Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 24 September 2002 in Case C-471/99 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Sozialgericht Nürnberg): Alfredo Martínez Domínguez, Joaquín Benítez Urbano, Agapito Mateos Cruz, Carmen Calvo Fernández v Bundesanstalt für Arbeit, Kindergeldkasse (Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 — Articles 77 and 78 — Pensioners under the legislation of several Member States — Pensioners under a social-security convention between Member States concluded prior to accession to the European Communities — Benefits for dependent children and for orphans of pensioners — Entitlement to family benefits for which the competent institution of a Member State other than that of residence is responsible — Conditions of entitlement)
Date: 2002-11-09
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Germany, family benefit, interpretation of the law, orphan, social-security benefit

9.11.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 274/3

a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that
court between Baumbast, R and Secretary of State for the
Home Department, on the interpretation of Article 18 EC and
Article 12 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, F. Macken (Rapporteur), N. Colneric and
S. von Bahr
(Presidents of Chambers), C. Gulmann,
D.A.O. Edward, A. La Pergola, J.-P. Puissochet, M. Wathelet,
V. Skouris, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues and C.W.A. Timmermans,
Judges; L.A. Geelhoed, Advocate General; L. Hewlett, Adminis-
trator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 17 September
2002, in which it has ruled:

1.

Children of a citizen of the European Union who have installed
themselves in a Member State during the exercise by their
parent of rights of residence as a migrant worker in that
Member State are entitled to reside there in order to attend
general educational courses there, pursuant to Article 12 of
Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 of the Council of 15 October
1968 on freedom of movement
for workers within the
Community. The fact that the parents of the children concerned
have meanwhile divorced, the fact that only one parent is a
citizen of the Union and that parent has ceased to be a migrant
worker in the host Member State and the fact that the children
are not themselves citizens of the Union are irrelevant in this
regard.

2. Where children have the right to reside in a host Member State
in order to attend general educational courses pursuant to
Article 12 of Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68, that provision
must be interpreted as entitling the parent who is the primary
carer of those children, irrespective of his nationality, to reside
with them in order to facilitate the exercise of that right
notwithstanding the fact that the parents have meanwhile
divorced or that the parent who has the status of citizen of the
European Union has ceased to be a migrant worker in the host
Member State.

3. A citizen of the European Union who no longer enjoys a right
of residence as a migrant worker in the host Member State can,
as a citizen of the Union, enjoy there a right of residence by
direct application of Article 18(1) EC. The exercise of that right
is subject to the limitations and conditions referred to in that
provision, but the competent authorities and, where necessary,
the national courts must ensure that those limitations and
conditions are applied in compliance with the general principles
of Community law and, in particular, the principle of pro-
portionality.

( 1) OJ C 6 of 8.1.2002.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Sixth Chamber)

of 24 September 2002

in Case C-471/99 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Sozialgericht Nürnberg): Alfredo Martínez Domín-
guez, Joaquín Benítez Urbano, Agapito Mateos Cruz,
Carmen Calvo Fernández v Bundesanstalt für Arbeit,
Kindergeldkasse (1)

(Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 — Articles 77 and 78 —
Pensioners under the legislation of several Member States
— Pensioners under a social-security convention between
Member States concluded prior to accession to the European
Communities — Benefits for dependent children and for
orphans of pensioners — Entitlement to family benefits for
which the competent institution of a Member State other
than that of residence is responsible — Conditions of
entitlement)

(2002/C 274/04)

(Language of the case: German)

