Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) 7 February 2002 in Case C-5/00: Commission of the European Communities v Federal Republic of Germany (Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Directive 89/391/EEC — Measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work — Articles 9(1)(a) and 10(3)(a) — Employer's duty to keep documents containing an assessment of the risks to safety and health at work)
Date: 2002-04-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Germany, accident prevention, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, occupational health, occupational safety

6.4.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 84/17

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

8 January 2002

in Case C-507/99 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven): Denkavit
Nederland BV v Minister van Landbouw, Natuurbeheer
en Visserij, Voedselvoorzieningsin- en verkoopbureau (1)

(Agriculture — Combating bovine spongiform encephalo-
pathy — Powers of the Member States — Decision to
slaughter and determination of the timing of slaughter
of United Kingdom calves during the bovine spongiform
encephalopathy crisis in March 1996)

(2002/C 84/26)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

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

bovine spongiform encephalopathy and Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in
humans and to the bovine spongiform encephalopathy crisis in
the Member States were entitled, under
the United Kingdom,
Article 8(1)(a) of Council Directive 90/425/EEC of 26 June 1990
concerning veterinary and zootechnical checks applicable in intra-
Community trade in certain live animals and products with a view to
the completion of the internal market, as amended by Council
Directive 92/118/EEC of 17 December 1992 laying down animal
health and public health requirements governing trade in and imports
into the Community of products not subject to the said requirements
laid down in specific Community rules referred to in Annex A (I) to
to Directive
Directive 89/662/EEC and, as regards pathogens,
90/425:

— to order the slaughter of young bovine animals originating from

the United Kingdom present in their territory and

— consequently, to determine when their slaughter took place.

(1) OJ C 79 of 18.3.2000

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

7 February 2002

In Case C-507/99: reference to the Court under Article 234 EC
by the College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven (Netherlands)
for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that
court between Denkavit Nederland BV and Minister van
Landbouw, Natuurbeheer en Visserij, Voedselvoorzieningsin-
en verkoopbureau, on the power of the Member States to
order the slaughter of United Kingdom calves and determine
its timing during the bovine spongiform encephalopathy crisis
of March 1996 and on the interpretation of Article 8 of
Council Directive 90/425/EEC of 26 June 1990 concerning
veterinary and zootechnical checks applicable in intra-Com-
munity trade in certain live animals and products with a view
to the completion of the internal market (OJ 1990 L 224,
p. 29), as amended by Council Directive 92/118/EEC of
17 December 1992 laying down animal health and public
health requirements governing trade in and imports into the
Community of products not subject to the said requirements
laid down in specific Community rules referred to in Annex A
(I) to Directive 89/662/EEC and, as regards pathogens, to
Directive 90/425 (OJ 1993 L 62, p. 49), the Court (Fifth
Chamber), composed of: P. Jann, President of the Chamber,
D.A.O. Edward, A. La Pergola, L. Sevo´ n (Rapporteur) and
M. Wathelet, Judges, Advocate General: F.G. Jacobs, Registrar:
H.A. Rühl, Principal Administrator, has given a judgment on
8 January 2002, in which it has ruled:

The Community provisions applicable to the common agricultural
policy in the beef and veal sector are to be interpreted as meaning
that, in response to information concerning a possible link between

in Case C-5/00: Commission of the European Communi-
ties v Federal Republic of Germany(1)

(Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations —
Directive 89/391/EEC — Measures to encourage improve-
ments in the safety and health of workers at work —
Articles 9(1)(a) and 10(3)(a) — Employer’s duty to keep
documents containing an assessment of the risks to safety
and health at work)

(2002/C 84/27)

(Language of the case: German)

