Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 18 September 2003 in Case C-125/01 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Sozialgericht Leipzig): Peter Pflücke v Bundesanstalt für Arbeit (Protection of workers — Insolvency of the employer — Guarantee of payment of outstanding salary — National provision laying down a two-month time-limit for lodging applications for payment and providing for an extension of that time-limit)
Date: 2003-11-01
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: approximation of laws, employer, financial solvency, interpretation of the law, pay, social security

1.11.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 264/7

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Sixth Chamber)

of 11 September 2003

mentioned in that provision, if it relates to the management of
that waste as such within the meaning of Article 1(d) of
Directive 75/442, and if it results in a level of protection of the
environment at
least equivalent to that aimed at by that
directive, whatever the date of its entry into force.

(1) OJ C 173 of 16.6.2001.

in Case C-114/01 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Korkein hallinto-oikeus): AvestaPolarit Chrome Oy,
formerly Outokumpu Chrome Oy (1)

(Approximation of laws — Directives 75/442/EEC and 91/
156/EEC — Meaning of ‘waste’ — Production residue —
Mine — Use — Storage — Article 2(1)(b) — Meaning
of ‘other legislation’ — National legislation outside the
framework of Directives 75/442/EEC and 91/156/EEC)

(2003/C 264/10)

(Language of the case: Finnish)

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

In Case C-114/01: Reference to the Court under Article 234
EC by the Korkein hallinto-oikeus (Finland) for a preliminary
ruling in the proceedings brought before that court by
AvestaPolarit Chrome Oy, formerly Outokumpu Chrome Oy,
on the interpretation of Articles 1(a) and 2(1)(b) of Council
Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste (OJ 1975
L 194, p. 39), as amended by Council Directive 91/156/EEC
of 18 March 1991 (OJ 1991 L 78, p. 32),
the Court
(Sixth Chamber), composed of: J.-P. Puissochet (Rapporteur),
President of the Chamber, R. Schintgen, V. Skouris, F. Macken
and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues,
Jacobs, Advocate
General; H.A. Rühl, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar,
has given a judgment on 11 September 2003, in which it has
ruled:

Judges; F.G.

1.

2.

In a situation such as that at issue in the main proceedings, the
holder of leftover rock and residual sand from ore-dressing
operations from the operation of a mine discards or intends to
discard those substances, which must consequently be classified
as waste within the meaning of Council Directive 75/442/EEC
of 15 July 1975 on waste, as amended by Council Directive
91/156/EEC of 18 March 1991, unless he uses them lawfully
for the necessary filling in of the galleries of that mine and
provides sufficient guarantees as to the identification and actual
use of the substances to be used for that purpose.

In so far as it does not constitute a measure of application of
Directive 75/442, as amended by Directive 91/156, and in
particular Article 11 of that directive, national legislation must
be regarded as
legislation’ within the meaning of
Article 2(1)(b) of that directive covering a category of waste

‘other

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

of 18 September 2003

in Case C-125/01 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Sozialgericht Leipzig): Peter Pflücke v Bundesanstalt
für Arbeit (1)

(Protection of workers — Insolvency of the employer —
Guarantee of payment of outstanding salary — National
provision laying down a two-month time-limit for lodging
applications for payment and providing for an extension of
that time-limit)

(2003/C 264/11)

(Language of the case: German)

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

In Case C-125/01: Reference to the Court under Article 234
EC by the Sozialgericht Leipzig (Germany) for a preliminary
ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between
Peter Pflücke and Bundesanstalt für Arbeit, on the interpret-
ation of Article 9 of Council Directive 80/987/EEC of 20 Octo-
ber 1980 on the approximation of the laws of the Member
States relating to the protection of employees in the event of
the insolvency of their employer (OJ 1980 L 283, p. 23), the
Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of: M. Wathelet, President of
the Chamber, C.W.A. Timmermans, D.A.O. Edward (Rappor-
J. Mischo, Advocate
teur), P.
General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment on 18 Sep-
tember 2003, in which it has ruled:

Jann and A. Rosas,

Judges;

1.

