Judgment of the Court 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 (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)
Date: 2002-11-09
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Finland, bus, environmental protection, interpretation of the law, public contract, transport company

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

9.11.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 274/5

ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between
Concordia Bus Finland Oy Ab, formerly Stagecoach Finland
Oy Ab, and Helsingin kaupunki, HKL-Bussiliikenne, on the
interpretation of Articles 2(1)(a), (2)(c) and (4) and 34(1) of
Council Directive 93/38/EEC of 14 June 1993 coordinating
the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water,
energy, transport and telecommunications sectors (OJ 1993
L 199, p. 84), as amended by the Act concerning the conditions
of accession of the Republic of Austria, the Republic of Finland
and the Kingdom of Sweden and the adjustments to the
Treaties on which the European Union is founded (OJ 1994
C 241, p. 21, and OJ 1995 L 1, p. 1), and Article 36(1) of
Council Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992 relating to the
coordination of procedures for the award of public service
contracts (OJ 1992 L 209, p. 1), the Court, composed of:
G.C. Rodríguez Iglesias, President, P. Jann and F. Macken
(Presidents of Chambers), C. Gulmann, D.A.O. Edward, A. La
Pergola, M. Wathelet, R. Schintgen and V. Skouris (Rappor-
teur), Judges; J. Mischo, Advocate General; H. von Holstein,
Deputy Registrar, has given a judgment on 17 September
2002, in which it has ruled:

1. Article 36(1)(a) of Council Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June
1992 relating to the coordination of procedures for the award
of public service contracts must be interpreted as meaning that
where, in the context of a public contract for the provision of
urban bus transport services, the contracting authority decides
to award a contract to the tenderer who submits the economically
most advantageous tender,
it may take into consideration
ecological criteria such as the level of nitrogen oxide emissions
or the noise level of the buses, provided that they are linked to
the subject-matter of the contract, do not confer an unrestricted
freedom of choice on the authority, are expressly mentioned in
the contract documents or the tender notice, and comply with
all the fundamental principles of Community law, in particular
the principle of non-discrimination.

2.

3.

The principle of equal treatment does not preclude the taking
into consideration of criteria connected with protection of the
environment, such as those at issue in the main proceedings,
solely because the contracting entity’s own transport undertaking
is one of the few undertakings able to offer a bus fleet satisfying
those criteria.

The answer to the second and third questions would not be
different if the procedure for the award of the public contract at
issue in the main proceedings fell within the scope of Council
Directive 93/38/EEC of 14 June 1993 coordinating the
procurement procedures of entities operating in the water,
energy, transport and telecommunications sectors.

( 1) OJ C 102 of 8.4.2000.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

of 24 September 2002

in Joined Cases C-74/00 P and C-75/00 P: Falck SpA,
Acciaierie di Bolzano SpA, v Commission of the European
Communities (1)

(State aid — ECSC scheme — Rights of the recipient of aid
— Scope: no need for trade and competition to be affected
— Applicability of different State aid codes over time —
Rate of interest to be applied for the repayment of incompat-
ible aid)

(2002/C 274/07)

(Language of the case: Italian)

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

In Joined Cases C-74/00 P and C-75/00 P: Falck SpA,
established in Milan (Italy), (lawyers: G. Macrì, M. Condinanzi
and F. Colussi) Acciaierie di Bolzano SpA, established in
Bolzano (Italy) (lawyer: B. Nascimbene) — appeal against the
judgment of the Court of First Instance of the European
Communities (Fifth Chamber, Extended Composition) of
16 December 1999 in Case T-158/96 Acciaierie di Bolzano v
Commission [1999] ECR II-3927, the other parties to the
proceedings being Commission of the European Communities
(Agents: V. di Bucci and K.-D. Borchardt) and Italian Republic
(Agent: U. Leanza, assisted by D. Del Gaizo), with an address
for service in Luxembourg, the Court, composed of: G.C. Rodrí-
guez Iglesias, President, P. Jann, F. Macken, N. Colneric and
S. von Bahr (Presidents of Chambers), D.A.O. Edward, A. La
Pergola, J.-P. Puissochet (Rapporteur), M. Wathelet, V. Skouris
and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, Judges; S. Alber, Advocate General;
L. Hewlett, Administrator, for the Registrar, gave a judgment
on 24 September 2002 in which it:

1.

Sets aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance of
16 December 1999 in Case T-158/96 Acciaierie di Bolzano
v Commission in so far as the Commission’s tardiness in
requiring repayment entailed an infringement of the principle
of legal certainty;

2. Dismisses the remainder of the appeals;

3. Dismisses the action for annulment brought by Acciaierie di

Bolzano SpA before the Court of First Instance;