Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 14 October 2004 in Case C-340/02: Commission of the European Communities v French Republic (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Directive 92/50/EEC — Procedure for the award of public service contracts — Assistance to the maître d'ouvrage for a sewage treatment plant — Award to the successful candidate in an earlier design contest without prior publication of a contract notice in the OJEC)
Date: 2004-12-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: action for annulment (EU), award of contract, public contract, water treatment

C 300/12

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

4.12.2004

1) Declares that, by failing to adopt all the laws, regulations and
administrative provisions necessary
completely
Article 2(a) and (e) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 3508/92 of
27 November 1992 establishing an integrated administration
and control
the
Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that
regulation.

certain Community aid schemes,

to implement

system for

2) Dismisses the remainder of the action.

3) Orders the Commission of the European Communities and the

Hellenic Republic to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 261 of 26.10.2002.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(First Chamber)

of 14 October 2004

munity plant variety right
to request a supplier of processing
services to provide the information specified in those provisions
where the holder has no indication that the latter has processed or
intends to process the product of the harvest obtained by farmers
by planting propagating material of a variety belonging to the
holder, other than a hybrid or synthetic variety, which is covered
by that right and belongs to one of the agricultural plant species
listed in Article 14(2) of Regulation No 2100/94, for planting.

2. The sixth indent of Article 14(3) of Regulation No 2100/94 in
conjunction with Article 9 of Regulation No 1768/95 must be
interpreted as meaning that, where the holder has some indication
that the supplier of processing services has processed or intends to
process the product of the harvest obtained by farmers by planting
propagating material of a variety belonging to the holder, other
than a hybrid or synthetic variety, which is covered by a Com-
munity plant variety right and belongs to one of the agricultural
plant species listed in Article 14(2) of Regulation No 2100/94,
for planting, the processor is required to provide him with the rele-
vant information relating not only to the farmers for whom the
holder has some indication that the processor has provided or
intends to provide such services but also to all other farmers for
whom he has processed or intends to process the product of the
harvest obtained by planting propagating material of the variety
concerned, where that variety has been declared or is otherwise
known to him.

in Case C-336/02 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Landgericht Düsseldorf): Saatgut-Treuhandverwal-
tungsgesellschaft mbH v Brangewitz GmbH (1)

(1) OJ C 289 of 23.11.2002.

(Plant varieties — System of protection — Article 14(3) of
Regulation (EC) No 2100/94 and Article 9 of Regulation
(EC) No 1768/95 — Use by farmers of the product of the
harvest — Suppliers of processing services — Obligation to
provide information to the holder of the Community right)

(2004/C 300/23)

(Language of the case: German)

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

In Case C-336/02: reference for a preliminary ruling under
Article 234 EC from the Landgericht Düsseldorf (Germany),
made by decision of 8 August 2002, received at the Court on
23 September 2002, in the proceedings between Saatgut-Treu-
handverwaltungsgesellschaft mbH and Brangewitz GmbH —
the Court (First Chamber), composed of: P. Jann, President of
the Chamber, A. Rosas, R. Silva de Lapuerta, K. Lenaerts and S.
von Bahr (Rapporteur), Judges; D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer, Advo-
cate General; M. Múgica Arzamendi, Principal Administrator,
for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 14 October 2004,
in which it has ruled:

1. The sixth indent of Article 14(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No
2100/94 of 27 July 1994 on Community plant variety rights in
conjunction with Article 9 of Commission Regulation (EC) No
1768/95 of 24 July 1995 implementing rules on the agricultural
exemption provided for
in Article 14(3) of Regulation No
2100/94 cannot be interpreted as allowing the holder of a Com-

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(First Chamber)

of 14 October 2004

in Case C-340/02: Commission of the European Commu-
nities v French Republic (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Directive
92/50/EEC — Procedure for the award of public service
contracts — Assistance to the maître d'ouvrage for a sewage
treatment plant — Award to the successful candidate in an
earlier design contest without prior publication of a contract
notice in the OJEC)

(2004/C 300/24)

(Language of the case: French)

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

In Case C-340/02: action under Article 226 EC for failure to
fulfil obligations, brought on 24 September 2002, between

4.12.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 300/13

Commission of the European Communities (Agent: M. Nolin)
and French Republic (Agents: G. de Bergues, S. Pailler and D.
Petrausch) — the Court (First Chamber), composed of: P. Jann,
the Chamber, S. von Bahr and K. Schiemann
President of
(Rapporteur),
Judges; L.A. Geelhoed, Advocate General; R.
Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment on 14 October 2004, in
which it:

1. Declares that, by virtue of the award by the Communauté urbaine
du Mans of a study contract for assistance to the maître d'ouvrage
in respect of
the Chauvinière sewage treatment plant, without
publication of a contract notice in the Official Journal of the Euro-
pean Communities, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obli-
gations under Council Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992
relating to the coordination of procedures for the award of public
service contracts, and in particular Article 15(2) thereof;

hoed, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judg-
ment on 7 October 2004, in which it has ruled:

The Combined Nomenclature set out in Annex I to Council Regu-
lation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statis-
tical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff, as amended
by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1734/96 of 9 September 1996,
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2086/97 of 4 November 1997,
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2261/98 of 26 October 1998,
and Commission Regulation (EC) No 2204/99 of 12 October 1999
must be construed as meaning that in a dispute such as that in the
main proceedings, in which the parties disagree as to whether plastic
chairmats such as those at issue in the main proceedings come under
subheading 3918 10 90 or
the
Combined Nomenclature, classification under the former subheading
is to be preferred.

subheading 9403 70 90 of

2. Orders the French Republic to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 289 of 23.11.2002.

(1) OJ C 7 of 11.1.2003.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Second Chamber)

of 7 October 2004

in Case C-402/02: Commission of the European Commu-
nities v French Republic (1)

(Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Direc-
tives 89/48/EEC and 92/51/EEC — Recognition of diplomas
— Access to the profession of special needs teacher in the
hospital public service and local public service — Definition
of ‘regulated profession’ — Professional experience — Article
39 EC)

(2004/C 300/26)

(Language of the case: French)

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Sixth Chamber)

of 7 October 2004

in Case C-379/02 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Østre Landsret): Skatteministeriet v Imexpo Trading
A/S (1)

(Common Customs Tariff — Tariff headings — Classifica-
tion in the Combined Nomenclature — Chairmats)

(2004/C 300/25)

(Language of the case: Danish)

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

In Case C-379/02: reference for a preliminary ruling under
Article 234 EC from the Østre Landsret (Denmark), made by
order of 15 October 2002, received at
the Court on 21
in the proceedings between Skatteministeriet
October 2002,
and Imexpo Trading A/S — the Court
(Sixth Chamber),
composed of: A. Borg Barthet, President of the Chamber, J.-P.
Puissochet (Rapporteur), and S. von Bahr, Judges; L.A. Geel-

In Case C-402/02: Commission of the European Communities
(Agents: M. Patakia and D. Martin) v French Republic (Agents:
G. de Bergues and A. Colomb) — action under Article 226 EC
for failure to fulfil obligations, brought on 12 November 2002
— the Court (Second Chamber), composed of: C.W.A. Timmer-
mans (Rapporteur), President of the Chamber, C. Gulmann, J.-P.
Puissochet, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues and F. Macken, Judges; A.
Tizzano, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a
judgment on 7 October 2004, in which it: