Case C-154/02: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Hässleholms Tingsrätt by order of that Court of 22 April 2002 in the case against Jan Nilsson
Date: 2002-06-15
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: environmental protection, preliminary issue, protection of animal life, purchase, sale

15.6.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 144/27

— impede the Italian establishment of a limited com-
pany whose principal business is in the United
Kingdom from carrying on in the host state the
business of organising and administering courses of
study for preparation for university examinations,
for which the company is duly authorised and
accredited by the United Kingdom public auth-
orities?

— discriminate as between nationals pursuing the same

activities;

— require production of an attestation from the diplo-
matic representation — Italian consulate in the
foreign country in which the degree was awarded —
proving actual residence in that country by the
person concerned for the whole period of
the
university studies;

— limit recognition of degrees ‘solely’ to pursuit of a
profession already pursued in the State of origin,
thus precluding recognition for the purposes of
access to a regulated profession even though not
previously exercised.

— prohibit and/or seriously impede the Italian estab-
lishment of that undertaking in obtaining, in another
Member State and for valuable consideration, the
services conducive to the pursuit of the abovemen-
tioned activity;

— discourage students from enrolling in those courses

of study;

— impede the professional training of enrolled students
and the obtaining of an award capable of conferring
on its holder advantages either in securing access to
a professional activity or in exercising it with greater
reward in other Member States as well.

2. On an interpretation — herein requested — of Article 2
of Council Directive 89/48/EC (1), does that directive
confer rights which may be relied on also before acqui-
sition of the degree mentioned in Article 1 of the directive
itself. If the reply to that question is affirmative, does the
directive itself, regard also being had to the judgment in
Case C-145/99 Commission v Italian Republic [2001] (2),
permit rules or administrative practices in the national
legal order which:

— make recognition of university degrees obtained on
completion of
three years’
training of at
duration subject to the discretion of the public
authorities;

least

— grant recognition in Italy of degrees awarded by
universities recognised in the United Kingdom only
if completed after regular attendance for the whole
to the
course of studies at
exclusion therefore of degrees awarded to Italian
nationals on the basis of periods of study completed
with foreign institutions operating in Italy even
though they are approved and accredited by the
competent public authorities in the Member State to
which they belong;

those universities,

training’

3. What is the meaning and scope of the expression ‘harmful
in Council
interruption (...) of vocational
Decision 63/266/EEC (3) and does it cover the creation at
national level by the public authorities of a permanent
system of
information which evidences that degrees
awarded by a university, even though legally recognised
in the United Kingdom, cannot be recognised under
national legislation if they have been obtained on the
basis of periods of study completed in Italy.

(1) OJ L 19 of 24.1.1989, p. 16.
(2) OJ C 109 of 4.5.2002, p. 2.
(3) OJ 63 of 20.4.1963, p. 1338.

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Hässleholms
Tingsrätt by order of that Court of 22 April 2002 in the
case against Jan Nilsson

(Case C-154/02)

(2002/C 144/46)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by order of the Hässleholms Tingsrätt
(district court) of 22 April 2002, received at the Court Registry
on 26 April 2002, for a preliminary ruling in the case against
Jan Nilsson on the following questions:

1) Do stuffed animals listed in Annex A fall within the

definition of ‘worked specimens’?

2) What is covered by the term ‘acquire’ in Article 8(3) of

Regulation No 338/97(1)?

C 144/28

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

15.6.2002

3) Must the person who acquired the specimen more than

50 years previously be the present owner?

4) Do the provisions on exemption in Article 32 of Regu-
lation No 1808/2001 (2) mean that no assessment by the
authority in accordance with Article 2(w) of Regulation
No 338/97 is required?

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 338/97 of 9 December 1996 on the
protection of species of wild fauna and flora by regulating trade
therein (OJ L 061 of 3.3.1997, p. 1).

(2) Commission Regulation (EC) No 1808/2001 of 30 August 2001
laying down detailed rules concerning the implementation of
Council Regulation (EC) No 338/97 on the protection of species
of wild fauna and flora by regulating trade therein (OJ L 250 of
19.9.2001, p. 1).

— point H(e) of that annex (relating to Italy)

includes,
amongst the benefits under the Italian system which are
subject to residence requirements, benefits supplementing
the minimum pension;

— benefits supplementing the minimum pension do not
possess the characteristics of an autonomous benefit, but
must instead be regarded as an integral element of the
benefit to be awarded,

— the Court of Justice is requested to give a preliminary
ruling on the validity of Annex IIa of Regulation No 1408/
71, inasmuch as it includes amongst the ‘non-exportable’
benefits listed in point H(e) (relating to Italy) the sup-
plement to the minimum pension as provided for by the
Italian legislation;

in other words, a ruling is requested on the question whether
that annex is compatible with Articles 39 and 42 of the EC
Treaty inasmuch as it precludes the exportability not of a
special non-contributory benefit but rather of an element of a
contributory benefit (in this case, an old-age pension) which
cannot be subject to any residence requirement.

(1) OJ L 149 of 5.7.1971, p. 2.
(2) OJ L 136 of 19.5.1992, p. 1.

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunale di
Roma by order of that Court of 5 April 2002 in the
case of Lidia Marcaletti against Istituto nazionale della
previdenza sociale (INPS)

(Case C-158/02)

(2002/C 144/47)

Action brought on 2 May 2002 by the Kingdom of Spain
against the Commission of the European Communities

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by order of the Tribunale di Roma
(Rome District Court) of 5 April 2002, received at the Court
Registry on 29 April 2002, for a preliminary ruling in the case
of Lidia Marcaletti against Istituto nazionale della previdenza
(National Social Welfare Institution) on the
sociale (INPS)
following questions: Whereas:

— Article 4 of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 (1) lists the
benefits from amongst the various branches of social
security which fall within the substantive scope of that
regulation;

— Article 1(t) sets out a Community definition of the terms

‘benefits’ and ‘pensions’;

— Annex IIa, introduced by Regulation No 1247/92 (2) of
30 April 1992, refers to the special non-contributory
benefits which are subject to residence conditions;

(Case C-165/02)

(2002/C 144/48)

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of Justice of the European
Communities on 2 May 2002 by the Kingdom of Spain,
represented by Rosario Silva de Lapuerta, Abogado del Estado,
with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Spanish
Embassy, 4-6, boulevard E. Servais.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul Commission Regulation (EC) No 494/2002 (1) of
19 March 2002 establishing
technical
measures for the recovery of the stock of hake in ICES
sub-areas III, IV, V, VI and VII and ICES divisions VIII a,
b, d, e;

additional

— order the defendant institution to pay the costs.