Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) 6 June 2002 in Case C-133/99: Kingdom of the Netherlands v Commission of the European Communities (EAGGF — Clearance of accounts — 1995 financial year — Aid for processing of skimmed milk into casein and caseinates)
Date: 2002-09-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EAGGF Guarantee Section, Netherlands, action for annulment (EU), production aid, skimmed milk

28.9.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 233/1

I

(Information)

COURT OF JUSTICE

COURT OF JUSTICE

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

11 July 2002

employment, on the sole ground that that student completed her
secondary education in another Member State.

(1) OJ C 258 of 15.8.1998.

in Case C-224/98 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Tribunal du travail de Liège): Marie-Nathalie D’Hoop
v Office national de l’emploi (1)

(Citizenship of the Union — Principle of non-discrimination
— National legislation granting the right to tideover allow-
ances to its nationals only on condition that they have
completed their secondary education in an educational estab-
lishment in their own Member State — National seeking
first employment having completed her secondary education
in an educational establishment in another Member State)

(2002/C 233/01)

(Language of the case: French)

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

In Case C-224/98: Reference to the Court under Article 177
of the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) by the Tribunal du
for a preliminary ruling in the
travail de Liège (Belgium)
proceedings pending before that court between Marie-Nathalie
D’Hoop and Office national de l’emploi on the interpretation
of Article 48 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment,
Article 39 EC) and Article 7 of Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68
of the Council of 15 October 1968 on freedom of movement
for workers within the Community (OJ, English Special Edition
1968 (II), p. 475), the Court, composed of: G.C. Rodríguez
Iglesias, President, P. Jann (Rapporteur), F. Macken and S. von
Bahr (Presidents of Chambers), C. Gulmann, D.A.O. Edward,
A. La Pergola, R. Schintgen, V. Skouris, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues
and C.W.A. Timmermans, Judges; L.A. Geelhoed, Advocate
General; H. von Holstein, Deputy Registrar, has given a
judgment on 11 July 2002, in which it has ruled:

Community law precludes a Member State from refusing to grant the
tideover allowance to one of its nationals, a student seeking her first

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

6 June 2002

in Case C-133/99: Kingdom of the Netherlands v Com-
mission of the European Communities (1)

(EAGGF — Clearance of accounts — 1995 financial year
— Aid for processing of skimmed milk into casein and
caseinates)

(2002/C 233/02)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

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

In Case C-133/99, Kingdom of the Netherlands (Agents:
A. Fierstra and N. Wijmenga) supported by French Republic
(Agents: R. Abraham and C. Vasak) v Commission of the
European Communities (Agents: T. van Rijn, K.-D. Borchardt
and C. van der Hauwaert): Application for partial annulment
of Commission Decision 1999/187/EC of 3 February 1999 on
the clearance of the accounts presented by the Member States
in respect of the expenditure for 1995 of the Guarantee
Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee
Fund (OJ 1999 L 61, p. 37),
in so far as it excludes the
applicant Member State from Community financing in the
sum of NLG 39 182 606 by way of aid for the processing of
skimmed milk into casein and caseinates, the Court (Fifth

C 233/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

28.9.2002

Chamber), composed of: P. Jann (Rapporteur), President of the
Chamber, D.A.O. Edward, A. La Pergola, M. Wathelet and
C.W.A. Timmermans, Judges; J. Mischo, Advocate General;
H.A. Rühl, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, has given
a judgment on 6 June 2002, in which it:

1. Annuls Commission Decision 1999/187/EC of 3 February
1999 on the clearance of the accounts presented by the Member
States in respect of the expenditure for 1995 of the Guarantee
Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee
Fund, in so far as it excludes the Kingdom of the Netherlands
from Community financing in the sum of NLG 32 746 529 by
way of aid for the processing of skimmed milk into casein and
caseinates;

2. Dismisses the remainder of the action by the Kingdom of the

Netherlands;

3. Orders the Commission of the European Communities to pay
five sixths of the costs and the Kingdom of the Netherlands to
pay one sixth of the cost;

4. Orders the French Republic to bear its own costs.

( 1) OJ C 226 of 7.8.1999.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

11 July 2002

in Case C-371/99 (Reference for a preliminary ruling
from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden): Liberexim BV v
Staatssecretaris van Financiën (1)

(Sixth VAT Directive — Importation by removal of goods
from customs arrangements — Transport by road under
the TIR arrangements or the external Community transit
arrangements — Changing of tractor — Unloading of trailer
and destruction of seals — Removal of goods from customs
supervision)

(2002/C 233/03)

preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that
court between Liberexim BV and Staatssecretaris van Financiën
on the interpretation of Article 7(3) of the Sixth Council
Directive (77/338/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), as amended by Council Directive
92/111/EEC of 14 December 1992 amending Directive 77/
388 and introducing simplification measures with regard to
value added tax (OJ 1992 L 384, p. 47), the Court (Fifth
Chamber), composed of: P. Jann, President of the Chamber,
Judges;
D.A.O. Edward and A. La Pergola (Rapporteur),
J. Mischo, Advocate General; H. von Holstein, Deputy Regis-
trar, has given a judgment on 11 July 2002, in which it has
ruled:

1. Where goods, transported by road under the external Com-
munity transit arrangements, are placed on the Community
market after a number of irregularities have been committed in
respect of those goods in various Member States, the goods
cease to be covered by those arrangements within the meaning
of Article 7(3) 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, as amended by Council
Directive 92/111/EEC of 14 December 1992 amending
Directive 77/388 and introducing simplification measures with
regard to value added tax, on the territory of the Member State
where the first operation which can be regarded as a removal of
the goods from customs supervision was carried out.

Any act or omission which prevents, if only for a short time,
the competent customs authority from gaining access to goods
under customs supervision and from monitoring them as
provided for by the Community customs provisions must be
regarded as a removal of the goods in question from customs
supervision.

2.

Removal of goods from customs supervision does not require
intent, but, instead, only that certain objective conditions be
met.

(Language of the case: Dutch)

(1) OJ C 366 of 18.12.1999.

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

In Case C-371/99: Reference to the Court under Article 234
EC by the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands) for a