ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 256/6

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 3 September 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

(Case C-457/08) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 2005/14/EC - Insurance against civil liability - Motor vehicles - Failure to transpose within the prescribed period)

2009/C 256/10

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: N. Yerrell, acting as Agent)

Defendant: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented by: L. Seeboruth, acting as Agent)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Failure to adopt, within the prescribed period, the provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2005/14/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 amending Council Directives 72/166/EEC, 84/5/EEC, 88/357/EEC and 90/232/EEC and Directive 2000/26/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council relating to insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles (OJ 2005 L 149, p. 14)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed period, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2005/14/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 amending Council Directives 72/166/EEC, 84/5/EEC, 88/357/EEC and 90/232/EEC and Directive 2000/26/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council relating to insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Directive 2005/14/EC;

2. Orders the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 313, 6.12.2008.
2.

The second sentence of Article 4(1) of the Convention must be interpreted as meaning that a part of a contract may be governed by a law other than that applied to the rest of the contract only where the object of that part is independent. Where the connecting criterion applied to a charter-party is that set out in Article 4(4) of the Convention, that criterion must be applied to the whole of the contract, unless the part of the contract relating to carriage is independent of the rest of the contract.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 297/9

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 15 October 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Ítélőtábla (Republic of Hungary)) — Hochtief AG, Linde-Kca-Dresden GmbH v Közbeszerzések Tanácsa Közbeszerzési Döntőbizottság

(Case C-138/08) (1)

(Procedures for the award of public works contracts - Procedures initiated after the entry into force of Directive 2004/18/EC and before the expiry of the period for transposition of that directive - Negotiated procedures with publication of a contract notice - Obligation to admit a minimum number of suitable candidates - Obligation to ensure genuine competition)

2009/C 297/06

Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Fővárosi Ítélőtábla

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Hochtief AG, Linde-Kca-Dresden GmbH

Defendant: Közbeszerzések Tanácsa Közbeszerzési Döntőbizottság

Intervening party: Budapest Főváros Önkormányzata

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Fővárosi Ítélőtábla — Interpretation of Article 22(2) and (3) of Council Directive 93/37/EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts (OJ 1993 L 199, p. 54), and of Article 44(3) 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 2004 L 134, p. 114) — Whether it is possible to continue a negotiated procedure with publication of a contract notice where the number of suitable candidates is less than the minimum number of the range prescribed in the contract notice, and less than the minimum number prescribed for that purpose in the abovementioned directives

Operative part of the judgment

1. 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 is not applicable to a decision taken by a contracting authority when awarding a public works contract before the period for transposition of that directive has expired;

2. Article 22(3) of Council Directive 93/37/EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, as amended by Directive 97/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 1997, must be interpreted as meaning that where a contract is awarded by a negotiated procedure and the number of suitable candidates is below the lower limit prescribed for the procedure in question, the contracting authority may, nevertheless, continue with the procedure by inviting the suitable candidate or candidates to negotiate the terms of that contract;

3. Council Directive 93/37, as amended by Directive 97/52, must be interpreted as meaning that the obligation to ensure that there is genuine competition is satisfied where the contracting authority has recourse to the negotiated procedure under the conditions referred to in Article 7(2) of that directive.

(1) OJ C 183, 19.07.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 297/14

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 15 October 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État (Belgium)) — Enviro Tech (Europe) Ltd v État belge

(Case C-425/08) (1)

(Environment and consumer protection - Classification, packaging and labelling of n-propyl bromide as a dangerous substance - Directive 2004/73/EC - Directive 67/548/EEC - Duty to transpose)

2009/C 297/16

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Conseil d’État

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Enviro Tech (Europe) Ltd

Defendant: État belge

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Conseil d’État (Belgium) — Validity, in the light of Framework Council Directive 67/548/EEC of 27 June 1967 on the approximation of laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous substances (OJ, English Special Edition 1967, p. 234), in particular Annex V (point A.9) and Annex VI (point 4.2.3) thereto, of Commission Directive 2004/73/EC of 29 April 2004 adapting to technical progress for the twenty-ninth time Framework Directive 67/548/EEC (OJ 2004 L 152, p. 1) — National provisions unlawful on the ground that they transpose a directive presumed to be contrary to the framework directive — Classification of the substance called n-propyl bromide as a highly flammable and toxic substance.

Operative part of the judgment

Examination of the questions referred has shown no factor capable of affecting the validity of Directive 2004/73/EC of 29 April 2004 adapting to technical progress for the 29th time Council Directive 67/548/EEC of 27 June 1967 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous substances, in that it classifies n-propyl bromide as a highly flammable substance (R11) and toxic for reproduction in category 2 (R60).

