Judgment of the Court 19 February 2002 in Case C-256/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d'appel de Bruxelles): Besix SA v Wasserreinigungsbau Alfred Kretzschmar GmbH & Co. KG (WABAG), Planungs- und Forschungsgesellschaft Dipl. Ing. W. Kretzschmar GmbH & Co. KG (Plafog) (Brussels Convention — Article 5(1) — Jurisdiction in matters relating to a contract — Place of performance of the obligation in question — Obligation not to do something, applicable without geographical limit — Undertakings given by two companies not to bind themselves to other partners when tendering for a public contract — Application of Article 2)
Date: 2002-05-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Belgium, Germany, civil law, commercial law, interpretation of the law, jurisdiction

18.5.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 118/13

1. Declares that, by maintaining in force, in Article 207 of the
Italian highway code, a disproportionate difference in treatment
between offenders based on the place of registration of their
vehicles, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations
under Article 6 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment,
Article 12 EC);

2. Orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 247 of 26.8.2000.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

19 February 2002

in Case C-256/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Cour d’appel de Bruxelles): Besix SA v Wasserreini-
gungsbau Alfred Kretzschmar GmbH & Co. KG (WAB-
Ing.
AG), Planungs- und Forschungsgesellschaft Dipl.

W. Kretzschmar GmbH & Co. KG (Plafog) (1)

(Brussels Convention — Article 5(1) — Jurisdiction in
matters relating to a contract — Place of performance of the
obligation in question — Obligation not to do something,
applicable without geographical limit — Undertakings given
by two companies not to bind themselves to other partners
when tendering for a public contract — Application of
Article 2)

(2002/C 118/19)

(Language of the case: French)

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

In Case C-256/00: Reference to the Court under the Protocol
of 3 June 1971 on the interpretation by the Court of Justice of
the Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and the
Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters
by the Cour d’Appel de Bruxelles (Belgium) for a preliminary
ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between
Besix SA and Wasserreinigungsbau Alfred Kretzschmar GmbH
& Co. KG (WABAG), Planungs- und Forschungsgesellschaft
Dipl. Ing. W. Kretzschmar GmbH & Co. KG (Plafog), on
the aforementioned
the interpretation of Article 5(1) of
Convention of 27 September 1968 (OJ 1972 L 299, p. 32), as
amended by the Convention of 9 October 1978 on the
Accession of the Kingdom of Denmark, Ireland and the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (OJ 1978
L 304, p. 1 and — amended version - p. 77), the Court,
Jann,
composed of: G.C. Rodrı´guez Iglesias, President, P.

F. Macken and N. Colneric (Presidents of Chambers), A. La
Pergola, J.P. Puissochet, M. Wathelet, R. Schintgen (Rapporteur)
and V. Skouris, Judges; S. Alber, Advocate General; R. Grass,
Registrar, has given a judgment on 19 February 2002, in
which it has ruled:

The special jurisdictional rule in matters relating to a contract, laid
down in Article 5(1) of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on
Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commer-
cial Matters, as amended by the Convention of 9 October 1978 on
the Accession of the Kingdom of Denmark, Ireland and the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, is not applicable
where, as in the present case, the place of performance of the
obligation in question cannot be determined because it consists in an
undertaking not
to any
geographical limit and is therefore characterised by a multiplicity of
places for its performance. In such a case,
jurisdiction can be
determined only by application of the general criterion laid down in
the first paragraph of Article 2 of that Convention.

to do something which is not subject

(1) OJ C 233 of 12.8.2000.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

21 March 2002

in Case C-267/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the High Court of Justice (England & Wales), Queen’s
Bench Division (Crown Office)): Commissioners of Cus-
toms and Excise v Zoological Society of London (1)

(Sixth VAT Directive — Article 13A(2)(a), second indent —
Exempt transactions — Bodies managed and administered
on a voluntary basis)

(2002/C 118/20)

(Language of the case: English)

In Case C-267/00: Reference to the Court under Article 234
EC by the High Court of Justice of England and Wales, Queen’s