Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) 21 February 2002 in Case C-215/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Regeringsrätten): Arbetsmarknadsstyrelsen v Petra Rydergård (Social security — Unemployment benefit — Conditions governing the retention of entitlement to benefits for an unemployed person travelling to another Member State)
Date: 2002-05-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Community migration, interpretation of the law, self-employment, social security, unemployment

C 109/10

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

4.5.2002

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

2. Orders the Republic of Finland to pay the costs.

(Fifth Chamber)

7 March 2002

(1) OJ C 247 of 26.8.2000.

in Case C-169/00: Commission of the European Communi-
ties v Republic of Finland (1)

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Sixth
VAT Directive, Articles 2 and 28(3)(b) and point 2 of
Annex F — Act of Accession of the Republic of Finland —
Exemption for the services supplied by authors, artists and
performers of works of art — Derogating provisions)

(2002/C 109/14)

(Language of the case: Finnish)

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

(Fifth Chamber)

21 February 2002

in Case C-215/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Regeringsrätten): Arbetsmarknadsstyrelsen v Petra
Rydergård (1)

(Social security — Unemployment benefit — Conditions
governing the retention of entitlement to benefits for an
unemployed person travelling to another Member State)

(2002/C 109/15)

(Language of the case: Swedish)

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

In Case C-169/00, Commission of the European Communities
(Agents: E. Paasivirta and E. Traversa) v Republic of Finland
(Agent: E. Bygglin): Application for a declaration that, by
maintaining in force legislation under which supplies of works
of art by artists or their agents and imports of works of art
bought directly from artists are exempted from value added
tax, the Republic of Finland has failed to fulfil its obligations
under Article 2 of the Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of
17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member
States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value
added tax: uniform basis of assessment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1),
the Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of: P. Jann, President of
the Chamber, S. von Bahr (Rapporteur) and A. La Pergola,
Judges; L.A. Geelhoed, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar,
has given a judgment on 7 March 2002, in which it:

1. Declares that, by maintaining in force legislation exempting
from value added tax the sale of a work of art by the artist,
either directly or through an agent, and the importation of a
work of art by the owner-artist, the Republic of Finland has
failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 2 of the Sixth
Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the
harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to
turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform
basis of assessment.

In Case C-215/00: Reference to the Court under Article 234
EC by the Regeringsrätten (Sweden) for a preliminary ruling in
the proceedings pending before that court between Arbetsmar-
knadsstyrelsen and Petra Rydergård, on the interpretation of
Article 69(1)(a) of 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 (EC) No 118/97 of
2 December 1996 (OJ 1997 L 28, p. 1), the Court (Fifth
Chamber), composed of: P. Jann (Rapporteur), President of the
Chamber, S. von Bahr, D.A.O. Edward, A. La Pergola and
C.W.A. Timmermans, Judges; L.A. Geelhoed, Advocate Gen-
eral; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment on 21 February
2002, in which it has ruled:

1.

the

The question as to the conditions under which a person may be
regarded as having remained available to the employment
services of
competent State within the meaning of
Article 69(1)(a) of 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 (EC) No 118/97 of 2 December
1996, must be examined on the basis of the rules of national
law of that State.

4.5.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 109/11

2. Article 69(1)(a) of Regulation No 1408/71, as amended and
updated by Regulation No 118/97, must be construed as
meaning that, in order to retain entitlement to unemployment
benefits as provided for therein, a person seeking work must
have remained available to the employment services of the
competent State for a total of at least four weeks after the
commencement of unemployment, regardless of whether that
period was continuous or not.

On a proper construction of Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC)
No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical
nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff, as amended by
Regulation (EC) No 2086/97 of 4 November 1997, immunoglobul-
in concentrates from dried, defatted and decaseinated colostrum,
standardised by means of lactose, are to be classified as pharmaceutical
products in Chapter 30 of the Combined Nomenclature.

(1) OJ C 211 of 22.7.2000.

(1) OJ C 247 of 26.8.2000.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fourth Chamber)

7 March 2002

(Sixth Chamber)

7 February 2002

in Case C-259/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling
from the Finanzgericht München): Biochem Zusatzstoffe
Handels- und Produktions GmbH v Oberfinanzdirektion
Nürnberg (1)

in Case C-279/00: Commission of the European Communi-
ties v Italian Republic (1)

(Common Customs Tariff — Tariff headings — Tariff
classification of immunoglobulin concentrates from col-
ostrum — Classification in the Combined Nomenclature)

(Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations —
Freedom to supply services — Free movement of capital —
Business of providing temporary labour)

(2002/C 109/16)

(2002/C 109/17)

(Language of the case: German)

(Language of the case: Italian)

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

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

In Case C-259/00: Reference to the Court under Article 234
EC by the Finanzgericht München (Germany) for a preliminary
ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between
Biochem Zusatzstoffe Handels- und Produktions GmbH and
Oberfinanzdirektion Nürnberg, on the interpretation of Chap-
ter 30 of the Combined Nomenclature, set out in Annex I to
Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the
tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common
Customs Tariff
(OJ 1987 L 256, p. 1), as amended by
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2086/97 of 4 November
1997 (OJ 1997 L 312, p. 1), the Court (Fourth Chamber),
composed of: D.A.O. Edward (Rapporteur), acting for the
President of
the Fourth Chamber, A. La Pergola and
C.W.A. Timmermans, Judges; C. Stix-Hackl, Advocate General;
R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment on 7 March 2002, in
which it has ruled:

In Case C-279/00, Commission of the European Communities
(Agents: E. Traversa and M. Patakia) v Italian Republic (Agent:
U. Leanza, assisted by D. Del Gaizo): Application for a
declaration that, by requiring undertakings engaged in the
provision of temporary labour which are established in other
Member States to maintain their registered office or a branch
office on Italian territory, and to lodge a guarantee of ITL
700 million with a credit institution having its registered office
or a branch office on Italian territory, the Italian Republic has
failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 49 EC and 56 EC,
the Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of: F. Macken, President
of the Chamber, C. Gulmann, R. Schintgen (Rapporteur),
V. Skouris, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, Judges; S. Alber, Advocate
General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment on 7 Febru-
ary 2002, in which it: