Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 27 February 2003 in Case C-320/01 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeitsgericht Lübeck): Wiebke Busch v Klinikum Neustadt GmbH & Co. Betriebs-KG (Equal treatment for men and women — Article 2(1) of Directive 76/207/EEC — Protection of pregnant women)
Date: 2003-04-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: interpretation of the law, motherhood, parental leave, racial discrimination

26.4.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 101/7

(Rapporteur) and A. Rosas, Judges; S. Alber, Advocate General;
L. Hewlett, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, has given
a judgment on 25 February 2003, in which it:

1. Declares that, by introducing and maintaining in force rate-
freezing rules applicable to all contracts of insurance in respect
of third-party liability arising from the use of motor vehicles in
relation to risks situated within Italian territory, without
distinguishing between insurance companies having their head
office in Italy and those conducting their business in Italy
through branch offices or under the freedom to provide services,
in breach of the principle of freedom to set premiums referred to
in Articles 6, 29 and 39 of Council Directive 92/49/EEC of
18 June 1992 on the coordination of laws, regulations and
administrative provisions relating to direct insurance other than
life assurance and amending Directives 73/239/EEC and 88/
357/EEC (third non-life insurance Directive),
the Italian
Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

2. Dismisses the remainder of the application;

3. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

(Agents: K.-D. Borchardt and M. Niejahr), which contends that
the Court — composed of: G.C. Rodríguez Iglesias, (President),
J.-P. Puissochet, M. Wathelet, R. Schintgen (Rapporteur) and
C.W.A. Timmermans, (Presidents of Chambers), C. Gulmann,
D.A.O. Edward, A. La Pergola, P. Jann and V. Skouris, F. Macken
and N. Colneric, S. von Bahr, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues and
A. Rosas,
Judges; P. Léger, Advocate General; R. Grass,
Registrar, has given a judgment on 6 March 2003, in which it:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders T Port GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 245 of 1 September 2001.

( 1) OJ C 134 of 5.5.2001.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

of 27 February 2003

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

of 6 March 2003

in Case C-320/01 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Arbeitsgericht Lübeck): Wiebke Busch v Klinikum
Neustadt GmbH & Co. Betriebs-KG (1)

in Case C-213/01 P: T Port GmbH & Co. KG v Commission
of the European Communities (1)

(Equal treatment for men and women — Article 2(1) of
Directive 76/207/EEC — Protection of pregnant women)

(Appeal — Bananas — Imports from ACP States and
non-member countries — Calculation of annual reference
quantity allocated to operators — Imports in accordance
with interim measures ordered by a national court in
interlocutory proceedings — Action for damages)

(2003/C 101/13)

(Language of the case: German)

(2003/C 101/12)

(Language of the case: German)

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

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

In Case C-213/01 P: T Port GmbH & Co. KG, established in
Hamburg (Germany) (lawyer: G. Meier) — appeal against the
judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber) of
20 March 2001 in Case T-52/99 (ECR II-981), seeking to have
that
the other party to the
proceedings being Commission of the European Communities,

judgment set aside in part,

In Case C-320/01: Reference to the Court under Article 234
EC by the Arbeitsgericht Lübeck (Germany) for a preliminary
ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between
Wiebke Busch and Klinikum Neustadt GmbH & Co. Betriebs-
KG, on the interpretation of Article 2(1) of Council Directive
76/207/EEC of 9 February 1976 on the implementation of the
principle of equal treatment for men and women as regards
access to employment, vocational training and promotion,
and working conditions (OJ 1976 L 39, p. 40), the Court (Fifth
Chamber), composed of: M. Wathelet (Rapporteur), President
of the Chamber, C.W.A. Timmermans, P. Jann, S. von Bahr
Judges; D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer, Advocate
and A. Rosas,

C 101/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

26.4.2003

General; M.-F. Contet, Principal Administrator, for the Regis-
trar, has given a judgment on 27 February 2003, in which it
has ruled:

1. Article 2(1) of Council Directive 76/207/EEC of 9 February
1976 on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment
for men and women as regards access to employment, vocational
training and promotion, and working conditions is to be
interpreted as precluding a requirement that an employee who,
with the consent of her employer, wishes to return to work
before the end of her parental leave must inform her employer
that she is pregnant in the event
that, because of certain
legislative prohibitions, she will be unable to carry out all of her
duties.

2. Article 2(1) of Directive 76/207 is to be interpreted as
precluding an employer from contesting under national law the
consent it gave to the reinstatement of an employee to return
before the end of her parental leave on the grounds that it was
in error as to her being pregnant.

(Agent: C. Pochet): Application for a declaration that, in so far
as the Région flamande (Flemish Region) has failed to transpose
Article 4(1) and (2) of and Annex I to Council Directive 79/
409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds
(OJ 1979 L 103, p. 1), to demarcate special protection areas
within its territory capable of being relied upon as against
third parties, and to adopt the measures necessary to ensure
that the classification of a site as a special protection area
automatically and simultaneously entails the application of
a system of protection and conservation complying with
Community law, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil
its obligations under Article 4(1) and (2) in conjunction with
Article 4(4), as partially amended, of Directive 79/409 in
accordance with Article 7 of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of
21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of
wild fauna and flora (OJ 1992 L 206, p. 7), by Article 6(2) to
(4) of the latter directive, the Court (Sixth Chamber), composed
of: J.-P. Puissochet, President of the Chamber, R. Schintgen,
C. Gulmann (Rapporteur), F. Macken and J.N. Cunha Rodri-
gues, Judges; P. Léger, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar,
has given a judgment on 27 February 2003, in which it:

( 1) OJ C 303 of 27.10.2001.

the measures necessary to ensure that

1. Declares that, in so far as the Région flamande has failed to
transpose Article 4(1) and (2) of and Annex I to Council
Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of
wild birds, to demarcate special protection areas within its
territory capable of being relied upon as against third parties,
and to adopt
the
classification of a site as a special protection area automatically
and simultaneously entails the application of a system of
protection and conservation complying with Community law,
the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations
under Article 4(1) and (2) of Directive 79/409 and the first
sentence of Article 4(4) thereof, as amended, in accordance with
Article 7 of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992
on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and
flora, by Article 6(2) to (4) of the latter directive;

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Sixth Chamber)

of 27 February 2003

in Case C-415/01: Commission of the European Communi-
ties v Kingdom of Belgium (1)

(Failure by a Member State to fulfil

its obligations —

Conservation of wild birds — Special protection areas)

2. Orders the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.

(2003/C 101/14)

(Language of the case: French)

(1) OJ C 369 of 22.12.2001.

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

In Case C-415/01, Commission of the European Communities
(Agents: G. Valero Jordana and J. Adda) v Kingdom of Belgium