Order of the Court of 12 October 2000 in Case C-278/00 R: Hellenic Republic v Commission of the European Communities (Interim measures — Suspension of operation — State aid)
Date: 2001-03-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Greece, State aid, action for annulment (EU), debt, redemption

C 79/10

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

10.3.2001

ORDER OF THE COURT

of 12 October 2000

in Case C-278/00 R: Hellenic Republic v Commission of
the European Communities (1)

(Interim measures — Suspension of operation — State aid)

(2001/C 79/18)

(Language of the case: Greek)

band der landwirtschaftlichen Krankenkassen (5) Verband
der Angestellten-Krankenkassen e.V.
(6) AEV — Arbeiter-
Ersatzkassen-Verband e.V. (7) Seekrankenkasse and (8) Bundes-
knappschaft, joined parties: (1) Federal Republic of Germany,
and (2) Bundesausschuss der A¨ rzte und Krankenkassen on the
following questions:

1. Must statutory sickness funds and the associations thereof
which are subject to State supervision be regarded as
undertakings or associations of undertakings within the
meaning of Article 81 et seq. EC for the purpose of the
joint determination of the level of uniform fixed amounts
for medicinal products to which the funds’ liability is
limited in relation to the insured persons?

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

2.

In Case C-278/00 R: Hellenic Republic (Agents: I. Chalkias and
C. Tsiavou) v Commission of the European Communities
J. Flett and D. Triantafyllou) — application for
(Agents:
suspension of operation, primarily, of Commission Decision
E(2000) 686 final of 1 March 2000 relating to the aid
schemes implemented by Greece in order to regulate debts of
agricultural cooperatives in the years 1992 and 1994 including
aid for the reorganisation of the dairy cooperative AGNO,
alternatively of Article 2 of that decision — the President of
the Court has made an order on 12 October 2000, the
operative part of which is as follows:

1.

2.

The application for interim measures is dismissed.

The costs are reserved.

(1) OJ C 259 of 9.9.2000.

If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative,
does determination of a fixed amount as referred to in
the first question constitute an agreement which restricts
competition within the meaning of Article 81(1) EC?

3. Do Articles 81 and 86 EC preclude legislation giving
social security funds and associations thereof the power
to determine fixed amounts of the kind referred to in the
first question for medicinal products?

Action brought on 13 December 2000 by the Commission
of the European Communities against the Italian Republic

(Case C-455/00)

(2001/C 79/20)

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Landessozial-
gericht Nordrhein-Westfalen by order of that court of
28 September 2000 in the case of Merz + Co. GmbH &
Co. v (1) AOK Bundesverband (2) Bundesverband der
Betriebskrankenkassen (3) IKK-Bundesverband (4) Bun-
desverband der
landwirtschaftlichen Krankenkassen
(5)Verband der Angestellten-Krankenkassen e.V. (6) AEV
— Arbeiter-Ersatzkassen-Verband e.V. (7) Seekrankenkas-
se and (8) Bundesknappschaft, joined parties: (1) Federal
Republic of Germany, and (2) Bundesausschuss der A¨ rzte
und Krankenkassen

(Case C-428/00)

(2001/C 79/19)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by order of the Landessozialgericht
Nordrhein-Westfalen (Higer Social Court of North Rhine-
Westphalia) of 28 September 2000, which was received at the
Court Registry on 20 November 2000, for a preliminary ruling
in the case of (1) AOK Bundesverband (2) Bundesverband der
Betriebskrankenkassen (3) IKK-Bundesverband (4) Bundesver-

An action against the Italian Republic was brought before the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 13 December
2000 by the Commission of the European Communities,
represented by Antonio Aresu, of its Legal Service, acting as
Agent, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the office
of Carlos Go´ mez de la Cruz, of its Legal Service, Wagner
Centre, Kirchberg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— Declare that the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its
obligations under Article 9(1) to (3) of Council Directive
90/270/EEC (1) of 29 May 1990 on the minimum safety
and health requirements for work with display screen
equipment (fifth individual Directive within the meaning
of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC) (2), inasmuch as
it:

(a)

does not ensure regular eye and eyesight tests for all
workers who use display screen equipment within
the meaning of Article 2(c) of the abovementioned
directive;