(1) OJ C 327, 20.10.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 24/12

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 26 November 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Austria)) — Romana Slanina v Unabhängiger Finanzsenat, Außenstelle Wien

(Case C-363/08) (1)

(Social security for migrant workers - Family allowances - Refusal - National of one Member State resident with her child in another Member State, while the father of the child works in the former Member State)

2010/C 24/18

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Romana Slanina

Defendant: Unabhängiger Finanzsenat, Außenstelle Wien

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Austria) — Interpretation of Article 73 of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of the Council of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to self–employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community (OJ 1971 L 149, p. 2) — National legislation providing for the payment of a family allowance (Familienbeihilfe) to persons who have the care of a child and who are permanently resident on national territory — Refusal to grant the allowance to an Austrian national who has settled with her child in another Member State, the father of the child having remained permanently resident on national territory and being in employment there

Operative part of the judgment

1. Article 73 of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of the Council of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community, in the version amended and updated by Council Regulation (EC) No 118/97 of 2 December 1996, must be interpreted as meaning that a divorced person who was paid family allowances by the competent institution of the Member State in which she was living and where her ex-husband continues to live and work maintains in respect of her child, provided that child is recognised as a ‘member of the family’ of the ex-husband within the meaning of Article 1(f)(i) of that regulation, entitlement to such allowances even though she leaves that State and settles with her child in another Member State, where she does not work, and even though her ex-husband could receive those allowances in his Member State of residence.

2. The fact that a person in a situation such as that of the applicant in the main proceedings is in employment in her Member State of residence, giving entitlement to family allowances, has, under Article 76 of Regulation No 1408/71, in the version amended and updated by Regulation No 118/97, the effect of suspending entitlement to family allowances payable under the legislation of the Member State in whose territory her ex-husband is in employment, up to the sum provided for by the legislation of her Member State of residence.

(1) OJ C 285, 8.11.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 312/8

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 29 October 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Sweden

(Case C-274/08) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 2003/54/EC - Article 15(2) - Article 23(2) - Internal market in electricity - Prior approval of the methodologies used to calculate or establish the terms and conditions for connection and access to national networks, including transmission and distribution tariffs - National regulatory authority)

2009/C 312/12

Language of the case: Swedish

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: B. Schima and P. Dejmek, Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of Sweden (represented by: A. Falk, Agent)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Breach of Article 15(2)(b) and (c) and of Article 23(2)(a) of Directive 2003/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2003 concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity and repealing Directive 96/92/EC — Statements made with regard to decommissioning and waste management activities (OJ 2003 L 176, p. 37) — Failure to ensure a functional division between distribution and production interests in a vertically integrated undertaking — Failure to make the regulatory authorities responsible for establishing or approving the methodologies used to calculate or establish the terms and conditions for access to national networks

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt measures necessary to ensure a functional division between distribution and production interests in a vertically integrated undertaking in accordance with Article 15(2)(b) and (c) of Directive 2003/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2003 concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity and repealing Directive 96/92/EC and by failing to make the regulatory authorities responsible for approving, in advance, at least the methodologies used to calculate or establish the terms and conditions for access to national networks, including transmission and distribution tariffs in accordance with Article 23(2)(a) thereof, the Kingdom of Sweden has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 15(2)(b) and (c) and Article 23(2)(a) of that directive;

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

(1) OJ C 236, 13.9.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 51/7

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 17 December 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Audiencia Provincial de Salamanca — Spain) — Eva Martín Martín v EDP Editores SL

(Case C-227/08) (1)

(Directive 85/577/EEC - Article 4 - Consumer protection - Contracts negotiated away from business premises - Right of cancellation - Obligation on the trader to give notice of that right - Contract void - Appropriate measures)

2010/C 51/10

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Audiencia Provincial de Salamanca

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Eva Martín Martín

Defendant: EDP Editores SL

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Audiencia Provincial de Salamanca — Interpretation of Article 4 of Council Directive 85/577/EEC of 20 December 1985 to protect the consumer in respect of contracts negotiated away from business premises (OJ 1985 L 372, p. 31) — Articles 3 EC, 95 EC and 153 EC — Article 38 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights — Right of renunciation — Obligation on the trader to supply certain information — Consumer protection measures in case of non-performance — Nullity of contract and jurisdiction of national court

Operative part of the judgment

Article 4 of Council Directive 85/577/EEC of 20 December 1985 to protect the consumer in respect of contracts negotiated away from business premises does not preclude a national court from declaring, of its own motion, that a contract falling within the scope of that directive is void on the ground that the consumer was not informed of his right of cancellation, even though the consumer at no stage pleaded that the contract was void before the competent national courts.

(1) OJ C 223, 30.8.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 24/13

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 19 November 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — Don Bosco Onroerend Goed BV v Staatssecretaris van Financiën

(Case C-461/08) (1)

(Sixth VAT Directive - Interpretation of Articles 13B(g) and 4(3)(a) - Supply of land occupied by a partly demolished building in place of which a new building is to be constructed - VAT Exemption)

2010/C 24/21

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Don Bosco Onroerend Goed BV

Defendant: Staatssecretaris van Financiën

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Hoge Raad der Nederlanden, The Hague — Interpretation of Article 4(3)(a), read in conjunction with Article 13B(g), 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) — Taxation of the supply of a building or part of a building and the adjacent ground prior to its first occupation — Supply of a partially demolished building by reason of its replacement by a new building to be constructed

Operative part of the judgment

Article 13B(g) of the 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, in conjunction with Article 4(3)(a) of the directive must be interpreted as meaning that the exemption from value added tax provided for in Article 13B(g) does not cover the supply of land still occupied by a dilapidated building that is to be demolished and replaced by a new building and whose demolition, paid for by the vendor, had already begun before the actual supply took place. For value added tax purposes, such supply and such demolition form a single transaction, given that, taken as a whole, the aim of the transactions was not to supply the existing building and the land it stands on but land that has not been built on, regardless of how far demolition of the old building had progressed at the moment the land was actually supplied.

