Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 23 November 2000 in Case C-135/99 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundessozialgericht): Ursula Elsen v Bundesversicherungsanstalt für Angestellte (Social security for migrant workers — Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 — Articles 3 and 10 and Annex VI, Section C, point 19 — Old-age insurance — Validation of periods of child-rearing completed in another Member State)
Date: 2001-03-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: care of mothers and infants, compulsory insurance, frontier worker, interpretation of the law, maternity leave

C 79/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

10.3.2001

address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Elvinger,
Hoss et Prussen, 15 Côte d’Eich — appeal against the judgment
of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities
(First Chamber, Extended Composition) of 24 October 1997
in Case T-243/94 British Steel v Commission [1997] ECR II-
1887, seeking to have that judgment set aside in so far as
it dismissed its application against Commission Decision
94/258/ECSC of 12 April 1994 concerning aid to be granted
by Spain to the public integrated steel company Corporacio´ n
de la Siderurgia Integral
(CSI) and Commission Decision
94/259/ECSC of 12 April 1994 concerning aid to be granted
by Italy to the public steel sector (Ilva group) (OJ 1994 L 112,
pp. 58 and 64 respectively), the other parties to the proceedings
being: Commission of the European Communities (Agents:
N. Khan and P.F. Nemitz), Det Danske Stålvalseværk A/S,
established in Frederiksværk, Denmark,
represented by
J.A. Lawrence and A. Renshaw, Solicitors, with an address for
service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of E. Arendt, 8-
10 Rue Mathias Hardt, Italian Republic (Agents: Professor
U. Leanza, assisted by P.G. Ferriv), Kingdom of Spain (Agent:
N. Dı´az Abad), Council of the European Union (Agents:
J. Carbery and A.P. Feeney), Svenskt Stål AB (SSAB), established
in Stockholm, Sweden, and Ilva Laminati Piani SpA, established
in Rome,
Italy — the Court (Sixth Chamber), composed
of: C. Gulmann, President of the Chamber, J.-P. Puissochet
(Rapporteur), and M. Macken, Judges; N. Fennelly, Advocate
General; R. Grass, the Registrar, has given a judgment on
23 November 2000, in which it:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders British Steel plc, now Corus UK Ltd, to pay the costs;

3. Orders the Italian Republic, the Kingdom of Spain, the Council
of the European Union and Det Danske Stålvalseværk A/S to
bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 72 of 7.3.1998.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

of 23 November 2000

in Case C-135/99 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Bundessozialgericht): Ursula Elsen v Bundesver-
sicherungsanstalt für Angestellte (1)

(Social security for migrant workers — Regulation (EEC)
No 1408/71 — Articles 3 and 10 and Annex VI, Section C,
point 19 — Old-age insurance — Validation of periods of
child-rearing completed in another Member State)

(2001/C 79/03)

(Language of the case: German)

(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
in the European Court Reports)

In Case C-135/99: reference to the Court under Article 177 of
the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) from the Bundessozialge-
richt (Germany), for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings

pending before that court between Ursula Elsen and Bundesver-
sicherungsanstalt für Angestellte — on the interpretation of
Article 51 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 42
EC) and Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 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, as amended
and updated by Council Regulation (EEC) No 2001/83 of
2 June 1983 (OJ 1983 L 230, p. 6), as amended at the material
time, in particular by Council Regulation (EEC) No 2195/91
of 25 June 1991 (OJ 1991 L 206, p. 2) — the Court (Fifth
the
Chamber), composed of: A. La Pergola, President of
Chamber, M. Wathelet
(Rapporteur) and D.A.O. Edward,
Judges; A. Saggio, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has
given a judgment on 23 November 2000, in which it has
ruled:

Articles 8a, 48 and 51 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment,
Articles 18 EC, 39 EC and 42 EC) require that, for the purpose of
the grant of an old-age pension, the competent institution of a
Member State take into account, as though they had been completed
in national territory, periods devoted to child-rearing completed in
another Member State by a person who, at the time when the child
was born, was a frontier worker employed in the territory of the first
Member State and residing in the territory of the second Member
State.

(1) OJ C 188 of 3.7.1999.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Third Chamber)

of 23 November 2000

in Case C-319/99: Commission of the European Communi-
ties v French Republic (1)

(Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Failure
to transpose Directive 95/47/EC)

(2001/C 79/04)

(Language of the case: French)

(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
in the European Court Reports)

In Case C-319/99: Commission of the European Communities
(Agent: M. Nolin) v French Republic (Agents: K. Rispal-
Bellanger and A. Maitrepierre) — application for a declaration
that, by not communicating within the prescribed period the
laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to
comply with Directive 95/47/EC of the European Parliament
and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the use of standards