ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 212/10

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 15 May 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht München — Germany) — Data I/O GmbH v Hauptzollamt München

(Case C-297/13) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Tariff classification - Common Customs Tariff - Combined Nomenclature - Section XVI, note 2 - Headings 8422, 8456, 8473, 8501, 8504, 8543, 8544 and 8473 - Concepts of ‘parts’ and ‘articles’ - Parts and accessories (motors, power supplies, lasers, generators, cables and heat sealers) intended for programming systems - No precedence of heading 8473 over other headings of Chapters 84 or 85))

2014/C 212/10

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Finanzgericht München

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Data I/O GmbH

Defendant: Hauptzollamt München

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Finanzgericht München — Interpretation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff (OJ 1987 L 256, p. 1), as amended by Commission Regulations (EC) Nos 2031/2001 of 6 August 2001 (OJ 2001 L 279, p. 1), 1832/2002 of 1 August 2002 (OJ 2002 L 290, p. 1), 1789/2003 of 11 September 2003 (OJ 2003 L 281, p. 1) and 1810/2004 of 7 September 2004 (OJ 2004 L 327, p. 1) and, inter alia, note 2(a) and (b) to Section XVI — Classification of parts and accessories (motors, generators, lasers, cables and heat sealers) intended for programming systems under heading 8473 — Whether that heading takes precedence over other headings of Chapters 84 or 85

Operative part of the judgment

Note 2(a) to Section XVI of the Combined Nomenclature in Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2031/2001 of 6 August 2001, Commission Regulation (EC) No 1832/2002 of 1 August 2002, Commission Regulation (EC) No 1789/2003 of 11 September 2003 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1810/2004 of 7 September 2004, must be interpreted as meaning that goods which may be classified under heading 8473 of the Combined Nomenclature, as parts of a machine under heading 8471 thereof, and under one of headings 8422, 8456, 8501, 8504, 8543 and 8544 thereof, as individual goods, are to be classified as individual goods under one of the latter headings, according to their individual characteristics.

(1) OJ C 260, 7.9.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 194/8

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 30 April 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia No4 de Palma de Mallorca — Spain) — Barclays Bank SA v Sara Sánchez García, Alejandro Chacón Barrera

(Case C-280/13) (1)

((Request for a preliminary ruling - Directive 93/13/EEC - Thirteenth recital in the preamble - Article 1(2) - Consumer contracts - Mortgage loan agreement - Mortgage enforcement proceedings - National statutory and regulatory provisions - Contractual balance))

2014/C 194/09

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Juzgado de Primera Instancia No4 de Palma de Mallorca

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Barclays Bank SA

Defendant: Sara Sánchez García, Alejandro Chacón Barrera

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Juzgado de Primera Instancia de Palma de Mallorca — Interpretation of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (OJ 1993 L 95, p. 29) — Consumer protection in relation to mortgage loans — Balance in the parties’ contractual rights and obligations — Principle of consumer protection — National civil procedure rules applicable to the procedure for enforcing a mortgage

Operative part of the judgment

Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts and the principles of EU law relating to consumer protection and a balance in the parties’ rights and obligations must be interpreted as meaning that statutory and regulatory provisions of a Member State, such as those at issue in the main proceedings, are excluded from their scope, when there is no contractual term altering the effect or ambit of those provisions.

(1) OJ C 226, 3.8.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 292/8

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 3 July 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de grande instance de Bayonne — France) — Préfet des Pyrénées-Atlantiques v Raquel Gianni da Silva

(Case C-189/13) (1)

((Area of freedom, security and justice - Directive 2008/115/EC - Common standards and procedures for returning illegally staying third-country nationals - National legislation making provision for a sentence of imprisonment in the event of unlawful entry in flagrante delicto - Response from the Court no longer necessary to resolve the dispute - No need to adjudicate))

2014/C 292/10

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal de grande instance de Bayonne

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Préfet des Pyrénées-Atlantiques

Defendant: Raquel Gianni da Silva

Operative part of the judgment

There is no need to reply to the request for a preliminary ruling made by the juge des libertés et de la détention (liberty and custody judge) of the Tribunal de grande instance de Bayonne (France), by decision of 9 April 2013 (Case C-189/13).

(1) OJ C 164, 8.6.2013
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 282/11

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 12 June 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesarbeitsgericht Hamm — Germany) — Gülay Bollacke v K + K Klaas & Kock B.V. & Co. KG

(Case C-118/13) (1)

((Request for a preliminary ruling - Social policy - Directive 2003/88/EC - Organisation of working time - Paid annual leave - Allowance in lieu in the event of death))

2014/C 282/15

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landesarbeitsgericht Hamm

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Gülay Bollacke

Defendant: K + K Klaas & Kock B.V. & Co. KG

Operative part of the judgment

Article 7 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 must be interpreted as precluding national legislation or practice, such as those at issue in the main proceedings, which provide that the entitlement to paid annual leave is lost without conferring entitlement to an allowance in lieu of leave outstanding, where the employment relationship is terminated by the death of the worker. Receipt of such an allowance is not to be dependent on a prior application by the interested party.

(1) OJ C 171, 15.6.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 315/8

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 17 July 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Østre Landsret — Denmark) — Nordea Bank Danmark A/S v Skatteministeriet

(Case C-48/13) (1)

((Tax legislation - Freedom of establishment - National tax on profits - Group taxation - Taxation of the activity of foreign permanent establishments of resident companies - Avoidance of double taxation by set-off of tax (credit method) - Reincorporation of the losses deducted previously in the event that the permanent establishment is transferred to a group company over which the Member State in question does not exercise powers of taxation))

2014/C 315/11

Language of the case: Danish

Referring court

Østre Landsret

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Nordea Bank Danmark A/S

Defendant: Skatteministeriet

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 49 TFEU and 54 TFEU and Articles 31 and 34 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area of 2 May 1992 preclude legislation of a Member State under which, in the event of transfer by a resident company to a non-resident company in the same group of a permanent establishment situated in another Member State or in another State that is party to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, the losses previously deducted in respect of the establishment transferred are reincorporated into the transferring company’s taxable profit, in so far as the first Member State taxes both the profits made by that establishment before its transfer and those resulting from the gain made upon the transfer.

(1) OJ C 101, 6.4.2013.
1.

Article 141 EC must be interpreted as meaning that a scheme for early retirement with immediate payment of pension such as that at issue in the main proceedings gives rise to indirect discrimination in terms of pay as between female workers and male workers, contrary to that article, unless it can be justified by objective factors unrelated to any discrimination on grounds of sex, such as a legitimate social policy aim, and is appropriate to achieve that aim and necessary in order to do so, which requires that it genuinely reflect a concern to attain that aim and be pursued in a consistent and systematic manner.
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 4 September 2014 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van beroep te Antwerpen — Belgium) — Provincie Antwerpen v Belgacom NV van publiek recht (C-256/13), Mobistar NV (C-264/13)

(Joined Cases C-256/13 and C-264/13) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Electronic communications networks and services - Directive 2002/20/EC - Article 6 - Conditions attached to the general authorisation and to the rights of use for radio frequencies and for numbers, and specific obligations - Article 13 - Fees for rights of use and rights to install facilities - Regional legislation making undertakings liable to pay a tax on places of business))

(2014/C 395/19)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hof van beroep te Antwerpen

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Provincie Antwerpen

Respondents: Belgacom NV van publiek recht (C-256/13), Mobistar NV (C-264/13)

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 6 and 13 of 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 (‘the Authorisation Directive’) must be interpreted as not precluding operators providing electronic communications networks or services from being subject to a general tax on establishments, on account of the presence on public or private property of cellular telephone communication masts, pylons or antennae which are necessary for their activity.

(1) OJ C 207, 20.7.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 315/24

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 17 July 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Bamberg — Germany) — Criminal proceedings against Mohammad Ferooz Qurbani

(Case C-481/13) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Geneva Convention of 28 July 1951 relating to the Status of Refugees - Article 31 - Third country national who has entered the territory of a Member State after passing through another Member State - Use of the services of human traffickers - Unauthorised entry and stay - Presentation of a forged passport - Criminal penalties - Lack of jurisdiction of the Court))

2014/C 315/36

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberlandesgericht Bamberg

Party in the criminal proceedings before the referring court

Mohammad Ferooz Qurbani

Operative part of the judgment

The Court of Justice of the European Union does not have jurisdiction to reply to the questions referred for a preliminary ruling by the Oberlandesgericht Bamberg (Germany), by decision of 29 August 2013 in Case C-481/13.

(1) OJ C 352, 30.11.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 409/7

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 10 September 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Krajský súd v Prešove — Slovakia) — Monika Kušionová v SMART Capital a.s.