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

In Case C-5/00, Commission of the European Communities
(Agent: M. Bogensberger) v Federal Republic of Germany
(Agents: W.-D. Plessing and B. Muttelsee-Schön): Application
for a declaration that, by exempting, under Paragraph 6(1) of
the Gesetz über die Durchführung von Maßnahmen des
Arbeitsschutzes zur Verbesserung der Sicherheit und des
Gesundheitsschutzes der Beschäftigten bei der Arbeit (Arbeits-
[Law on the implementation of protective
schutzgesetz)
measures to improve the safety and health of employees at
work (Law on safety and health at work)] of 7 August 1996

C 84/18

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

6.4.2002

(BGBl. 1996 I, p. 1246), employers of 10 or fewer workers
from the duty to keep documents containing the results of a
risk assessment, the Federal Republic of Germany has failed to
fulfil its obligations under Articles 5 and 189 of the EC Treaty
(now Articles 10 EC and 249 EC) and Articles 9(1)(a) and
10(3)(a) of Council Directive 89/391/EEC of 12 June 1989 on
the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in
the safety and health of workers at work (OJ 1989 L 183
p. 1). the Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of: S. von Bahr
(Rapporteur), President of the Fourth Chamber, acting for the
President of the Fifth Chamber, D.A.O. Edward, A. La Pergola,
M. Wathelet and C.W.A. Timmermans,
Judges, Advocate
General: L.A. Geelhoed, Registrar: R. Grass, has given a
judgment on 7 February 2002, in which it:

1. Declares that, by failing to ensure that the obligation to be in
possession of an assessment in documentary form of the risks to
safety and health at work, as laid down by Council Directive
89/391/EEC of 12 June 1989 on the introduction of measures
to encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers
at work, applies to employers of 10 or fewer workers in all
circumstances, the Federal Republic of Germany has failed to
fulfil its obligations under Articles 9(1)(a) and 10(3)(a) of that
directive;

2. Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 135 of 13.5.2000.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

of 29 November 2001

in Case C-17/00 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Collège juridictionnel de la Région de Bruxelles-
Capitale): François De Coster v Collège des bourgmestre
et échevins de Watermael-Boitsfort (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling — Defination of a
national court or tribunal — Freedom to provide services —
Municipal tax on satellite dishes — Restriction on the
freedom to receive television programmes by satellite)

(2002/C 84/28)

(Language of the case: French)

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

the Brussels-Capital

Capitale (Judicial Board of
region)
(Belgium) for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending
before that court between François De Coster and Collège des
bourgmestre et échevins de Watermael-Boitsfort — on the
interpretation of Article 59 of the EC Treaty (now, after
amendment, Article 49 EC) and Articles 60 and 66 of the EC
Treaty (now Articles 50 and 55 EC) — the Court (Fifth
Chamber), composed of: P. Jann, President of the Chamber,
S. von Bahr, D.A.O. Edward, A. La Pergola (Rapporteur)
and M. Wathelet, Judges; D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer, Advocate
General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment on 29 Nov-
ember 2001, in which it has ruled:

Article 59 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 49 EC)
and Articles 60 and 66 of the EC Treaty (now Articles 50 and 55
EC) must be interpreted as preventing the application of a tax on
satellite dishes such as that introduced by Articles 1 to 3 of the tax
regulation adopted on 24 June 1997 by the municipal council of
Watermael-Boitsfort.

(1) OJ C 102 of 8.4.2000.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

7 February 2002

in Case C-28/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Oberster Gerichtshof): Liselotte Kauer v Pensions-
versicherungsanstalt der Angestellten, (1)

(Social security for migrant workers — Regulation (EEC)
No 1408/71 — Articles 94(1), (2) and (3) — Old-age
insurance — Periods of child-rearing completed in another
Member State before the entry into force of Regulation
No 1408/71)

(2002/C 84/29)

(Language of the case: German)

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

In Case C-17/00: reference to the Court under Article 234 EC
from the Collège juridictionnel de la Région de Bruxelles-

In Case C-28/00: Reference to the Court under Article 234 EC
by the Oberster Gerichtshof (Austria) for a preliminary ruling
in the proceedings pending before that court between Liselotte