ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 167/2

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 20 May 2009 — Philippe Guigard v Commission of the European Communities

(Case C-214/08 P) (1)

(Appeal - Action for damages - Conditions for the Community to incur contractual and non-contractual liability - Articles 313(2)(k), 314 and 317(a) of the Fourth Lomé Convention, as revised by the Mauritius Agreement)

2009/C 167/02

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Philippe Guigard (represented by: S. Rodrigues and C. Bernard-Glanz)

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: A. Bordes and F. Dintilhac, Agents)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber) of 11 March 2008 in Case T-301/05 Guigard v Commission, by which the Court of First Instance dismissed the applicant’s action for damages for the loss which he allegedly suffered by reason of the Commission’s conduct with regard to the non-renewal of his contract of employment concluded in the framework of technical co-operation between the Community and the Republic of Niger financed by the European Development Fund — Conditions for the Community to incur non-contractual liability — Infringement of Articles 313(2)(k) and 314 of the Fourth Lomé Convention (OJ 1991 L 229), as revised by the Mauritius Agreement (OJ 1998 L 156, p. 3) — Infringement of the obligation to state reasons and of the rights of the defence.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Sets aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities in Case T-301/05 Guigard v Commission inasmuch as it declared Mr Guigard’s action to be admissible;

2. Dismisses Mr Guigard’s action in Case T-301/05;

3. Declares that it is not necessary to rule on the appeal;

4. Orders Mr Guigard to pay the costs incurred by the Commission of the European Communities before the Court of Justice of the European Communities and before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities.

(1) OJ C 223, 30.08.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 153/11

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 14 May 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale ordinario di Padova (Italy)) — Azienda Agricola Disarò Antonio and Others v Cooperativa Milka 2000 Soc. coop. arl

(Case C-34/08) (1)

(Agriculture - Common organisation of the markets - Milk quotas - Levy - Validity of Regulation (EC) No 1788/2003 - Objectives of the common agricultural policy - Principles of non-discrimination and proportionality - Determination of the national reference quantity - Criteria - Relevance of the criterion of a Member State’s milk production deficit)

2009/C 153/21

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale ordinario di Padova

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Azienda Agricola Disarò Antonio and Others

Defendant: Cooperativa Milka 2000 Soc. coop. arl

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Tribunale ordinario di Padova — Interpretation and validity of Council Regulation (EC) No 1788/2003 of 29 September 2003 establishing a levy in the milk and milk products sector (OJ 2003 L 270, p.123) — Regulation under which (i) no account is taken of the periodic updating for each country of the reference quantities exempt from the levy and (ii) the additional levy is applied in an identical manner to producers with surplus milk production and to those in deficit — Incompatibility with Articles 5, 32, 33 et 34 EC

Operative part of the judgment

1. The fact that Council Regulation (EC) No 1788/2003 of 29 September 2003 establishing a levy in the milk and milk products sector does not take into account, for the purposes of determining the national reference quantity, the fact that the Member State concerned has a milk production deficit is not capable of affecting the compatibility of that regulation with the objectives laid down, in particular, in Article 33(1)(a) and (b) EC.

2. The analysis of Regulation No 1788/2003 in the light of the principle of non-discrimination has not disclosed any factor which might affect the validity of that regulation.

3. The analysis of Regulation No 1788/2003 in the light of the principle of proportionality has not disclosed any factor which might affect the validity of that regulation.

