Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 20 June 2002 in Case C-287/00: Commission of the European Communities v Federal Republic of Germany (Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Sixth VAT Directive — Articles 2(1) and 13(A)(1)(i) — Research activities of public-sector higher-education establishments carried out for consideration — Exemption)
Date: 2002-08-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Germany, VAT, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, basis of tax assessment, tax exemption

C 191/6

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

10.8.2002

1. Declares that, by failing to take the appropriate steps to identify
waters affected by pollution and, consequently, to designate the
corresponding vulnerable zones, in accordance with Article 3 of
and Annex I to Council Directive 91/676/EEC of 12 December
1991 concerning the protection of waters against pollution
caused by nitrates from agricultural sources, the French Republic
has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders Ms Simon to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 233 of 12.8.2000.

2. Orders the French Republic to pay the costs;

3. Orders the Kingdom of Spain to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 247 of 26.8.2000.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

of 20 June 2002

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

in Case C-287/00: Commission of the European Communi-
ties v Federal Republic of Germany(1)

(Sixth Chamber)

of 27 June 2002

(Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Sixth
VAT Directive — Articles 2(1) and 13(A)(1)(i) — Research
activities of public-sector higher-education establishments
carried out for consideration — Exemption)

in Case C-274/00 P: Odette Simon v Commission of the
European Communities (1)

(Appeal — Officials — Person claiming the status of a
member of the temporary staff — Application brought out
of time — Inadmissibility of application — Appeal in part
manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded)

(2002/C 191/09)

(Language of the case: French)

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

In Case C-274/00 P, Odette Simon, resident in Luxembourg,
represented initially by J.-N. Louis, and, subsequently, by
L. Misson, avocats, with an address for service in Luxembourg:
Appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance of
the European Communities (single judge) of 10 May 2000 in
Case T-177/97 Simon v Commission [2000] ECR-SC I-A-75
and II-319, seeking to have that judgment set aside, the other
party to the proceedings being: Commission of the European
Communities (Agent: J. Currall, assisted by D. Waelbroeck),
the Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of: F. Macken, President
of
the Chamber, N. Colneric (Rapporteur), C. Gulmann,
J.-P. Puissochet and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, Judges; F.G. Jacobs,
Advocate General; L. Hewlett, Administrator, for the Registrar,
has given a judgment on 27 June 2002, in which it:

(2002/C 191/10)

(Language of the case: German)

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

In Case C-287/00, Commission of the European Communities
(Agents: G. Wilms and K. Gross) v Federal Republic of Germany
(Agents: W.-D. Plessing and T. Jürgensen): Application for
a declaration that, by exempting from value added tax the
research activities of public-sector higher-education establish-
ments pursuant to Paragraph 4(21a) of the Umsatzsteuergesetz
(Law on Turnover Taxes) of 27 April 1993 (BGBl. 1993 I,
p. 565), as amended by Paragraph 4(5) of the Umsatzsteuerge-
setz-A¨ nderungsgesetz of 12 December 1996 (BGBl. 1996 I,
p. 1851), the Federal Republic of Germany 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 assess-
ment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1), the Court (Fifth Chamber),
composed of: P. Jann, President of the Chamber, S. von Bahr
(Rapporteur), D.A.O. Edward, A. La Pergola and C.W.A. Tim-
mermans, Judges; F.G. Jacobs, Advocate General; R. Grass,
Registrar, has given a judgment on 20 June 2002, in which it:

1. Declares that, by exempting from value added tax the research
activities carried out for consideration by public-sector higher-
education establishments pursuant to Paragraph 4(21a) of the

10.8.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 191/7

Umsatzsteuergesetz (Law on Turnover Taxes) of 27 April
1993, as amended by Paragraph 4(5) of the Umsatzsteuerge-
setz-A¨ nderungsgesetz of 12 December 1996,
the Federal
Republic of Germany 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;

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

(1) OJ C 273 of 23.9.2000.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Sixth Chamber)

of 20 June 2002

In Joined Cases C-388/00 and C-429/00 (Reference for a
preliminary ruling from the Giudice di pace di Genova):
Radiosistemi Srl v Prefetto di Genova (1)

(Directive 1999/5/EC — Radio equipment and telecommuni-
cations terminal equipment — Compatibility of national
legislation prohibiting the marketing of radio apparatus
which does not bear the national type-approval stamp —
Whether penalties provided for by the national legislation
are precluded)

(2002/C 191/11)

(Language of the case: Italian)

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

In Joined Cases C-388/00 and C-429/00: Reference to the
Court under Article 234 EC by the Giudice di pace di Genoa
(Italy) for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending
before that court between Radiosistemi Srl and Prefetto di
Genova, on the interpretation of Article 28 EC, of Directive
1999/5/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of
9 March 1999 on radio equipment and telecommunications
terminal equipment and the mutual recognition of
their
conformity (OJ 1999 L 91, p. 10), and of Decision No 3052/
95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of
13 December 1995 establishing a procedure for the exchange
of information on national measures derogating from the
principle of the free movement of goods within the Com-
munity (OJ 1995 L 321, p. 1), the Court (Sixth Chamber),
composed of: F. Macken, President of the Chamber, N. Colne-
ric, J.-P. Puissochet, V. Skouris and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues
Judges; L.A. Geelhoed, Advocate General;
(Rapporteur),

L. Hewlett, Administrator,
judgment on 20 June 2002, in which it has ruled:

for the Registrar, has given a

1. Article 28 EC precludes legislation and national administrative
practice which — in the context of a system where matters
concerning conformity assessment procedures for the purposes
of placing radio equipment on the market and putting such
equipment into service have been delegated to the administrative
authorities,
their discretion — prevents
economic operators from importing, marketing or holding in
stock, with a view to selling, radio equipment that has not
undergone national type-approval, and which does not admit
other forms of evidence, equally reliable but less burdensome to
obtain, to prove that such equipment is in conformity with
requirements concerning the proper use of the radio frequencies
authorised under national law.

to be decided at

2.

3.

the

The provisions of
second sentence of Article 6(1),
Article 7(1) and Article 8(1) of Directive 1999/5/EC of the
European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 1999 on
radio equipment and telecommunications terminal equipment
and the mutual recognition of their conformity confer on
individuals rights which may be relied upon before national
courts even though the Directive itself has not been formally
law within the period prescribed.
implemented in national
Article 7(2) of the Directive does not allow for the maintenance
in force of legislation or administrative practice which, after
8 April 2000, prohibits the marketing or the putting into
service of radio equipment which does not bear the national
type-approval stamp, where it has been confirmed that such
equipment makes efficient and proper use of the radio frequencies
authorised under national law, or where it is easy to verify that
this is the case.

The term ‘measure’ within the meaning of Article 1 of Decision
No 3052/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 13 December 1995 establishing a procedure for the
exchange of information on national measures derogating from
the principle of
the free movement of goods within the
Community includes any measures, other than judicial decisions,
taken by a Member State having the effect of restricting the free
movement of goods lawfully produced or marketed in another
Member State. Where the administrative authorities, having
seized a particular model or a particular type of product which
is lawfully marketed in another Member State, continue to
withhold that model or product after a check has been carried
out by the public authorities responsible for technical checks to
ascertain that the product in question is in conformity with both
national and Community legislation, that is a ‘measure’ which
must be notified to the Commission within the meaning of that
provision.

4. Where national provisions have been recognised as being
contrary to Community law, the imposition of fines or other
coercive measures for infringements of those provisions is also
incompatible with Community law.

(1) OJ C 28 of 27.1.2001.