ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 22/9

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 December 2007 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Germany)) — Ursula Voß v Land Berlin

(Case C-300/06) (1)

(Article 141 EC - Principle of equal pay for men and women - Civil servants - Overtime - Indirect discrimination against women employed part-time)

(2008/C 22/16)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesverwaltungsgericht

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Ursula Voß

Defendant: Land Berlin

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Bundesverwaltungsgericht — Interpretation of Article 141 of the EC Treaty — National legislation laying down, for both full-time and part-time workers, a reduction in the remuneration for overtime as against that received for normal working hours — Remuneration of a female part-time teacher, who is a civil servant, who works overtime (but not sufficient to bring the hours worked overall above the level of normal working hours for full-time civil servants), which is lower than that which would be received if the same number of hours were worked in the context of full-time employment — Indirect discrimination against female workers

Operative part of the judgment

Article 141 EC is to be interpreted as precluding national legislation on the remuneration of civil servants, such as that at issue in the main proceedings — which defines overtime, for both full-time civil servants and part-time civil servants, as hours worked over and above their normal working hours, and which remunerates those additional hours at a rate lower than the hourly rate applied to their normal working hours, so that part-time civil servants are less well paid than full-time civil servants in respect of hours which are worked over and above their normal working hours, but which are not sufficient to bring the number of hours worked overall above the level of normal working hours for full-time civil servants — where:

— in the group of workers subject to that legislation, a considerably higher percentage of women is affected as compared with the percentage of men so affected; and

— the difference in treatment is not justified by objective factors wholly unrelated to discrimination based on sex.

(1) OJ C 96, 22.4.2006.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 51/19

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 18 December 2007 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale amministrativo regionale per la Lombardia, Italy) — Frigerio Luigi & C. Snc v Comune di Triuggio

(Case C-357/06) (1)

(Directive 92/50/EEC - Public service contracts - National legislation restricting the award of local public services of economic interest to companies with share capital - Compatibility)

(2008/C 51/31)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale amministrativo regionale per la Lombardia (Italy)

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Frigerio Luigi & C. Snc

Defendant: Comune di Triuggio

Intervening party: Azienda Servizi Multisettoriali Lombarda — A.S.M.L. SpA

Re:

Preliminary ruling — Tribunale amministrativo regionale per la Lombardia — Interpretation of Arts 39, 43, 48 and 81 EC, Article 26(2) of Council Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992 relating to the coordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts (OJ 1992 L 209, p. 1), Article 4(1) 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), Article 9(1) of Council Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste (OJ 1975 L 194, p. 39) and Article 7(1) of Directive 2006/12/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2006 on waste (OJ 2006 L 114, p. 9) — Procedure for the award of public service contracts — Environmental hygiene service — Domestic legislation authorising joint stock companies alone to hold contracts for waste management and disposal services

Operative part of the judgment

Article 26(1) and (2) of Council Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992 relating to the coordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts, as amended by Commission Directive 2001/78/EC of 13 September 2001, precludes national provisions, such as those at issue in the main proceedings, which exclude candidates or tenderers entitled under the law of the Member State concerned to provide the service in question, including those composed of groups of service providers, from submitting a tender, in a procedure for the award of a public service contract with a value greater than the threshold for application of Directive 92/50, solely on the ground that those candidates or tenderers do not have a legal form corresponding to a specific category of legal persons, namely that of a company with share capital. It is for the national court, to the full extent of its discretion under national law, to interpret and apply national law in accordance with the requirements of Community law and, in so far as such an interpretation is not possible, to disapply any provision of national law which is contrary to those requirements.

(1) OJ C 281, 18.11.2006.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 22/13

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 6 December 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Ferriere Nord SpA

(Case C-516/06 P) (1)

(Appeal - Competition - Commission decision - Fine - Enforcement - Regulation (EEC) No 2988/74 - Limitation period - Acts adversely affecting a party - Inadmissibility)

(2008/C 22/24)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: V. Di Bucci and F. Amato, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings: Ferriere Nord SpA (represented by: W. Viscardini and G. Donà, avvocati)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance of 27 September 2006 in Case T-153/04 Ferriere Nord SpA v Commission by which the Court of First Instance annulled the Commission decisions notified by letter of 5 February 2004 and by facsimile of 13 April 2004 concerning the outstanding balance of the fine imposed on the applicant by Commission Decision 89/515/EEC of 2 August 1989 relating to a proceeding under Article 85 of the EEC Treaty (IV/31.553 — Welded steel mesh)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Sets aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities of 27 September 2006 in Case T-153/04 Ferriere Nord v Commission;

2. Declares the action for annulment brought by Ferriere Nord SpA against the decisions of the Commission of the European Communities notified by letter of 5 February 2004 and by fax of 13 April 2004 concerning the outstanding balance of the fine imposed on Ferriere Nord SpA by Commission Decision 89/515/EEC of 2 August 1989 relating to a proceeding under Article 85 of the EEC Treaty (IV/31.553 — Welded steel mesh) inadmissible.

3. Orders Ferriere Nord SpA to pay the costs of both sets of proceedings.

(1) OJ C 42, 24.2.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 64/6

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 17 January 2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Hamburg, Germany) — Viamex Agrar Handels GmbH (C-37/06), Zuchtvieh-Kontor GmbH (ZVK) (C-58/06) v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas

(Joined Cases C-37/06 and C-58/06) (1)

(Regulation (EC) No 615/98 - Directive 91/628/EEC - Export refunds - Protection of bovine animals during transport - Payment of export refunds for bovine animals subject to compliance with Directive 91/628/EEC - Principle of proportionality - Forfeiture of export refunds)

(2008/C 64/06)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Finanzgericht Hamburg

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Viamex Agrar Handels GmbH (C-37/06), Zuchtvieh-Kontor GmbH (ZVK) (C-58/06)

Defendant: Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Finanzgericht Hamburg — Validity of Articles 1 and 5(3) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 615/98 of 18 March 1998 laying down specific detailed rules of application for the export refund arrangements as regards the welfare of live bovine animals during transport (OJ 1998 L 82, p. 19) — Payment of export refunds for bovine animals subject to compliance with the provisions of Council Directive 91/628/EEC of 19 November 1991 on the protection of animals during transport and amending Directives 90/425/EEC and 91/496/EEC (OJ 1991 L 340, p. 17) — Forfeiture of a refund as a result of a failure to observe prescribed rest periods during the transport of the animals

Operative part of the judgment

1) Consideration of the first question has disclosed nothing capable of casting doubt on the validity of Article 1 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 615/98 of 18 March 1998 laying down specific detailed rules of application for the export refund arrangements as regards the welfare of live bovine animals during transport.

2) Consideration of the second question has disclosed nothing capable of casting doubt on the validity of Article 5(3) of Regulation No 615/98 in the light of the principle of proportionality. It is for the Finanzgericht Hamburg to assess whether the competent authorities have applied the relevant provisions of Regulation No 615/98 in a manner that is consonant with that principle.

(1) OJ C 96, 22.4.2006.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 51/16

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 13 December 2007 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d'État (Belgium)) — United Pan-Europe Communications Belgium SA, Coditel Brabant SA, Société Intercommunale pour la Diffusion de la Télévision (Brutele), Wolu TV ASBL v État Belge

(Case C-250/06) (1)

(Article 49 EC - Freedom to provide services - National legislation requiring cable operators to broadcast programmes transmitted by certain private broadcasters (‘must carry’) - Restriction - Overriding reason relating to the general interest - Maintenance of pluralism in a bilingual region)

(2008/C 51/26)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Conseil d'État

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: United Pan-Europe Communications Belgium SA, Coditel Brabant SPRL, Société Intercommunale pour la Diffusion de la Télévision (Brutele), Wolu TV ASBL

Defendant: État Belge

Intervening parties: BeTV SA, Tvi SA, Télé Bruxelles ASBL, Belgian Business Television SA, Media ad Infinitum SA, TV5-Monde,

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Conseil d'État (Belgium) — Interpretation of Articles 49 EC and 86 EC — Definition of ‘special right’ — Obligation imposed on cabled distribution companies to distribute television programmes broadcast by certain broadcasting organisations established mainly in national territory

Operative part of the judgment

Article 49 EC is to be interpreted as meaning that it does not preclude legislation of a Member State, such as the legislation at issue in the main proceedings, which requires, by virtue of a must-carry obligation, cable operators providing services on the relevant territory of that State to broadcast television programmes transmitted by private broadcasters falling under the public powers of that State and designated by the latter, where such legislation:

— pursues an aim in the general interest, such as the retention, pursuant to the cultural policy of that Member State, of the pluralist character of the television programmes available in that territory, and

— is not disproportionate in relation to that objective, which means that the manner in which it is applied must be subject to a transparent procedure based on objective non-discriminatory criteria known in advance.

It is for the national court to determine whether those conditions are satisfied.

(1) OJ C 212, 2.9.2006.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 92/4

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 21 February 2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof — Germany) — Netto Supermarkt GmbH & Co. OHG v Finanzamt Malchin

(Case C-271/06) (1)

(Sixth VAT Directive - Article 15(2) - Exemption for supplies of goods for export to a destination outside the Community - Conditions for exemption not fulfilled - Proof of export falsified by the purchaser - Supplier acting with due commercial care)

(2008/C 92/06)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesfinanzhof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Netto Supermarkt GmbH & Co. OHG

Defendant: Finanzamt Malchin

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Bundesfinanzhof — Interpretation of Community law on VAT, in particular Article 15(2) 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) — Reimbursement of VAT on supplies of goods for export obtained on the basis of forged documents — Exemption on grounds of fairness

Operative part of the judgment

Article 15(2) 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 95/7/EC of 10 April 1995, must be interpreted as not precluding a Member State from granting an exemption from value added tax on the supply of goods for export to a destination outside the European Community, where the conditions for such an exemption are not met, but the taxable person was not able to recognise — even by exercising due commercial care — that they were not met, because the export proofs provided by the purchaser had been forged.

(1) OJ C 224, 16.9.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 79/4

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 14 February 2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Koblenz — Germany) — Dynamic Medien Vertriebs GmbH v Avides Media AG

(Case C-244/06) (1)

(Free movement of goods - Article 28 EC - Measures having equivalent effect - Directive 2000/31/EC - National rules prohibiting the sale by mail order of image storage media which have not been examined and classified by the competent authority for the purpose of protecting children and which do not bear a label from that authority indicating the age from which they may be viewed - Image storage media imported from another Member State which have been examined and classified by the competent authority of that State and bear an age-limit label - Justification - Child protection - Principle of proportionality)

(2008/C 79/05)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landgericht Koblenz

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Dynamic Medien Vertriebs GmbH

Defendant: Avides Media AG

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Landgericht Koblenz — Interpretation of Articles 28 EC and 30 EC and the provisions of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the internal market (OJ 2000 L 178, p. 1) — National legislation on the protection of youth prohibiting mail order sales of image storage media not labelled as having been declared available to young persons by the competent authority of the Member State — Image storage media imported from another Member State having been declared available to young persons above a certain age limit by the competent authority of that Member State — Principle of proportionality

Operative part of the judgment

Article 28 EC does not preclude national rules, such as those at issue in the main proceedings, which prohibit the sale and transfer by mail order of image storage media which have not been examined and classified by a higher regional authority or a national voluntary self-regulation body for the purposes of protecting young persons and which do not bear a label from that authority or that body indicating the age from which they may be viewed, unless it appears that the procedure for examination, classification and labelling of image storage media established by those rules is not readily accessible or cannot be completed within a reasonable period, or that a decision of refusal is not open to challenge before the courts.

(1) OJ C 178, 29.7.2006.
2.

The recovery of amounts lost as a result of an irregularity or negligence must be carried out on the basis of Article 23(1) of Regulation No 4253/88, as amended by Regulation No 2082/93, and in accordance with the detailed rules laid down in national law, on condition that the application of that law does not hinder the application or the effectiveness of Community law and does not make it impossible in practice to recover the sums improperly granted. It is for the national court to ensure the full application of Community law by setting aside or, in so far as necessary, interpreting a national rule such as the General Statute on administrative law (Algemene wet bestuursrecht) which prevents such application. The national court may apply the Community law principles of legal certainty and the protection of legitimate expectations when assessing the conduct of both the recipient of the amounts lost and the administrative authority, on condition that full account is taken of the interests of the European Community. The fact that the recipient of the funds is a public-law person is irrelevant in that regard.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 142/6

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 17 April 2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof — Germany) — Quelle AG v Bundesverband der Verbraucherzentralen und Verbraucherverbände

(Case C-404/06) (1)

(Consumer protection - Directive 1999/44/EC - Sale of consumer goods and associated guarantees - Right of the seller, where goods not in conformity are replaced, to require the consumer to pay compensation for the use of those goods - No charge for the use of the goods not in conformity)

(2008/C 142/08)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Quelle AG

Defendant: Bundesverband der Verbraucherzentralen und Verbraucherverbände

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Bundesgerichtshof — Interpretation of Article 3 of Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 1999 on certain aspects of the sale of consumer goods and associated guarantees (OJ 1999 L 171, p. 12) — Entitlement under national law of a seller to seek compensation from consumers for the use of goods not in conformity with the sale contract during the period before their replacement

Operative part of the judgment

Article 3 of Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 1999 on certain aspects of the sale of consumer goods and associated guarantees is to be interpreted as precluding national legislation under which a seller who has sold consumer goods which are not in conformity may require the consumer to pay compensation for the use of those defective goods until their replacement with new goods.

(1) OJ C 310, 16.12.2006.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 209/8

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 12 June 2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Regeringsrätten, Sweden) — Skatteverket v Gourmet Classic Ltd

(Case C-458/06) (1)

(Jurisdiction of the Court - Directive 92/83/EEC - Harmonisation of the structures of excise duties on alcohol and alcoholic beverages - Article 20, first indent - Alcohol contained in cooking wine - Exemption from the harmonised duty)

(2008/C 209/11)

Language of the case: Swedish

Referring court

Regeringsrätten

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Skatteverket

Defendant: Gourmet Classic Ltd

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Regeringsrätten — Interpretation of the first indent of Article 20 of Council Directive 92/83/EEC of 19 October 1992 on the harmonisation of the structures of excise duties on alcohol and alcoholic beverages (OJ 1992 L 316, p. 21) — Exemption from duty — Product based on wine, with an alcoholic content of 4.8 % per 100 kg of finished product, intended for cooking

Operative part of the judgment

The alcohol contained in cooking wine is, if it has an alcoholic strength exceeding 1.2 % by volume, to be classified as ethyl alcohol as referred to in the first indent of Article 20 of Council Directive 92/83/EEC of 19 October 1992 on the harmonisation of the structures of excise duties on alcohol and alcoholic beverages.

(1) OJ C 326, 30.12.2006.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 171/6

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 15 May 2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof, Germany) — Lidl Belgium GmbH & Co. KG v Finanzamt Heilbronn

(Case C-414/06) (1)

(Freedom of establishment - Direct taxation - Taking account of losses incurred by a permanent establishment situated in a Member State and belonging to a company which has its registered office in another Member State)

(2008/C 171/09)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesfinanzhof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Lidl Belgium GmbH & Co. KG

Defendant: Finanzamt Heilbronn

Re:

Preliminary ruling — Bundesfinanzhof — Interpretation of Articles 43 EC and 56 EC — Deduction from a German company's taxable profits of losses resulting from the activities of a permanent establishment in another Member State — Refusal of such deduction on the basis of a bilateral convention concluded with that other Member State for the purpose of preventing double taxation

Operative part of the judgment

Article 43 EC does not preclude a situation in which a company established in a Member State cannot deduct from its tax base losses relating to a permanent establishment belonging to it and situated in another Member State, to the extent that, by virtue of a double taxation convention, the income of that establishment is taxed in the latter Member State where those losses can be taken into account in the taxation of the income of that permanent establishment in future accounting periods.

(1) OJ C 326, 30.12.2006.