ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 328/4

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 7 October 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank van eerste aanleg te Antwerpen (Belgium)) — Criminal proceedings against Vítor Manuel dos Santos Palhota, Mário de Moura Gonçalves, Fernando Luis das Neves Palhota, Termiso Limitada

(Case C-515/08) (1)

(Freedom to provide services - Articles 56 TFEU and 57 TFEU - Posting of workers - Restrictions - Employers established in another Member State - Registration of prior declaration of posting - Social or labour documents - Equivalent to those provided for under the law of the host Member State - Copy - Keeping available to the national authorities)

2010/C 328/05

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Rechtbank van eerste aanleg te Antwerpen

Parties in the main proceedings

Vítor Manuel dos Santos Palhota, Mário de Moura Gonçalves, Fernando Luis das Neves Palhota, Termiso Limitada

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Rechtbank van eerste aanleg te Antwerpen — Interpretation of Articles 49 EC and 50 EC — National legislation requiring construction sector undertakings carrying out works in a Member State on a temporary basis to provide a declaration of posting to the authorities in the host country

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 56 TFEU and 57 TFEU preclude national legislation requiring an employer, established in another Member State and posting workers to the territory of the first Member State, to send a prior declaration of posting, in so far as the employer must be notified of a registration number for the declaration before the planned posting may take place and the national authorities of that first State have a period of five working days from receipt of the declaration to issue that notification.

Articles 56 TFEU and 57 TFEU do not preclude national legislation requiring an employer, established in another Member State and posting workers to the territory of the first Member State, to keep available to the national authorities of the latter, during the posting, copies of documents equivalent to the social or labour documents required under the law of the first Member State and also to send those copies to the authorities at the end of that period.

(1) OJ C 44, 21.2.2009.
1.

Declares that by failing to transpose Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979, on the conservation of wild birds, into Italian law in a manner which is wholly in compliance with that directive, and by failing to transpose Article 9 of that directive in a manner which ensures that the derogations adopted by the competent Italian authorities comply with the conditions and requirements referred to in that article, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 2 to 7, 9 to 11, 13 and 18 of the directive;
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 55/2

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 7 December 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van beroep te Brussel — Belgium) — Vlaamse federatie van verenigingen van Brood- en Banketbakkers, Ijsbereiders en Chocoladebewerkers ‘VEBIC’ VZW v Raad voor de Mededinging, Minister van Economie

(Case C-439/08) (1)

(Competition policy - National proceedings - National competition authorities participating in judicial proceedings - Hybrid national competition authority being judicial and administrative in nature - Appeal against the decision of such an authority - Regulation (EC) No 1/2003)

2011/C 55/03

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hof van beroep te Brussel

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: VZW Vlaamse federatie van verenigingen van Brood- en Banketbakkers, Ijsbereiders en Chocoladebewerkers ‘VEBIC’ VZW

Respondents: Raad voor de Mededinging, Minister van Economie

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Hof van beroep te Brussel — Interpretation of Articles 2, 5, 15(1) and 35(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the competition rules laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty (OJ 2003 L 1, p. 1) — Submission by national competition authorities of written observations and arguments of fact and of law in the course of an appeal against their decision — Plurality of authorities in a Member State

Operative part of the judgment

Article 35 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty must be interpreted as precluding national rules which do not allow a national competition authority to participate, as a defendant or respondent, in judicial proceedings brought against a decision that the authority itself has taken. It is for the national competition authorities to gauge the extent to which their intervention is necessary and useful having regard to the effective application of European Union competition law. However, if the national competition authority consistently fails to enter an appearance in such judicial proceedings, the effectiveness of Articles 101 TFEU and 102 TFEU is jeopardised.

In the absence of European Union rules, the Member States remain competent, in accordance with the principle of procedural autonomy, to designate the body or bodies of the national competition authority which may participate, as a defendant or respondent, in proceedings brought before a national court against a decision which the authority itself has taken, while at the same time ensuring that fundamental rights are observed and that European Union competition law is fully effective.

(1) OJ C 313, 6.12.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 346/8

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 21 October 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Anotato Dikastirio tis Kipriakis Dimokratias (Cyprus)) — Simvoulio Apokhetefseon Lefkosias v Anatheoritiki Arkhi Prosforon

(Case C-570/08) (1)

(Public contracts - Directive 89/665/EEC - Article 2(8) - Body responsible for review procedures that is not judicial in character - Annulment of the contracting authority’s decision to accept a tender - Possibility for the contracting authority to appeal against that annulment before a judicial body)

2010/C 346/12

Language of the case: Greek

Referring court

Anotato Dikastirio tis Kipriakis Dimokratias

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Simvoulio Apokhetefseon Lefkosias

Defendant: Anatheoritiki Arkhi Prosforon

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Anotato Dikastirio Kiprou (Cyprus) — Interpretation of Article 2(8) of Council Directive 89/665/EEC of 21 December 1989 on the coordination of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the application of review procedures to the award of public supply and public works contracts (OJ 1989 L 395, p. 33) — Right of a contracting authority to judicial review of decisions of a responsible body, within the meaning of that provision, which is not judicial in character

Operative part of the judgment

Article 2(8) of Council Directive 89/665/EEC of 21 December 1989 on the coordination of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the application of review procedures to the award of public supply and public works contracts, as amended by Council Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992, must be interpreted as not requiring the Member States to provide, also for contracting authorities, a right to seek judicial review of the decisions of non-judicial bodies responsible for review procedures concerning the award of public contracts. However, that provision does not prevent the Member States from providing, in their legal systems, such a review procedure in favour of contracting authorities.

(1) OJ C 55, 7.3.2009.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 311/6

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 8 September 2011 — European Commission v Kingdom of the Netherlands, Federal Republic of Germany

(Case C-279/08 P) (1)

(Appeal - State aid - Article 87(1) EC - Emission trading scheme for nitrogen oxides - Classification of the national measure as State aid - Decision declaring aid to be compatible with the common market - Concept of selectivity - Advantage financed through State resources - Protection of the environment - Obligation to state the reasons for decision - Admissibility)

2011/C 311/07

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Appellant: European Commission (represented by: C. Urraca Caviedes, K. Gross and H. van Vliet, Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings: Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: C.M. Wissels and D.J.M. de Grave, Agents), Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: M. Lumma, B. Klein and T. Henze, Agents)

Interveners in support of the Kingdom of the Netherlands: French Republic (represented by: G. de Bergues, A.-L. Vendrolini, J. Gstalter and B. Cabouat, Agents), Republic of Slovenia (represented by: V. Klemenc, Agent), United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented by: E. Jenkinson, S. Behzadi-Spencer, S. Ossowski and H. Walker, Agents, and by K. Bacon, Barrister)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 10 April 2008 in Case T-233/04 Kingdom of the Netherlands v Commission, by which the Court of First Instance annulled Commission Decision C(2003) 1761 final of 24 June 2003 relating to State aid N 35/2003 concerning the emission trading scheme for nitrogen oxides notified by the Kingdom of the Netherlands

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Sets aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities of 10 April 2008 in Case T-233/04 Netherlands v Commission;

2. Dismisses the cross-appeals;

3. Dismisses the action at first instance;

4. Orders the Kingdom of the Netherlands to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission relating to the proceedings at first instance and to bear its own costs in those proceedings.