(1) OJ C 92, 12.4.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 180/18

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 4 June 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Commissione Tributaria Regionale di Trieste (Italy)) — Agenzia Dogane Ufficio delle Dogane di Trieste v Pometon SpA

(Case C-158/08) (1)

(Community customs code - Regulation (EC) No 384/96 - Protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community - Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 - Protection of the European Communities’ financial interests - Processing under the inward processing procedure - Irregular practice)

2009/C 180/29

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Commissione Tributaria Regionale di Trieste

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Agenzia Dogane Ufficio delle Dogane di Trieste

Defendant: Pometon SpA

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Commissione Tributaria Regionale di Trieste — Interpretation of Articles 114, 117(c), 202, 204, 212 and 240 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code (OJ 1992 L 302, p. 1) and of Article 13 of Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (OJ 1996 L 56, p. 1) — Imports into the Community customs territory of unwrought magnesium originating in China — Imports through a company having its registered office in a non-member country and not subject to anti-dumping measures — Processing of the magnesium, under the inward processing procedure, by a company with its registered office in a Member State and connected to the company in the non-member country — Re-export in the form of compensating products to the said non-member country without being subjected to import duties — Immediate sale of the product by the non-member country company to the Member State company which carried out the processing

Operative part of the judgment

1. Article 13 of Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community is inapplicable in the absence of a Council decision, adopted on a proposal from the Commission, to extend the application of anti-dumping duties to imports from third countries of like products or parts thereof.

2. An operation which consists in merely sending goods over the border after processing them into a product which is not subject to anti-dumping duties without any actual intention to re-export them and re-importing them shortly after cannot lawfully be placed under inward processing procedure. An importer who improperly brings himself within that procedure and benefits from it is required to pay the duties on the products concerned, without prejudice, where appropriate, to administrative, civil or criminal sanctions provided for by national law. It is for the national court having jurisdiction in the matter to determine whether the operation concerned in the main proceedings must, in the light of the considerations set out above, be regarded as irregular in the light of Community law.

(1) OJ C 158, 21.06.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 180/14

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 4 June 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Sozialgericht Nürnberg — Germany) — Athanasios Vatsouras (C-22/08), Josif Koupatantze (C-23/08) v Arbeitsgemeinschaft (ARGE) Nürnberg 900

(Joined Cases C-22/08 and C-23/08) (1)

(European citizenship - Free movement of persons - Articles 12 EC and 39 EC - Directive 2004/38/EC - Article 24(2) - Assessment of validity - Nationals of a Member State - Professional activity in another Member State - Level of remuneration and duration of the activity - Retention of the status of ‘worker’ - Right to receive benefits in favour of job-seekers)

2009/C 180/22

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Sozialgericht Nürnberg

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Athanasios Vatsouras (C-22/08), Josif Koupatantze (C-23/08)

Defendant: Arbeitsgemeinschaft (ARGE) Nürnberg 900

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Sozialgericht Nürnberg — Legality of Article 24(2) of Directive 2004/38 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC (OJ 2004 L 158, p.77) — Interpretation of Article 12 EC and Article 39 EC — Right to social assistance benefits of a national of another Member State who is unemployed and has previously been in minor employment in the Member State concerned — National rules excluding nationals of other Member States from receipt of social assistance where the maximum period of residence referred to in Article 6 of Directive 2004/38/EC has been exceeded and there is no other right of residence.

Operative part of the judgment

1. With respect to the rights of nationals of Member States seeking employment in another Member State, the consideration of the first question has not disclosed any factor which might affect the validity of Article 24(2) of Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC;

2. Article 12 EC does not preclude national rules which exclude nationals of Member States of the European Union from receipt of the social assistance benefits granted to nationals of third countries.

(1) OJ C 107, 26.4.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 220/13

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 16 July 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale della Campania (Italy)) — Futura Immobiliare srl Hotel Futura, Meeting Hotel, Hotel Blanc, Hotel Clyton, Business srl v Comune di Casoria

(Case C-254/08) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 2006/12/EC - Article 15(a) - Waste disposal costs not allocated on the basis of actual production of waste - Compatibility with the ‘polluter pays’ principle)

2009/C 220/21

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale della Campania

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Futura Immobiliare srl Hotel Futura, Meeting Hotel, Hotel Blanc, Hotel Clyton, Business srl