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

In Case C-471/99: Reference to the Court under Article 177
of the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) by the Sozialgericht
Nürnberg (Germany) for a preliminary ruling in the proceed-
ings pending before that court between Alfredo Martínez
Domínguez, Joaquín Benítez Urbano, Agapito Mateos Cruz,
Carmen Calvo Fernández and Bundesanstalt für Arbeit, Kinder-
geldkasse, on the interpretation of Articles 77(2)(b), 78(2)(b)
and 79(1) 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 (EEC) No 2001/83 of
2 June 1983 (OJ 1983 L 230, p. 6), the Court
(Sixth
Chamber), composed of: F. Macken, President of the Chamber,
C. Gulmann (Rapporteur), R. Schintgen, V. Skouris and
J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, Judges; A. Tizzano, Advocate General;
L. Hewlett, Administrator,
for the Registrar, has given a
judgment on 24 September 2002, in which it has ruled:

Articles 77(2)(b) and 78(2)(b) 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 (EEC) No 2001/83 of 2 June
1983, and read in conjunction with Article 79(1) thereof, must be
interpreted as meaning that the competent institution of a Member
State other than that of the residence of a person in receipt of an old-
age or invalidity pension, or of the residence of orphans of a deceased
worker, is not required to grant the persons concerned benefits for
dependent children or for orphans where the conditions laid down by

C 274/4

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

9.11.2002

the legislation of the Member State of residence for the award of such
benefits are not or are no longer satisfied and where the entitlement
of the pensioner or of the orphans claiming under the deceased worker
is not acquired, in the other Member State, solely under the legislation
of that State. None the less,
in such a situation, the competent
institution of the Member State other than that of residence may be
required to award the benefit at
issue under a social-security
convention entered into by the two Member States concerned and
incorporated in their national law prior to the entry into force of the
Regulation, where the persons concerned have an established right to
continued application of that convention after the entry into force of
the Regulation.

( 1) OJ C 122 of 29.4.2000.

composed of: N. Colneric, President of the Second Chamber,
acting for the President of the Sixth Chamber, C. Gulmann,
J.-P. Puissochet, R. Schintgen (Rapporteur) and V. Skouris,
Judges; C. Stix-Hackl, Advocate General; L. Hewlett, Adminis-
trator, Registrar, has given a judgment on 17 September 2002,
in which it has ruled:

1. Article 2(1) 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 must be interpreted as
services which is effected for
meaning that a supply of
consideration but
is not based on enforceable obligations,
because it has been agreed that the provider is bound in honour
only to provide the services, constitutes a transaction subject to
value added tax.

2. Article 11A(1)(a) of the Sixth Directive 77/388 must be
interpreted as meaning that the full amount of the entry fees
received by the organiser of a competition constitutes the taxable
amount for that competition where the organiser has that
amount freely at his disposal.

(1) OJ C 47 of 19.2.2000.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Sixth Chamber)

of 17 September 2002

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

in Case C-498/99 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the VAT and Duties Tribunal, Manchester): Town &
County Factors Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and
Excise (1)

(Sixth VAT Directive — Scope — Competition whose
organiser binds himself in honour only — Taxable amount)

(2002/C 274/05)

(Language of the case: English)

In Case C-498/99: Reference to the Court under Article 234
EC by the VAT and Duties Tribunal, Manchester (United
Kingdom), for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending
before that tribunal between Town & County Factors Ltd and
Commissioners of Customs and Excise, on the interpretation
of Articles 2(1), 6(1) and 11A(1) of 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 (Sixth Chamber),

of 17 September 2002

in Case C-513/99 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Korkein hallinto-oikeus): Concordia Bus Finland Oy
Ab v Helsingin kaupunki, HKL-Bussiliikenne (1)

(Public service contracts in the transport sector — Directives
92/50/EEC and 93/38/EEC — Contracting municipality
which organises bus transport services and an economically
independent entity of which participates in the tender
procedure as a tenderer — Taking into account of criteria
relating to the protection of the environment to determine
the economically most advantageous tender — Whether
permissible when the municipal entity which is tendering
meets those criteria more easily)

(2002/C 274/06)

(Language of the case: Finnish)

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

In Case C-513/99: Reference to the Court under Article 234
EC by the Korkein hallinto-oikeus (Finland) for a preliminary