5. Orders the European Commission and the Kingdom of the Netherlands to bear their own costs relating to the appeal.

6. Orders the Federal Republic of Germany, the French Republic, the Republic of Slovenia and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 223, 30.8.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 204/3

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 24 May 2011 — European Commission v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg

(Case C-51/08) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Article 43 EC - Freedom of establishment - Civil-law notaries - Nationality condition - Article 45 EC - Connection with the exercise of official authority - Directive 89/48/EEC)

2011/C 204/04

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: J.-P. Keppenne and H. Støvlbæk, Agents)

Intervener in support of the applicant: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented by: E. Jenkinson and S. Ossowski, Agents)

Defendant: Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (represented by: C. Schiltz, Agent, and J.-J. Lorang, avocat)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Czech Republic (represented by: M. Smolek, Agent), French Republic (represented by: G. de Bergues and M. Messmer, Agents), Republic of Latvia (represented by: L. Ostrovska, K. Drēviņa and J. Barbale, Agents), Republic of Lithuania (represented by: D. Kriaučiūnas and E. Matulionytė, Agents), Republic of Hungary (represented by: J. Fazekas, R. Somssich, K. Veres and M. Fehér, Agents), Republic of Poland (represented by: M. Dowgielewicz, C. Herma and D. Lutostańska, Agents), Slovak Republic (represented by: J. Čorba, Agent)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Infringement of Articles 43 EC and 45 EC — National legislation making access to the profession of notary and its practice subject to a nationality requirement — Restriction on freedom of establishment — Scope of the exception relating to activities connected with the exercise of official authority — Requirement of direct and specific connection with such exercise — Failure to transpose, in respect of the profession of notary, Council Directive 89/48/EEC of 21 December 1988 on a general system for the recognition of higher-education diplomas awarded on completion of professional education and training of at least three years’ duration (OJ 1989 L 19, p. 16)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Declares that, by imposing a nationality condition for access to the profession of notary, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 43 EC;

2. Dismisses the action as the remainder;

3. Orders the European Commission, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, the Czech Republic, the French Republic, the Republic of Latvia, the Republic of Lithuania, the Republic of Hungary, the Republic of Poland, the Slovak Republic and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 128, 24.5.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 11/6

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 12 November 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Belgium

(Case C-7/09) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 2006/86/EC - Traceability requirements, notification of serious adverse reactions and events and certain technical requirements for the coding, processing, preservation, storage and distribution of human tissues and cells - Failure to transpose within the prescribed periods)

2010/C 11/10

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: C. Cattabriga and J. Sénéchal, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of Belgium (represented by: D. Haven, acting as Agent)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Failure to have adopted or communicated, within the prescribed time-limit, the measures necessary to comply with Commission Directive 2006/86/EC of 24 October 2006 implementing Directive 2004/23/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards traceability requirements, notification of serious adverse reactions and events and certain technical requirements for the coding, processing, preservation, storage and distribution of human tissues and cells (OJ 2006 L 294, p. 32)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. declares that, by not adopting within the period prescribed in the first subparagraph of Article 11(1) of Commission Directive 2006/86/EC of 24 October 2006 implementing Directive 2004/23/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards traceability requirements, notification of serious adverse reactions and events and certain technical requirements for the coding, processing, preservation, storage and distribution of human tissues and cells all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with that directive, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

2. orders the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 69, 21.03.2009.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 100/9

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 25 February 2010 — European Commission v Kingdom of Spain

(Case C-295/09) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 2006/43/EC - Company law - Statutory audits of annual accounts and consolidated accounts - Failure to transpose within the prescribed period)

2010/C 100/13

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: G. Braun and E. Adsera Ribera, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: F. Díez Moreno, acting as Agent)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Failure to adopt or notify, within the prescribed period, the provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2006 on statutory audits of annual accounts and consolidated accounts, amending Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC and repealing Council Directive 84/253/EEC (OJ L 157, p. 87)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to implement Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2006 on statutory audits of annual accounts and consolidated accounts, amending Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC and repealing Council Directive 84/253/EEC, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

2. Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 256, 24.10.2009.
1.

