Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 10 March 2005 in Case C-469/03: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Bologna Filomeno Mario Miraglia (Article 54 of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement — Principle ne bis in idem — Scope — Decision of a Member State's judicial authorities to discontinue prosecution by reason solely of the initiation of similar proceedings in another Member State)
Date: 2005-05-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Schengen Agreement, criminal proceedings, interpretation of the law, judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the EU

C 132/10

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

28.5.2005

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Second Chamber)

of 14 April 2005

in Case C-335/03: Portuguese Republic v Commission of
the European Communities (1)

(EAGGF — Beef premium — Monitoring — Representative-
ness of sampling — Transposition of monitoring results to
the preceding years — Reasons)

(2005/C 132/17)

(Language of the case: Portuguese)

In Case C-335/03 Portuguese Republic (Agent: L. Fernandes,
assisted by C. Botelho Moniz and E. Maia Cadete) v Commis-
sion of the European Communities (Agents: A. Alves Vieira and
L. Visaggio, assisted by N. Castro Marques and F. Costa Leite)
— action for annulment under Article 230 EC, brought on 25
July 2003, — the Court
(Second Chamber), composed of
C.W.A. Timmermans, President of the Chamber, R. Silva de
Lapuerta (Rapporteur), C. Gulmann, R. Schintgen and J.
Klučka,, Judges; L.A. Geelhoed, Advocate General; K. Sztranc,
Administrator, for the Registrar, gave a judgment on 14 April
2005, in which it:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 239 of 04.10.2003.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fourth Chamber)

of 17 March 2005

in Case C-467/03: Reference for a preliminary ruling from
Finanzgericht München in Ikegami Electronics
the

(Europe) GmbH v Oberfinanzdirektion Nürnberg (1)

(Common Customs Tariff — Tariff headings — Tariff classi-
fication of a digital recording machine — Classification
under the Combined Nomenclature)

(2005/C 132/18)

(Language of the case: German)

In Case C-467/03: reference for a preliminary ruling under
Article 234 EC from the Finanzgericht München (Germany),

made by decision of 24 June 2003, received at the Court on 6
November 2003, in the proceedings between Ikegami Electro-
nics (Europe) GmbH and Oberfinanzdirektion Nürnberg — the
Court (Fourth Chamber), composed of K. Lenaerts (Rapporteur),
President of the Chamber, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues and E. Levits,
Judges; J. Kokott, Advocate General; K. Sztranc, Administrator,
for the Registrar, gave a judgment on 17 March 2005, the
operative part of which is as follows:

for video-surveillance purposes, records signals
A machine which,
from cameras and, after compressing them,
them on
screen, performs a specific function other than data processing within
the meaning of Note 5(E) to Chapter 84 of the Combined Nomencla-
ture of the Common Customs Tariff in Annex I to Council Regulation
(EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical
nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff, as amended by
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2031/2001 of 6 August 2001.

reproduces

(1) OJ C 21 of 24.01.2004.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

of 10 March 2005

in Case C-469/03: Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Tribunale di Bologna Filomeno Mario Miraglia (1)

(Article 54 of the Convention implementing the Schengen
Agreement — Principle ne bis in idem — Scope — Decision
of a Member State's judicial authorities to discontinue prose-
cution by reason solely of the initiation of similar proceedings
in another Member State)

(2005/C 132/19)

(Language of the case: Italian)

In Case C-469/03: reference for a preliminary ruling under
Article 35 EU from the Tribunale di Bologna (Italy), made by
decision of 22 September 2003, received at
the Court on
10 November 2003, in the in the criminal proceedings brought
against Filomeno Mario Miraglia — the Court (Fifth Chamber),
composed of R. Silva de Lapuerta, President of the Chamber, R.
Schintgen (Rapporteur) and P. Kūris, Judges; A. Tizzano, Advo-
cate General; L. Hewlett, Principal Administrator, for the Regis-
trar, gave a judgment on 10 March 2005, the operative part of
which is as follows:

28.5.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 132/11

the States of

The principle ne bis in idem, enshrined in Article 54 of the Conven-
tion implementing the Schengen Agreement of 14 June 1985
between the Governments of
the Benelux Economic
Union, the Federal Republic of Germany and the French Republic on
the gradual abolition of checks at their common borders, signed on
19 June 1990 at Schengen, does not fall to be applied to a decision
of the judicial authorities of one Member State declaring a case to be
closed, after the Public Prosecutor has decided not to pursue the prose-
cution on the sole ground that criminal proceedings have been started
in another Member State against the same defendant and for the
same acts, without any determination whatsoever as to the merits of
the case.

carried out on national territory, all the travel costs would be reim-
bursed.

(1) OJ C 106 of 30.04.2004.

(1) OJ C 21 of 24.01.2004.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Third Chamber)

of 17 March 2005

in Case C-128/04: Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Rechtbank van eerste aanleg te Dendermonde in the
criminal proceedings against Annic Andréa Raemdonck
and Raemdonck-Janssens BVBA (1)

(Road transport — Social legislation — Regulation (EEC) No
3821/85 — Requirement to instal and use a tachograph —
Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85 — Exception for vehicles
carrying material and equipment)

(2005/C 132/21)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

In Case C-128/04: reference for a preliminary ruling under
Article 234 EC from the Rechtbank van eerste aanleg te
Dendermonde (Belgium), made by decision of 19 January
2004, received at the Court on 9 March 2004, in the criminal
proceedings against Annic Andréa Raemdonck and Raem-
donck-Janssens BVBA — the Court (Third Chamber), composed
of A. Rosas (Rapporteur), President of the Chamber, A. La
Pergola, J.-P. Puissochet, U. Lõhmus and A. Ó Caoimh, Judges;
M. Poiares Maduro, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, gave
a judgment on 17 March 2005, in which it ruled:

1. The terms ‘material or equipment’ in Article 13(1)(g) of Council
Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85 of 20 December 1985 on the
harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road trans-
port must, in the context of the exemption scheme provided for in
Article 3(2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 3821/85 of 20
December 1985 on recording equipment in road transport, be
construed as covering not only ‘tools and instruments’, but also the
goods, such as building materials or cables, which are required for
the performance of the work involved in the main activity of the
driver of the vehicle concerned.

(1) OJ C 106 of 30.04.2004.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(First Chamber)

of 17 March 2005

in Case C-109/04 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Bundesverwaltungsgericht): Karl Robert Kranemann v
Land Nordrhein-Westfalen (1)

(Article 48 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article
39 EC) — Freedom of movement for workers — Civil servant
undergoing preparatory practical
training — Practical
training completed in another Member State — Reimburse-
ment of travel expenses limited to the domestic stretch of the
journey)

(2005/C 132/20)

(Language of the case: German)

In Case C-109/04: reference for a preliminary ruling under
Article 234 EC from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Germany),
made by decision of 17 December 2003, received at the Court
on 2 March 2004,
in the proceedings pending before that
court between Karl Robert Kranemann and Land Nordrhein-
Westfalen — the Court (First Chamber), composed of P. Jann,
President of
(Rapporteur), N.
Colneric, K. Schiemann and E. Levits, Judges; L.A. Geelhoed,
Advocate General, R. Grass, Registrar, gave a judgment on 17
March 2005, the operative part of which is as follows:

the Chamber, K. Lenaerts

Article 48 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 39 EC)
precludes a national measure which grants a person who has
completed a practical training period under conditions of genuine and
effective activity as an employed person in a Member State other than
his Member State of origin the right
travel
expenses only up to the amount incurred in respect of the domestic
stretch of the journey, while providing that, if such an activity were

to reimbursement of