(1) OJ C 69 of 21.03.2009
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 63/9

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 26 January 2010 — Internationaler Hilfsfonds eV v European Commission

(Case C-362/08 P) (1)

(Appeal - Access to documents of the institutions - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Action for annulment - Notion of ‘measure open to challenge’ for the purposes of Article 230 EC)

2010/C 63/14

Language of the case: German

Parties

Appellant: Internationaler Hilfsfonds eV (represented by: H. Kaltenecker and R. Karpenstein, Rechtsanwälte)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: P. Costa de Oliveira, S. Fries and by T. Scharf, Agents)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment delivered by the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber) on 5 June 2008 in Case T-141/05 Internationaler Hilfsfonds e.V. v Commission, by which the Court of First Instance dismissed as inadmissible the action for annulment of the decision allegedly contained in the Commission’s letter of 14 February 2005 refusing to grant the appellant access to certain documents relating to Contract LIEN 97-2011 concerning the co-financing of a medical aid programme organised in Kazakhstan — Inadmissibility of an action for annulment brought against a measure that merely confirms an earlier decision not contested within the time-limit for initiating proceedings — Wrong classification of the contested measure — Inadmissibility of an action for annulment brought against a measure constituting an initial response, for the purposes of Article 7(1) of Regulation No 1049/2001 — Wrong interpretation of Article 7(2) of Regulation No 1049/2001

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Sets aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance of 5 June 2008 in Case T-141/05 Internationaler Hilfsfonds v Commission;

2. Rejects the plea of inadmissibility raised by the Commission of the European Communities before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities;

3. Refers the case back to the General Court of the European Union for judgment on the claims of Internationaler Hilfsfonds eV seeking annulment of the decision of the Commission of the European Communities of 14 February 2005 refusing it access to certain documents in the Commission’s possession;

4. Orders the European Commission to pay the costs of the present proceedings and those arising at first instance relating to the plea of inadmissibility;

5. Orders the costs to be reserved as to the remainder.

(1) OJ C 272, 25.10.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 63/4

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 26 January 2010 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo — Spain) — Transportes Urbanos y Servicios Generales SAL v Administración del Estado

(Case C-118/08) (1)

(Procedural autonomy of the Member States - Principle of equivalence - Action for damages against the State - Breach of European Union law - Breach of the Constitution)

2010/C 63/06

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Tribunal Supremo

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Transportes Urbanos y Servicios Generales SAL

Defendant: Administración del Estado

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Tribunal Supremo (Spain) — Infringement by a Member State of the rights granted to individuals under European Union law — Obligation to remedy the damage caused — An act contrary to the constitution of a Member State and an act contrary to European Union law — Principles of equivalence and effectiveness

Operative part of the judgment

European Union law precludes the application of a rule of a Member State under which an action for damages against the State, alleging a breach of that law by national legislation which has been established by a judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Communities given pursuant to Article 226 EC, can succeed only if the applicant has previously exhausted all domestic remedies for challenging the validity of a harmful administrative measure adopted on the basis of that legislation, when such a rule is not applicable to an action for damages against the State alleging breach of the Constitution by national legislation which has been established by the competent court.

(1) OJ C 128, 24.5.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 100/5

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 25 February 2010 — Lancôme parfums et beauté & Cie SNC v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), CMS Hasche Sigle

(Case C-408/08 P) (1)

(Appeal - Community trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Articles 55(1)(a) and 7(1)(c) - Interest in bringing an application for a declaration of invalidity of a trade mark based on an absolute ground for invalidity - Law firm - Word sign ‘COLOR EDITION’ - Descriptive character of a word mark composed of descriptive elements)

2010/C 100/07

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Lancôme parfums et beauté & Cie SNC (represented by: A. von Mühlendahl, Rechtsanwalt)

Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral), CMS Hasche Sigle

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) of 8 July 2008 in Case T-160/07 Lancôme v OHIM — CMS Hasche Sigle in which the Court of First Instance dismissed the action brought by the appellant against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 26 February 2007 declaring invalid the registration of the trade mark COLOR EDITION in respect of cosmetic and make-up goods — Infringement of Articles 7(1)(c) and 55(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1) — Legal standing to bring an application for a declaration of a trade mark’s invalidity — Law firm — No private economic interest to apply for a declaration of the invalidity of a cosmetics trade mark — Noticeable difference between the association created by the terms suggested for the purpose of a trade mark’s registration and the everyday language used by the target public to describe the goods and services at issue or their essential characteristics

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders Lancôme parfums et beauté & Cie SNC to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 6, 10.1.2009.