Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 18 November 2004 in Case C-284/03 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d'appel de Bruxelles): Etat belge v Temco Europe SA (Sixth VAT Directive — Article 13B(b) — Exempt transactions — Letting of immovable property — Licence to occupy)
Date: 2005-01-08
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Belgium, interpretation of the law, property leasing, tax system

C 6/14

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

8.1.2005

(c) Article 50a of Regulation No 3886/92 must be interpreted
as meaning that a premium application may be regarded as
having been ‘lodged’
the competent
authority received it prior to the expiry of the time-limit.

in due time only if

2. Consideration of

the question referred has disclosed nothing
capable of affecting the validity of Article 50a(1) of Regulation
No 3886/92 to the extent that it excludes the applicant from
receiving the premium entirely whenever the period for making
applications is exceeded, irrespective of how and by what extent.

meaning that transactions by which one company, through a number
of contracts, simultaneously grants associated companies a licence to
occupy a single property in return for a payment set essentially on the
basis of the area occupied and by which the contracts, as performed,
have as their essential object
in a passive
manner, of premises or parts of buildings in return for a payment
linked to the passage of time, are transactions comprising the ‘letting
of immovable property’ within the meaning of that provision and not
the provision of a service capable of being categorised in a different
way.

the making available,

(1) OJ C 146 of 21.6.2003.

(1) OJ C 213 of 6.9.2003.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(First Chamber)

of 18 November 2004

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Second Chamber)

of 28 October 2004

in Case C-284/03 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Cour d'appel de Bruxelles): Etat belge v Temco Europe
SA (1)

(Sixth VAT Directive — Article 13B(b) — Exempt transac-
tions — Letting of immovable property — Licence to occupy)

in Case C-357/03 Commission of the European Commu-
nities v Republic of Austria (1)

(Failure to fulfil obligations — Directive 98/24/EC — Protec-
tion of the health and safety of workers — Risks related to
chemical agents at work — Failure to transpose throughout
the territory of the Member State concerned within the
prescribed period)

(2005/C 6/24)

(Language of the case: French)

(2005/C 6/25)

(Language of the case: German)

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

In Case C-284/03: reference for a preliminary ruling under
Article 234 EC from the Cour d'appel de Bruxelles (Brussels
(Belgium), by decision of 19 June 2003,
Court of Appeal)
in the proceedings
received at the Court on 2 July 2003,
between Etat belge and Temco Europe SA — the Court (First
Chamber), composed of: P. Jann, President of the Chamber,
A. Rosas (Rapporteur), R. Silva de Lapuerta, K. Lenaerts and S.
von Bahr, Judges; D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer, Advocate General;
M.-F. Contet, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, has
given a judgment on 18 November 2004,
in which it has
ruled:

Article 13B(b) of 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) must be interpreted as

In Case C-357/03 Commission of the European Communities
(Agents: D. Martin and H. Kreppel) v Republic of Austria
(Agent: E. Riedl) – action under Article 226 EC for failure to
fulfil obligations, brought on 19 August 2003 – the Court
composed of: C.W.A. Timmermanns
(Second Chamber),
(Rapporteur), President of
J.
Makarczyk, P. Kūris and J. Klučka, Judges; A. Tizzano, Advocate
General; R. Grass, Registrar, gave a judgment on 28 October
2004, in which it:

the Chamber, C. Gulmann,

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed period, all
the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to
comply fully with Council Directive 98/24/EC of 7 April 1998
on the protection of the health and safety of workers from the risks
related to chemical agents at work (14th
individual Directive
within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC),
the Republic of Austria has failed to fulfil its obligations under
that directive;