Order of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 17 October 2003 nella causa C-35/02 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht): Landeszahnärztekammer Hessen v Markus Vogel, Third parties: Landesärtztekammer Hessen, Oberbundesanwalt beim Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure — Freedom of establishment — Freedom to provide services — Directives 78/686/EEC and 78/687/EEC — The practice of dentistry by a doctor)
Date: 2004-01-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: dentist, diploma, interpretation of the law, physician, right of establishment, vocational training

10.1.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 7/17

2. Article 21(1)(c) 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 does not preclude
reimbursement of an amount mentioned in error by way of
value added tax on an invoice or other document serving as
invoice where the services at issue are not subject to value added
tax and the amount invoiced cannot therefore be classified as
value added tax.

(1) OJ C 169 of 13.7.2002 and OJ C 144 du 15.6.2002.

An administrative practice such as the one at issue in the main
proceedings, under which degrees awarded by a university of one
Member State cannot be recognised in another Member State when
the courses of preparation for those degrees were provided in the latter
Member State by another educational establishment in accordance
with an agreement made between the two establishments,
is
incompatible with Article 43 EC.

(1) OJ C 144 of 15.6.2002.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

of 13 November 2003

ORDER OF THE COURT

(Fourth Chamber)

of 17 October 2003

in Case C-153/02 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Giudice di pace di Genova): Valentina Neri v European
School of Economics (ESE Insight World Education Sys-
tem Ltd) (1)

(Freedom of establishment — Recognition of diplomas —
Degree issued by a university established in a Member State
— Courses of study in preparation for a degree awarded in
another Member State and by another educational establish-
ment)

nella causa C-35/02 (Reference for a preliminary ruling
from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht): Landeszahnärzte-
kammer Hessen v Markus Vogel, Third parties: Landes-
ärtztekammer Hessen, Oberbundesanwalt beim Bundes-
verwaltungsgericht (1)

(Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure — Freedom of
establishment — Freedom to provide services — Directives
78/686/EEC and 78/687/EEC — The practice of dentistry
by a doctor)

(2004/C 7/28)

(Language of the case: Italian)

(2004/C 7/29)

(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-153/02: Reference to the Court under Article 234 EC
by the Giudice di pace di Genova (Italy) for a preliminary
ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between
Valentina Neri and European School of Economics (ESE
Insight World Education System Ltd) on the interpretation of
Articles 39 EC, 43 EC and 49 EC, of Council Decision 63/266/
EEC of 2 April 1963 laying down general principles for
implementing a common vocational
training policy (OJ,
English Special Edition 1963-1964 (I), p. 25) and Council
Directive 89/48/EEC of 21 December 1988 on a general
system for the recognition of higher-education diplomas
awarded on completion of professional education and training
of at least three years’ duration (OJ 1989 L 19, p. 16), the
Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of: D.A.O. Edward, acting
for the President of the Fifth Chamber, A. La Pergola and
S. von Bahr (Rapporteur),
Jacobs, Advocate
General; L. Hewlett, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar,
has given a judgment on 13 November 2003, in which it has
ruled:

Judges; F.G.

In Case C-35/02: Reference to the Court under Article 234 EC
by the Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Germany) for a preliminary
ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between
Landeszahnärztekammer Hessen and Markus Vogel; Third
parties: Landesärtztekammer Hessen, Oberbundesanwalt beim
Bundesverwaltungsgericht, on the the interpretation of Council
Directive 78/687/EEC of 25 July 1978 concerning the coordi-
nation of provisions laid down by law, regulation or adminis-
trative action in respect of the activities of dental practitioners
(OJ 1978 L 233, p. 10), 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), the Court (Fourth
Chamber), composed of: C.W.A. Timmermans (Rapporteur),
President of the Chamber, A. La Pergola and S. von Bahr,
Judges; A. Tizzano, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has
made an order on 17 October 2003, the operative part of
which is as follows:

C 7/18

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

10.1.2004

Council Directive 78/687/EEC of 25 July 1978 concerning the
coordination of provisions laid down by law, regulation or adminis-
trative action in respect of the activities of dental practitioners, 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, properly construed, precludes a national rule
containing a general authorisation for doctors who have not completed
the training required by Article 1 of that directive to carry out the
activities of a dental practitioner, irrespective of the title under which
those activities are carried out.