(Case C-34/13) (1)

((Request for a preliminary ruling - Directive 93/13/EEC - Unfair terms - Consumer credit agreement - Article 1(2) - Term reflecting a mandatory statutory provision - Scope of the directive - Articles 3(1), 4, 6(1) and 7(1) - Security for credit in the form of a charge on immovable property - Whether it is possible to enforce the charge by means of a sale by auction - Judicial review))

2014/C 409/09

Language of the case: Slovak

Referring court

Krajský súd v Prešove

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Monika Kušionová

Defendant: SMART Capital a.s.

Operative part of the judgment

1) Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which allows the recovery of a debt that is based on potentially unfair contractual terms by the extrajudicial enforcement of a charge on immovable property provided as security by the consumer, in so far as that legislation does not make it excessively difficult or impossible in practice to protect the rights conferred on consumers by that directive, which is a matter for the national court to determine.

2) Article 1(2) of Directive 93/13 must be interpreted as meaning that a contractual term included in a contract concluded by a seller or supplier with a consumer falls outside the scope of that directive only if that contractual term reflects the content of a mandatory statutory or regulatory provision, which is a matter for the national court to determine.

(1) OJ C 141, 18.5.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 409/10

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 10 September 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — Gemeente ‘s-Hertogenbosch v Staatssecretaris van Financiën

(Case C-92/13) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Sixth VAT Directive - Article 5(7)(a) - Taxable transactions - ‘Supplies made for consideration’ - First occupation by a municipal authority of premises built for it on land belonging to it - Activities engaged in as a public authority and as a taxable person))

2014/C 409/13

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Gemeente ‘s-Hertogenbosch

Defendant: Staatssecretaris van Financiën

Operative part of the judgment

Article 5(7)(a) 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 must be interpreted as applying to a situation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, in which a municipality takes first occupation of a building which it has had built on its own land and of which it intends to use 94 % of the area for its activities as a public authority and 6 % of that area for its activities as a taxable person, including 1 % for exempt activities in respect of which no right to deduct value added tax exists. However, the subsequent use of the building for the activities of the municipality may give rise to a right to deduct the tax paid in respect of the application provided for by that provision only in the proportion corresponding to its use for the purposes of the taxable transactions, pursuant to Article 17(5) of that directive.

(1) OJ C 147, 25.5.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 421/17

Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 18 September 2014 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Vergabekammer Arnsberg — Germany) — Bundesdruckerei GmbH v Stadt Dortmund

(Case C-549/13) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 56 TFEU - Freedom to provide services - Restrictions - Directive 96/71/EC - Procedures for the award of public service contracts - National legislation requiring tenderers and their subcontractors to undertake to pay a minimum wage to staff performing the services relating to the public contract - Subcontractor established in another Member State))

2014/C 421/23

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Vergabekammer Arnsberg

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Bundesdruckerei GmbH

Defendant: Stadt Dortmund

Operative part of the judgment

In a situation such as that at issue in the main proceedings, in which a tenderer intends to carry out a public contract by having recourse exclusively to workers employed by a subcontractor established in a Member State other than that to which the contracting authority belongs, Article 56 TFEU precludes the application of legislation of the Member State to which that contracting authority belongs which requires that subcontractor to pay those workers a minimum wage fixed by that legislation.

(1) OJ C 24, 25.1.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 421/14

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 1 October 2014 — Council of the European Union v Alumina d.o.o., European Commission

(Case C-393/13 P) (1)

((Appeal - Dumping - Implementing Regulation (EU) No 464/2011 - Importation of zeolite A powder originating in Bosnia and Herzegovina - Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 - Article 2 - Determination of the normal value - Concept of ‘ordinary course of trade’))

2014/C 421/18

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Council of the European Union (represented by: J.-P. Hix, acting as Agent, assisted initially by G.M. Berrisch and subsequently by D. Geradin, avocats)

Other parties to the proceedings: Alumina d.o.o. (represented by: J.-F. Bellis and B. Servais, avocats), European Commission

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders the Council of the European Union to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 274, 21.9.2013.
1.

Article 4(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 800/1999 of 15 April 1999 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of export refunds on agricultural products, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2299/2001 of 26 November 2001, read in conjunction with Article 24 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1291/2000 of 9 June 2000 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of import and export licences and advance fixing certificates for agricultural products, must be interpreted as not precluding the grant of an export refund in specific circumstances such as those of the case in the main proceedings, in which the export took place without an export licence, whose existence was however established at the time the export declaration was made and which was presented, by the exporter, within the additional period of one week granted for that purpose by the competent customs office.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 439/13

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 9 October 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hovrätten för Västra Sverige — Sweden) — criminal proceedings against Ove Ahlström, Lennart Kjellberg, Fiskeri Ganthi AB, Fiskeri Nordic AB

(Case C-565/13) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - External relations - Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and the Kingdom of Morocco - Exclusion of any possibility for Community vessels to carry out fishing activities in Moroccan fishing zones on the basis of a licence issued by the Moroccan authorities without the intervention of the competent European Union authorities))

(2014/C 439/18)

Language of the case: Swedish

Referring court

Hovrätten för Västra Sverige

Parties in the criminal proceedings in the main proceedings

Ove Ahlström, Lennart Kjellberg, Fiskeri Ganthi AB, Fiskeri Nordic AB

Operative part of the judgment

The Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and the Kingdom of Morocco, approved on behalf of the Community by Council Regulation (EC) No 764/2006 of 22 May 2006, in particular Article 6 of that agreement, must be interpreted as excluding any possibility for Community vessels to carry out fishing activities in Moroccan fishing zones on the basis of a licence issued by the Moroccan authorities without the intervention of the competent European Union authorities.

(1) OJ C 15, 18.1.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 7/11

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 6 November 2014 — Kingdom of the Netherlands v European Commission

(Case C-610/13 P) (1)

((Appeal - EAGGF, EAGF and EAFRD - Expenditure excluded from European Union financing - Expenditure incurred by the Netherlands))

(2015/C 007/14)

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Appellant: Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: M. Bulterman and M. de Ree, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: A. Bouquet and H. Kranenborg, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1) Dismisses the appeal.

2) Orders the Kingdom of the Netherlands to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 31, 1.2.2014.
1.

Declares that, by not ensuring the collection and treatment of urban waste waters of the agglomerations of Aywaille, Baelen, Blegny, Chastre, Grez-Doiceau, Jodoigne, Lasne, Obourg, Oreye, Orp, Raeren, Sart-Dames-Avelines, Soiron, Sombreffe and Yvoir-Anhée, and by not ensuring the treatment of urban waste waters of the agglomerations of Bassenge, Chaumont-Gistoux, Chièvres, Crisnée, Dalhem, Dinant, Écaussinnes, Estinnes, Feluy-Arquennes, Fexhe-Slins, Fosses-la-Ville, Godarville, Hannut, Havré, Jurbise, Le Rœulx, Leuze, Lillois-Witterzée, Profondeville, Rotheux-Neuville, Saint-Georges-sur-Meuse, Saint-Hubert, Sirault, Sprimont, Villers-la-Ville, Villers-le-Bouillet, Virginal-Hennuyères, Walcourt, Welkenraedt, Wépion, Wiers, Gaurain-Ramecroix and Hélécine, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 3 and 4 of Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning urban waste water treatment;
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 46/14

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 11 December 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte suprema di cassazione — Italy) — Idexx Laboratories Italia Srl v Agenzia delle Entrate

(Case C-590/13) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Indirect taxation - VAT - Sixth Directive - Articles 18 and 22 - Right to deduct - Intra-Community acquisitions - Reverse charge procedure - Substantive requirements - Formal requirements - Failure to comply with the formal requirements))

(2015/C 046/19)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Corte suprema di cassazione

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Idexx Laboratories Italia Srl

Defendant: Agenzia delle Entrate

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 18(1)(d) and 22 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, as amended by Council Directive 91/680/EEC of 16 December 1991, must be interpreted as containing formal requirements relating to the right to deduct, failure to comply with which, in circumstances such as those at issue in the main proceedings, cannot result in the loss of that right.

(1) OJ C 24, 25.1.2014.
2)

Article 24(1) 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, read in conjunction with Article 7(1)(b) thereof, and Article 4 of Regulation No 883/2004, as amended by Regulation No 1244/2010, must be interpreted as not precluding legislation of a Member State under which nationals of other Member States are excluded from entitlement to certain ‘special non-contributory cash benefits’ within the meaning of Article 70(2) of Regulation No 883/2004, although those benefits are granted to nationals of the host Member State who are in the same situation, in so far as those nationals of other Member States do not have a right of residence under Directive 2004/38 in the host Member State.