Case C-394/01: Action brought on 8 October 2001 by the French Republic against the Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2001-12-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, France, State aid, action for annulment (EU), crew, job creation

22.12.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 369/7

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Verwaltungsge-
richtshof, by order of that court of 20 September 2001,
in the case of (1) Dr Harald Weigel and (2) Ingrid Weigel
against the Finanzlandesdirektion für Vorarlberg

(Case C-387/01)

(2001/C 369/11)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by order of the Verwaltungsgerichts-
hof (Federal Administrative Court) of 20 September 2001,
received at the Court Registry on 8 October 2001, for a
preliminary ruling in the case of (1) Dr Harald Weigel and (2)
Ingrid Weigel against the Finanzlandesdirektion für Vorarlberg,
on the following questions:

1.

Is Article 39 EC (freedom of movement for workers) or
Article 12 EC (discrimination on the ground of national-
ity) to be construed as meaning that those provisions are
infringed where Normverbrauchsabgabe (basic duty plus
is charged on a vehicle brought into the
surcharge)
Republic of Austria from another part of the Community
in connection with a transfer of residence necessitated by
a change of job?

2. Do Article 90 EC (prohibition of higher taxation on
goods from other Member States) or Article 23 EC
(Customs Union) and Article 25 EC (prohibition of
customs duties or charges having equivalent effect as
between Member States) preclude the imposition of
the Normverbrauchsabgabe (basic duty and surcharge
respectively) mentioned in the first preliminary question?

3.

Is imposition of the surcharge determined as part of the
Normverbrauchsabgabe referred to in the first prelimi-
nary question compatible with Sixth Council Directive
(77/388/EEC) of 17 May 1977 (1) on the harmonization
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
91/680/EEC of 16 December 1991 (2) supplementing the
common system of value added tax with a view to the
abolition of fiscal frontiers?

(1) OJ 1997 L 145, p. 1.
(2) OJ 1991 L 376, p. 1.

Action brought on 8 October 2001 by the French Repub-
lic against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case C-394/01)

(2001/C 369/12)

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of Justice of the European
Communities on 8 October 2001 by the French Republic
represented by G. de Bergues and F. Million, acting as Agents,
with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The French Republic claims that the Court should:

— annul the Commission’s decision of 25 July 2001, taken
on the basis of Articles 87 and 88 EC relating to State aid
granted by France in the form of development assistance
for the liner ‘Le Levant’ built by Alstom Leroux Naval and
intended for operation in Saint-Pierre-et-Miquelon; and

— order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Errors of fact and of law and manifest errors of assessment
relating to the ‘development’ component of the aid at issue;

The Commission is wrong to take the view that the objectives
regarding job creation have not been achieved. Seventeen crew
members were recruited in the West Indies and twelve in Saint-
Pierre-et-Miquelon. The permanent staff attached to the ship
thus tallies with the estimates (55 posts) and eleven posts were
created with the shipowners instead of the five projected.

Lastly, the French Government challenges the Commission’s
assessment which finds that the economic consequences of the
aid for Saint-Pierre-et-Miquelon are inadequate. First, it submits
that the Commission could not evaluate the economic conse-
quences arising from the aid over the period 2001-2003 by
reference to a calculation involving the extrapolation of figures
recorded for the years 1999 and 2000 without committing an
error of law. Second, the Commission’s evaluation is based on
errors of fact. In any event, even if the economic consequences
for Saint-Pierre-et-Miquelon do not exceed the amount of the
aid,
it is nevertheless appropriate to evaluate them in the
context of the archipelago, that is to say, by reference, in
particular, to its size and economic potential.