Defendant: Comune di Casoria

Intervener: Azienda Speciale Igiene Ambientale (ASIA) SpA

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale della Campania — Interpretation of Article 15 of Council Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste (OJ 1975 L 194, p. 39) — National system not allocating the costs of waste disposal on the basis of the production of waste or its possession with a view to handling by a waste collector or an undertaking responsible for its disposal — Compatibility with the ‘polluter pays’ principle

Operative part of the judgment

Article 15(a) of Directive 2006/12/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2006 on waste must, as Community law currently stands, be interpreted as not precluding national legislation which, for the purposes of financing an urban waste management and disposal service, provides for a tax or charge calculated on the basis of an estimate of the volume of waste generated by users of that service and not on the basis of the quantity of waste which they have actually produced and presented for collection.

It is, however, incumbent upon the national court to review, on the basis of the matters of fact and law placed before it, whether the tax for the disposal of private solid urban waste at issue in the main proceedings results in the allocation to certain ‘holders’, in the case in point hotel establishments, of costs which are manifestly disproportionate to the volumes or nature of the waste that they are liable to produce.

(1) OJ C 209, 15.8.2008.
1.

Declares that, by not adopting the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 September 2005 on the recognition of professional qualifications, and in any event by not notifying those provisions to the Commission, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 267/22

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 17 September 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Landesgericht Feldkirch (Austria)) — Vorarlberger Gebietskrankenkasse v WGV-Schwäbische Allgemeine Versicherungs AG

(Case C-347/08) (1)

(Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 - Articles 9(1)(b) and 11(2) - Jurisdiction in matters relating to insurance - Motor accident - Statutory assignment of the rights of an injured party in favour of a social security institution - Action for recovery against the insurer of a person allegedly liable - Objective of protecting the weaker party)

2009/C 267/38

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landesgericht Feldkirch

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Vorarlberger Gebietskrankenkasse

Defendant: WGV-Schwäbische Allgemeine Versicherungs AG

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Landesgericht Feldkirch — Interpretation of Articles 9(1)(b) and 11(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ 2001 L 12, p. 1) — Jurisdiction in insurance matters — Action brought under statutory subrogation by a social security institution before the court for the place where that institution is established against an insurer established in another Member State.

Operative part of the judgment

The reference in Article 11(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters to Article 9(1)(b) thereof must be interpreted as meaning that a social security institution, acting as the statutory assignee of the rights of the directly injured party in a motor accident, may not bring an action directly in the courts of its Member State of establishment against the insurer of the person allegedly responsible for the accident, where that insurer is established in another Member State.

(1) OJ C 272, 25.10.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 220/14

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 16 July 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy w Kościanie — Republic of Poland) — Criminal proceedings against Tomasz Rubach

(Case C-344/08) (1)

(Protection of species of wild fauna and flora - Species listed in Annex B to Regulation (EC) No 338/97 - Evidence of lawful acquisition of specimens of those species - Burden of proof - Presumption of innocence - Rights of the defence)

2009/C 220/22

Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Sąd Rejonowy w Kościanie

Party involved in the criminal prosecution in the main proceedings

Tomasz Rubach

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Sąd Rejonowy w Kościanie — Interpretation of Article 8(5) of Council Regulation (EC) No 338/97 of 9 December 1996 on the protection of species of wild fauna and flora by regulating trade therein (OJ 1997 L 61, p. 1) — Notion of ‘proof’ that specimens of the species listed in Annex B were lawfully acquired

Operative part of the judgment

Article 8(5) of Council Regulation (EC) No 338/97 of 9 December 1996 on the protection of species of wild fauna and flora by regulating trade therein must be interpreted as meaning that, in the context of criminal proceedings brought against a person accused of having infringed that provision, any type of evidence accepted under the procedural law of the Member State concerned in similar proceedings is in principle admissible for the purpose of establishing whether specimens of animal species listed in Annex B to that regulation were lawfully acquired. In the light also of the principle of the presumption of innocence, such a person may adduce any such evidence to prove that those specimens came lawfully into his possession in accordance with the conditions laid down in that provision.

