Case C-396/02: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Gerechtshof (Douanekamer) te Amsterdam by judgment of that Court of 6 November 2002 in the case of DFDS B.V. against Head of the Rotterdam Customs District
Date: 2003-01-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: commercial vehicle, common customs tariff, interpretation of the law, road transport, technical specification

C 7/14

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

11.1.2003

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Rechtbank van
Eerste Aanleg (Antwerpen) by judgment of that Court of
4 November 2002 in the case of NV Transport service
against 1. The Belgian State, and 2. BVBA Bea Cars

Are vehicles which are designed for off-highway use and
intended for the transport and dumping of materials, and, in
particular, are equipped for that purpose with an intricate,
versatile and precise tipping function, excluded from the scope
of the term ‘dumper’ contained in heading 8704 10 of the
CCT?

(Case C-395/02)

(2003/C 7/24)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by judgment of the Rechtbank van
Eerste Aanleg (Court of First Instance) of 4 November 2002,
received at the Court Registry on 11 November 2002, for a
preliminary ruling in the case of NV Transport service against
1. The Belgian State, and 2. BVBA Bea Cars on the following
question:

Does the principle of the neutrality of value added tax preclude
a Member State from claiming additional VAT from a taxable
person which has issued an invoice, correctly or otherwise, in
accordance with the VAT exemption applicable to intra-
Community supplies
the BTW-Wetboek
(Article 39a of
(Belgian VAT Code)) where it is evident that the VAT has been
paid by the end user and transferred to the Member State by
the person who drew up the invoice issued to that end user?

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Gerechtshof
(Douanekamer) te Amsterdam by judgment of that Court
of 6 November 2002 in the case of DFDS B.V. against
Head of the Rotterdam Customs District

(Case C-396/02)

(2003/C 7/25)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by judgment of
the Gerechtshof
(Douanekamer) te Amsterdam (Amsterdam Regional Court of
Appeal — Customs Chamber) of 6 November 2002, received
at the Court Registry on 11 November 2002, for a preliminary
ruling in the case of DFDS B.V. against Head of the Rotterdam
Customs District on the following question:

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the La Cour d’appel
de Bruxelles by order of that Court of 6 November 2002
in the case of 1. Clinique la Ramee, a non-profit-making
associationy, and 2. Winterthur Europe Assurance SA
against 1. Jean-Pierre Riehl, and 2. the Council of the
European Union

(Case C-397/02)

(2003/C 7/26)

Reference has been made to the Court of
Justice of the
European Communities by order of the La Cour d’appel de
Bruxelles (Court of Appeal, Brussels) of 6 November 2002,
received at the Court Registry on 11 November 2002, for a
preliminary ruling in the case of 1. Clinique la Ramee, a
non-profit-making associationy, and 2. Winterthur Europe
Assurance SA against 1. Jean-Pierre Riehl, and 2. the Council
of the European Union on the following question:

Must Article 85a of the Staff Regulations of officials of the
European Communities, as laid down by Articles 2 and 3 of
Regulation (EEC, Euratom, ECSC) No 259/68 (1) of the Council
of 29 February 1968 and by the regulations amending that
regulation, be interpreted as conferring on the Communities
the right to claim from a third party liable for the death of an
official reimbursement in full of the survivor’s pension paid to
the surviving spouse pursuant to Articles 79 and 79a of those
Staff Regulations, although the legislation applicable to the
right to receive payment of compensation for the damage
provides that the right to a survivor’s pension is unconnected
with the obligation of the perpetrator of a wrongful act to
compensate in full for the damage, and although the damage
suffered by the surviving husband as a result of the loss of the
deceased wife’s income is less than the amount of the survivor’s
pension paid to him?

(1) Regulation (EEC, Euratom, ECSC) No 259/68 of the Council of
29 February 1968 laying down the Staff Regulations of Officials
and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the
European Communities and instituting special measures tempor-
arily applicable to officials of the Commission (English special
edition: Series-I 68(I) P. 30).