Case C-60/05: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per la Lombardia by order of that court of 14 December 2004 in WWF Italia and Others v Regione di Lombardia and with the intervention of the Associazione migratoristi italiani
Date: 2005-04-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: application of EU law, bird, derogation from EU law, environmental protection, hunting regulations, interpretation of the law, national implementing measure, scientific committee (EU)

16.4.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 93/13

Action brought on 10 February 2005 by the Commission
of the European Communities against the Kingdom of
Sweden

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale
Amministrativo Regionale per la Lombardia by order of
that court of 14 December 2004 in WWF Italia and Others
v Regione di Lombardia and with the intervention of the
Associazione migratoristi italiani

(Case C-58/05)

(2005/C 93/23)

(Language of the case: Swedish)

Justice of

An action against the Kingdom of Sweden was brought before
the Court of
the European Communities on 10
February 2005 by the Commission of the European Commu-
nities, represented by L. Ström van Lier and N. Yerrell, acting
as Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

1. Declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and
other provisions necessary in order to comply with Council
Directive 2000/79/EC (1) of 27 November 2000 concerning
the European Agreement on the Organisation of Working
Time of Mobile Workers in Civil Aviation concluded by the
Association of European Airlines
the European
Transport Workers' Federation (ETF), the European Cockpit
Association (ECA), the European Regions Airline Associa-
tion (ERA) and the International Air Carrier Association
(IACA), or in any event by failing to inform the Commission
of those provisions, the Kingdom of Sweden has failed to
fulfil its obligations under Article 3 of that Directive, and

(AEA),

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

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period for
December 2003.

implementing the Directive expired on 1

(1) OJ L 302 of 1 December 2000, p. 57.

(Case C-60/05)

(2005/C 93/24)

(Language of the case: Italian)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the Euro-
pean Communities by order of the Tribunale Amministrativo
Regionale per la Lombardia (Italy) of 14 December 2004,
received at the Court Registry on 10 February 2005, for a preli-
minary ruling in the proceedings between WWF Italia and
Others and Regione di Lombardia, and with the intervention of
the Associazione migratoristi
italiani, on the following ques-
tions:

1. Is Directive 79/409/EC (1) to be interpreted as meaning that,
irrespective of the internal allocation of powers between the
State and the Regions laid down by national systems, the
Member States must prepare
implementing provisions
governing all situations considered deserving of protection
by the same, in particular as regards ensuring that hunting
derogations do not exceed the small numbers laid down in
Article 9(1)(c)?

the national

should Directive 79/409/EC be

2. As regards in particular the numbers of hunting deroga-
interpreted as
tions,
meaning that
implementing provision must
refer to a criterion which is determined or can be deter-
mined, and even entrusted to qualified technical bodies, so
that the exercise of hunting derogations is governed by
criteria objectively establishing a quantitative level which
may not be exceeded at national or regional level, having
regard to the various environmental conditions which may
prevail?

3. Does the national provision in Article 19 of Law No
157/92, by requiring the obligatory, but non-binding,
opinion of
INPS to determine that criterion without,
however, providing for a process for reaching agreement
between the regions on the binding determination of the
distribution for each species of
limits of
hunting derogations set at national level as small numbers,
constitute a proper application of Article 9 of the Directive?

the numerical

C 93/14

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

16.4.2005

4. Is the procedure for verifying the compatibility with Com-
munity provisions of the hunting derogations authorised by
the Italian Regions under Article 19a of Law No 157/92,
preceded by a period of notice and therefore requiring fixed
periods of time, which are also necessary for the adoption
and publication of the measure, during which the brief
period of hunting derogations itself may expire, suitable for
ensuring effective application of Directive 79/409/EC?

(1) OJ L 103 of 25.04.1979, p. 1.

Action brought on 14 February 2005 by the Commission
of the European Communities against the Kingdom of the
Netherlands

(Case C-66/05)

(2005/C 93/25)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

An action against the Kingdom of the Netherlands was brought
before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on
14 February 2005 by the Commission of
the European
Communities, represented by Dennis Martin and Pieter van
Nuffel, acting as Agents.

The Commission claims that the Court should:

1. Declare that by taking into account, when calculating sick-
ness insurance contributions, the pensions paid under the
legislation of a Member State other than the Netherlands,
the Kingdom of the Netherlands has failed to fulfil its obliga-
tions under Article 33(1) of Regulation (EEC) No
1408/71; (1)

2. Order the Kingdom of the Netherlands to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

a ‘national
insurance’ scheme. Under the Wet Financiering
Volksverzekeringen (Law on the financing of national insurance
schemes) all
insured persons are liable to pay contributions.
The contribution is calculated on the basis of their income as a
whole.

The result of this legislation is that a person who lives in the
Netherlands and receives both a Netherlands pension and a
pension under the legislation of another Member State is
insured under the AWBZ for special sickness costs but is also
liable to pay contributions. When calculating that contribution,
both his Netherlands pension and his other pension are taken
into account.

According to the Commission, Article 33(1) of the Regulation
only permits the Netherlands pension to be taken into account
when calculating that contribution; according to the Nether-
lands, the entire income may be taken into account, including
the pension which the person concerned receives under the
legislation of another Member State.

(1) (OJ, English special edition, 1971 (II), p. 416). Regulation amended
and updated by Regulation (EC) No 118/97 (OJ L 28 of 30.1.1997,
p. 1) and last amended by Regulation (EC) No 631/2004 of the
European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 100 of 6.4.2004, p.
1).

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht
München by order of that court of 1 February 2005 in
Household of Jörg and Stefanie Wollny v Finanzgericht
Landshut

(Case C-72/05)

(2005/C 93/26)

(Language of the case: German)

The purpose of the Algemene Wet Bijzondere Ziektekosten
(General law on special sickness costs; ‘AWBZ’) is to cover the
cost of treatment, care and nursing in the case of serious long-
term sickness or invalidity. All inhabitants, that is to say all
persons resident in the Netherlands, are insured. It is therefore

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the Euro-
pean Communities by order of the Finanzgericht München
(Germany) of 1 February 2005, received at the Court Registry
on 15 February 2005, for a preliminary ruling in the proceed-
ings between Household of
Jörg and Stefanie Wollny and
Finanzgericht Landshut on the following question: