Case C-306/01: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf by order of that court of 11 July 2001 in case of 1. AOK Bundesverband, 2. Bundesverband der Betriebskrankenkassen, 3. Bundesverband der Innungskrankenkassen, 4. Bundesverband der landwirtschaftlichen Krankenkassen, 5. Verband der Angestelltenkrankenkassen e.V., Siegburg, 6. Verband der Arbeiter-Ersatzkassen, 7. Bundesknappschaft, 8. See-Krankenkasse gegen Mundipharma Gmbh
Date: 2001-10-27
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: competition law, fixing of prices, health insurance, interpretation of the law, medicinal product, pharmaceutical industry

27.10.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 303/7

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunale di
Catania — 4th Civil Section by order of 12 July 2001 in
joined civil actions (1) Sicilcassa SpA v IRA Costruzioni
SpA and Others, and (2) Aiello Elena v IRA Costruzioni
and Others

1. May nationals of a Member State of

the European
Union rely on free movement of capital for a domestic
transaction if national law lays down a prohibition of
discrimination against that country’s own nationals but
does not expressly guarantee citizens of the Union free
movement of capital in the national legislation?

(Case C-297/01)

(2001/C 303/09)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by an order of the Tribunale (District
Court) Catania — 4th Civil Section — by order of that court
of 12 July 2001, which was received at the Court Registry on
26 July 2001, for a preliminary ruling in the joined civil
actions (1) Sicilcassa SpA v IRA Costruzioni SpA and Others
and (2) Aiello Elena v IRA Costruzioni and Others on the
following questions:

1. On an interpretation of Article 87 et seq. EC may
transitional rules, such as those laid down in Article 106
of Legislative Decree No 270/99, constitute new State aid
and come within the scope of the prohibition under
Article 87 EC?

If the answer to Question 1 is affirmative,

2.

In light of the considerations set out in the grounds
hereof can the transitional rules under examination come
within the provision in Article 87(3)(b) of the EC Treaty?

If the answer to Question 2 is negative,

3.

In light of the general principles of Community law and
in particular those mentioned in the grounds hereof, can
the transitional rules under examination be deemed
compatible with the EC Treaty and the Community legal
order?

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Landesgericht
Feldkirch by order of that court of 14 June 2001 in the
land register proceedings brought by Doris Salzmann née
Greif

(Case C-300/01)

(2001/C 303/10)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by an order of the Landesgericht
Feldkirch (Regional Court, Feldkirch), Austria, of 14 June
2001, which was received at the Court Registry on 27 June
2001, for a preliminary ruling in the land register proceedings
brought by Doris Salzmann née Greif on the following
questions:

2.

Is it compatible with free movement of capital
for
authorisation by the land transfer authority, which has
constitutive effect, to be required for the acquisition of
building land which has not been built on?

3. What effect does the standstill clause in point 1(e) of
Annex XII to the EEA Agreement have on wholly new
kinds of situations requiring authorisation under land
transfer law, not created until after signature of the EEA
Agreement on 2 May 1992?

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Oberlandesge-
richt Düsseldorf by order of that court of 11 July 2001 in
case of 1. AOK Bundesverband, 2. Bundesverband der
Betriebskrankenkassen, 3. Bundesverband der Innungs-
krankenkassen, 4. Bundesverband der landwirtschaftli-
chen Krankenkassen, 5. Verband der Angestellten-
krankenkassen e.V., Siegburg, 6. Verband der Arbeiter-
Ersatzkassen, 7. Bundesknappschaft, 8. See-Krankenkasse
gegen Mundipharma Gmbh

(Case C-306/01)

(2001/C 303/11)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by order of the Oberlandesgericht
(Higher Regional Court) Düsseldorf of 11 July 2001 received
at the Court Registry on 6 August 2001, for a preliminary
ruling on the same questions as referred to the Court in Case
C-264/01 (1).

(1) See page 5 of this Official Journal.