(1) OJ C 109 of 4.5.2002.

ORDER OF THE COURT OF THE JUSTICE

of 11 July 2003

in Case C-161/03 (reference for a preliminary ruling by
the Commission de conciliation et d’expertise douanière):
Administration des douanes v Centrale d’achat française
pour l’outre-mer SA (CAFOM), Samsung Electronics
France (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling — Court’s lack of
jurisdiction)

(2004/C 7/30)

(Language of the case: French)

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

In Case C-161/03: reference to the Court under Article 234 EC
by the Commission de conciliation et d’expertise douanière
(France) for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings between
Administration des douanes and Centrale d’achat française
pour l’outre-mer SA (CAFOM), Samsung Electronics France —
on the interpretation of Article 27 of Protocol No 4 annexed
to the Europe Agreement between the European Communities
and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of
Hungary, of the other part, concluded and approved in the
name of the European Communities by Decision 93/743/
Euratom, ECSC, EC of the Council and the Commission of
13 December 1993 (OJ 1993 L 348, p. 1) — the Court,
composed of: G.C. Rodríguez Iglesias, President, J.-P. Puisso-
chet, M. Wathelet, R. Schintgen and C.W.A. Timmermans,
Presidents
(Rapporteur),
D.A.O. Edward, A. La Pergola, P. Jann, V. Skouris, F. Macken,
N. Colneric, S. von Bahr, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues and A. Rosas,
Judges; L.A. Geelhoed, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar,
made an order on 11 July 2003 of which the operative part is
as follows:

of Chambers, C. Gulmann

The Court of Justice of the European Communities clearly has no
jurisdiction to reply to the questions referred by the Commission de
conciliation et d’expertise douanière in its decision of 18 March
2003.

(1) OJ C 135 of 7.6.2003.

Appeal brought on 20 October 2003 by P&O European
Ferries (Vizcaya) SA against the judgment delivered
on 5 August 2003 by the First Chamber (Extended
Composition) of the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities in joined cases T-116/01 between
P&O European Ferries (Vizcaya) SA, supported by Dipu-
tación Foral de Vizcaya, and the Commission of the
European Communities and T-118/01 between Diputa-
ción Foral de Vizcaya, supported by P&O European
Ferries (Vizcaya) SA, and the Commission of the European
Communities

(Case C-442/03 P)

(2004/C 7/31)

An appeal against the judgment delivered on 5 August 2003
by the First Chamber (Extended Composition) of the Court of
First Instance of the European Communities in joined cases
T-116/01 (1) between P&O European Ferries (Vizcaya) SA,
supported by Diputación Foral de Vizcaya, and the Com-
the European Communities and T-118/01 (2)
mission of
between Diputación Foral de Vizcaya, supported by P&O
European Ferries (Vizcaya) SA, and the Commission of the
European Communities, was brought before the Court of
Justice of the European Communities on 20 October 2003 by
P&O European Ferries (Vizcaya) SA, established in Bilbao
(Spain), represented by Sir Jeremy Lever QC and M. Pickford,
Barristers, and J. Ellison, Solicitor.

The Appellant claims that the Court should:

1. make an order setting aside the Court of First Instance’s
judgment of 5 August 2003 and remitting the questions
set out at paragraph 13 of the appeal for determination
by the Court of First Instance;

2. make an order that the Commission pay the Appellant’s

costs of this appeal; and

3. make an order setting aside the order of the Court of First
Instance of 5 August 2003 that the Appellant pay the
Commission’s costs, and reserving reconsideration of
those costs for the Court of First Instance when the case
is remitted to it.