Council Directive 80/987/EEC of 20 October 1980 on the
approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the
protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their
employer does not preclude the application of a time-limit laid
down by national law for the lodging of an application by an
employee seeking to obtain, in accordance with the detailed
rules laid down in that directive, a compensation payment in
respect of outstanding salary
resulting from his
employer’s insolvency, provided that the time-limit is no less
favourable than those governing similar domestic applications
(principle of equivalence) and is not framed in such a way as to
render impossible in practice the exercise of rights conferred by
Community law (principle of effectiveness);

claims

C 264/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

1.11.2003

2.

If the national court finds that the national provision laying
down the time-limit is not compatible with the requirements of
Community law and that no compatible interpretation of that
provision is possible, it must refuse to apply the provision in
question.

(1) OJ C 161 of 2.6.2001.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

of 18 September 2003

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(First Chamber)

of 11 September 2003

in Case C-155/01 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Verwaltungsgerichtshof): Cookies World Vertriebsge-
sellschaft mbH iL v Finanzlandesdirektion für Tirol (1)

(Sixth VAT Directive — Motor vehicle made available
under a leasing contract — Taxable transactions — Own
consumption — Article 17(6) and (7) — Exclusions provided
for under national law at the date of entry into force of the
directive)

(2003/C 264/12)

(Language of the case: German)

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

In Case C-155/01: Reference to the Court under Article 234
EC by the Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Austria) for a preliminary
ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between
Cookies World Vertriebsgesellschaft mbH iL and Finanzlandes-
direktion für Tirol, on the interpretation,
in particular, of
Articles 5 and 6 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 (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1),
the Court (First Chamber), composed of: M. Wathelet, President
of the Chamber, P. Jann and A. Rosas (Rapporteur), Judges;
L.A. Geelhoed, Advocate General; H.A. Rühl, Principal Admin-
istrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 11 Septem-
ber 2003, in which it has ruled:

The provisions 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 preclude a measure of a Member
State which provides that payment for services supplied in other
Member States to a person in the first Member State is subject to
VAT whereas, had the services in question been supplied within the
territory of the country, the person to whom they were supplied would
not have been entitled to deduction of input tax.

(1) OJ C 200 of 14.7.2001.

in Case C-168/01 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden): Bosal Holding BV v
Staatssecretaris van Financiën (1)

(Freedom of establishment — Taxation — Taxes on company
profits — Limitation of the deductibility in one Member
State of costs connected with holdings of a parent company
in its subsidiaries established in other Member States —
Coherence of the tax system)

(2003/C 264/13)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

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

In Case C-168/01: Reference to the Court under Article 234
EC by the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands) for a
preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that
court between Bosal Holding BV and Staatssecretaris van
Financiën, on the interpretation of Article 52 of the EC Treaty
(now, after amendment, Article 43 EC), of Article 58 of the EC
Treaty (now Article 48 EC), and of Council Directive 90/435/
EEC of 23 July 1990 on the common system of taxation
applicable in the case of parent companies and subsidiaries of
different Member States (OJ 1990 L 225, p. 6), the Court
(Fifth Chamber), composed of: M. Wathelet, President of the
Chamber, C.W.A. Timmermans, D.A.O. Edward (Rapporteur),
P. Jann and S. von Bahr, Judges; S. Alber, Advocate General;
D. Louterman-Hubeau, Head of Division, for the Registrar, has
given a judgment on 18 September 2003, in which it has
ruled:

Council Directive 90/435/EEC of 23 July 1990 on the common
system of taxation applicable in the case of parent companies and
subsidiaries of different Member States, interpreted in the light of
Article 52 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 43 EC)
precludes a national provision which, when determining the tax on
the profits of a parent company established in one Member State,
makes the deductibility of costs in connection with that company’s
holding in the capital of a subsidiary established in another Member
State subject to the condition that such costs be indirectly instrumental
in making profits which are taxable in the Member State where the
parent company is established.

(1) OJ C 200 of 14.7.2001.