Declares that, by maintaining in force Article 24(5) and Article 27(1), (2) and (4) of Law 48/2003 of 26 November 2003 on the economic rules and supply of services for ports of general interest, which establishes a system of rebates and exemptions for harbour dues, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 1 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4055/86 of 22 December 1986 applying the principle of freedom to provide services to maritime transport between Member States and between Member States and third countries;
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 179/12

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 20 May 2010 — European Commission v Kingdom of Spain

(Case C-158/09) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 2003/88/EC - Organisation of working time - Non-civilian personnel in public authorities - Failure to transpose within the prescribed period)

2010/C 179/19

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: I. Martinez del Peral Cagigal and M. van Beek, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: B. Plaza Cruz, acting as Agent)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Article 1(3) of Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time (OJ 2003 L 299, p. 9) and Article 18(a) of Council Directive 93/104/EC of 23 November 1993 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time (OJ 1993 L 307, p. 18) maintained by Article 27(1) of Directive 2003/88, read in conjunction with Annex I, Part B, of the same directive — Non-civilian personnel in public authorities

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt within the prescribed period all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time, in respect of non-civilian personnel in public authorities, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 1(3) of that directive;

2. Orders the Kingdom of Spain to bear the costs.

(1) OJ C 180 of 1.8.2009.
1.

Declares that, by failing to adopt within the prescribed period all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2006 on statutory audits of annual accounts and consolidated accounts, amending Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC and repealing Council Directive 84/253/EEC and, in any event, by failing to communicate to the Commission of the European Communities the provisions of national law considered to contribute to ensuring such compliance, Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 53 of that directive;
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 221/11

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 17 June 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Commissione tributaria provinciale di Alessandria — Italy) — Agra Srl v Agenzia Dogane Ufficio delle Dogane di Alessandria

(Case C-75/09) (1)

(Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 - Community Customs Code - Article 221(3) and (4) - Post-clearance recovery of the customs debt - Limitation period - Act which could give rise to criminal court proceedings)

2010/C 221/17

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Commissione tributaria provinciale di Alessandria

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Agra Srl

Defendant: Agenzia Dogane Ufficio delle Dogane di Alessandria

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Commissione Tributaria Provinciale di Alessandria — Interpretation of Article 221(3) and (4) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code (OJ 1992 L 302, p. 1) — Recovery of the customs debt — Exceeding the time-limit for communicating the amount of duty to be recovered in the case of a debt resulting from an act that could give rise to criminal court proceedings — National legislation providing for the suspension of that time-limit until the decision given on the criminal proceedings initiated because of the act that caused the customs debt has become definitive.

Operative part of the judgment

Article 221(3) and (4) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code, as amended by Regulation (EC) No 2700/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2000, must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation under which, where the failure to pay customs duty has its origins in a criminal offence, time for the purposes of the limitation period for recovery of the customs debt is to run from the date on which the order or judgment in the criminal proceedings becomes final.

(1) OJ C 102, 1.5.2009.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 209/10

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 3 June 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (Belgium)) — Belgian State v Nathalie De Fruytier

(Case C-237/09) (1)

(Sixth VAT Directive - Article 13(A)(1)(d) - Exemptions for activities in the public interest - Supply of human organs, blood and milk - Activity of transporting, in a self-employed capacity, human organs and samples for hospitals and laboratories - Concepts of ‘supply of goods’ and ‘supply of services’ - Distinguishing criteria)

2010/C 209/13

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour de cassation

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Belgian State

Defendant: Nathalie De Fruytier

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Cour de cassation (Belgium) — Interpretation of Article 13(A)(1)(d) 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) — Exemptions for activities in the public interest — Supply of human organs, blood and milk — Possibility of treating the activity of transporting, in a self-employed capacity, human organs and samples for hospitals and laboratories as a supply.

Operative part of the judgment

Article 13(A)(1)(d) 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, exempting ‘supplies of human organs, blood and milk’ from value added tax, must be interpreted as not applying to the activity of transporting, in a self-employed capacity, human organs and samples for hospitals and laboratories.

(1) OJ C 220, 12.9.2009.