures taken by France as regards the introduction onto its territory of milk and milk products coming from a holding where a classical scrapie case is confirmed (OJ 2009 L 258, p. 27)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to comply with Commission Decision 2009/726/EC of 24 September 2009 concerning interim protection measures taken by France as regards the introduction onto its territory of milk and milk products coming from a holding where a classical scrapie case is confirmed, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 4(3) TEU and 288 TFEU.

2. The French Republic is ordered to pay costs.

(1) OJ C 362, 10.12.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 344/6

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 3 October 2013 — European Commission v Republic of Latvia, Republic of Lithuania, Slovak Republic, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

(Case C-267/11 P) (1)

(Appeals - Integrated pollution prevention and control - Greenhouse gas emission allowance trading system - Allocation of allowances for the Republic of Latvia - Period from 2008 to 2012)

2013/C 344/07

Language of the case: Latvian

Parties

Appellant: European Commission (represented by: I. Rubene and E. White, acting as Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings: Republic of Latvia (represented by: I. Kalniņš, acting as Agent), Republic of Lithuania, Slovak Republic, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

Intervener in support of Republic of Latvia: Czech Republic (represented by: M. Smolek and D. Hadroušek, acting as Agents)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 22 March 2011 in Case T-369/07 Latvia v Commission, by which the General Court annulled Commission Decision C(2007) 3409, of 13 July 2007, on the amendment of the national plan for the allocation of greenhouse gas emission allowances notified by the Republic of Latvia for the period from 2008 to 2012, under Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community and amending Council Directive 96/61/EC (OJ 2003 L 275, p. 32) — Misinterpretation of the procedure provided for in Article 9(3) of the directive — Erroneous application of the three-month time limit, laid down for initial decisions on new notified national allocation plans for greenhouse gas emission allowances (NAP), to a Commission decision accepting amendments to an NAP notified following a decision on the part of the Commission to reject the initial NAP

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders the European Commission, the Republic of Latvia and the Czech Republic to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 226, 30.7.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 344/16

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 10 October 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — Staatssecretaris van Financiën v Pactor Vastgoed BV

(Case C-622/11) (1)

(Sixth VAT Directive - Articles 13C and 20 - Supply of immovable property - Right to opt for taxation - Right to deduction - Adjustment of deductions - Recovery of sums due following adjustment of a VAT deduction - Taxable person liable for payment - Taxable person other than the person who initially applied the deduction and who is extraneous to the taxed transaction which gave rise to the deduction)

2013/C 344/25

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Staatssecretaris van Financiën

Defendant: Pactor Vastgoed BV

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Interpretation of Article 20 of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1) — Deduction of input tax — Adjustment of deductions previously made — Supply of a property by a supplier to a real estate company — Supply dealt with by the parties, although not by the applicable legislation, as a taxable transaction

Operative part of the judgment

Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment, as amended by Council Directive 95/7/EC of 10 April 1995, must be interpreted as precluding the recovery of amounts due following the adjustment of a value added tax deduction from a taxable person other than the person who applied that deduction.

(1) OJ C 73, 10.3.2012.
1.

Article 2(c) of Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services (Framework Directive) must be interpreted as meaning that a service consisting in the supply of a basic package of radio and television programmes via cable, the charge for which includes transmission costs as well as payments to broadcasters and royalties paid to copyright collecting societies in connection with the transmission of programme content, falls within the definition of an ‘electronic communications service’ and, consequently, within the substantive scope both of that directive and Directive 97/66/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 December 1997 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the telecommunications sector, Directive 2002/19/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on access to, and interconnection of, electronic communications networks and associated facilities (Access Directive), Directive 2002/20/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on the authorisation of electronic communications networks and services (Authorisation Directive) and Directive 2002/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications networks and services (Universal Service Directive), constituting the new regulatory framework applicable to electronic communications services, in so far as that service entails primarily the transmission of television content on the cable distribution network to the receiving terminal of the final consumer.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 344/7

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 26 September 2013 — European Commission v Czech Republic

(Case C-269/11) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Taxation - VAT - Directive 2006/112/EC - Articles 306 to 310 - Special scheme for travel agents - Discrepancies between language versions - National legislation providing for the application of the special scheme to persons other than travellers - Concepts of ‘traveller’ and ‘customer’)

2013/C 344/08

Language of the case: Czech

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: L. Lozano Palacios and M. Šimerdová, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Czech Republic (represented by: M. Smolek and J. Očková, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Hellenic Republic (represented by: E.-M. Mamouna, acting as Agent), Kingdom of Spain (represented by: S. Centeno Huerta, acting as Agent), French Republic (represented by: G. de Bergues and J.-S. Pilczer, acting as Agents), Republic of Poland (represented by: B. Majczyna, acting as Agent), Republic of Finland (represented by: J. Heliskoski, acting as Agent)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Articles 306 to 310 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1) — National legislation providing for the application of the special travel agency taxation scheme to transactions that travel agencies make in favour of recipients other than travellers

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the European Commission to pay the costs incurred by the Czech Republic;

3. Orders the Hellenic Republic, the Kingdom of Spain, the French Republic, the Republic of Poland and the Republic of Finland to bear their own respective costs.

(1) OJ C 232, 06.08.2011.