(1) OJ C 272, 25.10.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 282/15

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 1 October 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Belgium

(Case C-575/08) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 2005/56/EC - Cross-border mergers of limited liability companies - Failure to transpose within the prescribed period)

2009/C 282/27

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: V. Peere and P. Dejmek, acting as Agents)

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

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Failure to take or communicate, within the prescribed period, the measures necessary to comply with Directive 2005/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2005 on cross-border mergers of limited liability companies (OJ 2005 L 310, p. 1)

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 2005/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2005 on cross-border mergers of limited liability companies, 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 44, 21.02.2009.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 282/12

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 1 October 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v French Republic

(Case C-468/08) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Recognition of professional qualifications - Directive 2005/36/EC - Failure to transpose)

2009/C 282/22

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: H. Støvlbæk and V. Peere, acting as Agents)

Defendant: French Republic (represented by: G. de Bergues and B. Messmer, acting as Agents)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Failure to adopt, within the prescribed period, all the provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 September 2005 on the recognition of professional qualifications (OJ 2005 L 255, p. 22) or to inform thereof

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 September 2005 on the recognition of professional qualifications, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 63 of that directive;

2. orders the French Republic to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 6, 10.01.2009.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 297/7

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 15 October 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Baden-Württemberg — Germany) — Grundstücksgemeinschaft Busley and Cibrian Fernandez v Finanzamt Stuttgart-Körperschaften

(Case C-35/08) (1)

(Free movement of capital - Immovable property - Income tax - Deductibility of rental losses from the taxable income of a person liable to tax - Application of the decreasing-balance method of depreciation to the costs of acquisition or construction - More favourable tax treatment confined to immovable property situated on the national territory)

2009/C 297/03

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Finanzgericht Baden-Württemberg

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Grundstücksgemeinschaft Busley and Cibrian Fernandez

Defendant: Finanzamt Stuttgart-Körperschaften

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Finanzgericht Baden-Württemberg — Interpretation of Articles 18 and 56 of the EC Treaty — National income tax legislation limiting the ability to deduct losses arising from the rental of real property to those losses relating to property located on national territory, and reserving to such property alone the application of a more favourable method of depreciation

Operative part of the judgment

Article 56 EC precludes income-tax legislation of a Member State under which natural persons who are resident and liable to unlimited taxation are entitled to have (i) losses from the letting or leasing of an immovable property deducted from the taxable amount in the year in which those losses arise, and (ii) the income from such property assessed on the basis of the application of the decreasing-balance method of depreciation, only if the property in question is situated on the territory of that Member State.

(1) OJ C 92, 12.04.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 11/5

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 12 November 2009 — Le Carbone-Lorraine SA v Commission of the European Communities

(Case C-554/08 P) (1)

(Appeal - Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement - Market for electrical and mechanical carbon and graphite products - Article 15(2) of Regulation No 17 - Setting the amount of the fine - Gravity of the infringement - Cooperation during the administrative procedure - Principle of the individual nature of penalties - Equal treatment - Principle of proportionality)

2010/C 11/08

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Le Carbone-Lorraine SA (represented by: A. Winckler and H. Kanellopoulos, avocats)

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre and E. Gippini Fournier, acting as Agents)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber) of 8 October 2008 in Case T-73/04 Carbone-Lorraine v Commission, in which the Court dismissed the application brought by the appellant for the annulment of Commission Decision 2004/420/EC of 3 December 2003 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement concerning an agreement in the market for electrical and mechanical carbon and graphite products, and, in the alternative, annulment or reduction of the fine imposed on the appellant — Breach of the principle of the individual nature of penalties — Method for setting the amount of the fine imposed — Constant and close cooperation during the administrative procedure — Principles of proportionality and of equal treatment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders Le Carbone-Lorraine SA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 44 of 21.02.2009