Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 14 October 2004 in Case C-238/03 P: Maja Srl v Commission of the European Communities (Appeal — Community financial aid — Discontinuation of aid granted for the modernisation of an agricultural production unit)
Date: 2005-02-19
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, action for annulment (EU), aquaculture, fishing industry, modernisation aid, suspension of aid

C 45/12

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

19.2.2005

ORDER OF THE COURT

(Sixth Chamber)

of 14 October 2004

89/391/EEC of 12 June 1989 on the introduction of
measures to encourage improvements in the safety and
health of workers at work 1 by failing to define the neces-
sary capabilities and aptitudes required of persons desig-
nated to organise preventive and protective services related
to health and safety and

in Case C-238/03 P: Maja Srl v Commission of the Euro-
pean Communities (1)

2. order the Kingdom of Sweden to pay the costs.

(Appeal — Community financial aid — Discontinuation of
aid granted for the modernisation of an agricultural produc-
tion unit)

Pleas in law and main arguments

(2005/C 45/23)

(Language of the case: Italian)

In Case C-238/03 P: Maja Srl, formerly Ca' Pasta Srl (lawyers: P.
Piva, R. Mastroianni and G. Arendt ) v Commission of the
European Communities (Agents: C. Cattabriga and L. Visaggio,
assisted by A. Dal Ferro, lawyer) – appeal under Article 56 of
the Statute of the Court of Justice, the Court (Sixth Chamber),
composed of A. Borg Barthet (Rapporteur), President of the
Chamber, J. Malenovský and U. Lõhmus, Judges; D. Ruiz-Jarabo
Colomer, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, made an order
on 14 October 2004, the operative part of which is as follows:

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. Maja Srl is ordered to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 213 of 06.09.2003.

Article 7(8) of the directive does not provide for complete
harmonisation in the different Member States of the definition
of capabilities and aptitudes required of persons carrying out
activities related to protective and preventive services, but gives
the Member States discretion to define the knowledge required
to comply with the provision. The definitions in the national
legislation must, however, be above a certain minimum level so
the directive may be implemented in an acceptable
that
manner.

The national legislation must include, as a minimum, a refer-
ence to an objective means of establishing that the person in
question has undergone the required training and actually has
the necessary experience and knowledge.

Neither the regulation nor the guidelines issued by the Arbets-
miljöverket (Work Environment Authority) include the defini-
tion of the capabilities or aptitudes required of persons carrying
out activities relating to the work environment that is necessary
for the correct transposition of Article 7(8).

Action brought on 29 October 2004 by the Commission
of the European Communities against the Kingdom of
Sweden

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Verwaltungsger-
icht Sigmaringen by order of that court of 28 September
2004 in the case of Alexander Jehle and Weinhaus
Kiderlen against Land Baden-Württemberg

(Case C-459/04)

(2005/C 45/24)

(Language of the case: Swedish)

Justice of

An action against the Kingdom of Sweden was brought before
the Court of
the European Communities on 29
October 2004 by the Commission of the European Commu-
nities, represented by H. Kreppel and J. Enegren, acting as
Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

1. declare that the Kingdom of Sweden has failed to fulfil its
obligations under Article 7(8) of Council Directive

(Case C-489/04)

(2005/C 45/25)

(Language of the case: German)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the Euro-
pean Communities by order of the Verwaltungsgericht (Admin-
istrative Court) Sigmaringen (Fourth Chamber)
(Germany) of
28 September 2004, received at the Court Registry on 29
November 2004, for a preliminary ruling in the case of Alex-
ander Jehle and Weinhaus Kiderlen against Land Baden-Würt-
temberg on the following questions: