Case C-166/05: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof by judgment of that court of 31 March 2005 in Heger Rudi GmbH v Finanzamt Graz-Stadt
Date: 2005-06-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: fishing permit, interpretation of the law, provision of services, tax harmonisation

C 143/28

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

11.6.2005

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungs-
gerichtshof by judgment of that court of 31 March 2005 in
Heger Rudi GmbH v Finanzamt Graz-Stadt

(Case C-166/05)

(2005/C 143/43)

(Language of the case: German)

Must Article 9(2) of Council Directive 93/83/EEC of
27 September 1993 on the coordination of certain rules
concerning copyright and rights related to copyright applicable
to satellite broadcasting and cable retransmission (1) be inter-
preted as meaning that, where a collecting society is deemed to
be mandated to manage the rights of a copyright owner or
holder of related rights who has not transferred the manage-
ment of his rights to a collecting society, that society does not
have the power to exercise that rightholder's right to grant or
refuse authorisation to a cable operator for cable retransmis-
sion, since it is mandated only to manage the pecuniary aspects
of that rightholder's rights?

(1) OJ L 248 of 6.10.1993, p. 15.

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the Euro-
pean Communities by judgment of the Verwaltungsgerichtshof
(Higher Administrative Court)
(Austria) of 31 March 2005,
received at the Court Registry on 13 April 2005, for a preli-
minary ruling in the proceedings between Heger Rudi GmbH
and Finanzamt Graz-Stadt on the following question:

Does the grant of the right to fish by means of a transfer of
fishing permits for valuable consideration constitute a ‘supply
of services connected with immovable property’ within the
meaning of Article 9(2)(a) of Sixth Council Directive
77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonization of the laws
of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common
system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment?

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de
Cassation de Belgique by judgment of that court of 4 April
2005,
in URADEX SCRL v Union Professionelle de la
Radio et de la Télédistribution, abbreviated as RTD and
Société Intercommunale pour la Diffusion de la Télévision,
abbreviated as BRUTELE

(Case C-169/05)

(2005/C 143/44)

(Language of the case: French)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the Euro-
pean Communities by judgment of the Cour de Cassation de
Belgique (Belgium) of 4 April 2005, received at the Court
Registry on 15 April 2005, for a preliminary ruling in the
proceedings between URADEX SCRL v Union Professionelle de
la Radio et de la Télédistribution, abbreviated as RTD and
Société Intercommunale pour la Diffusion de la Télévision,
abbreviated as BRUTELE, on the following question:

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Landesgericht
für ZRS Wien by order of that court of 8 April 2005 in
KVZ retec GmbH v Republic of Austria (Federal Minister
for Agriculture, Forestry, the Environment and Water
Management)

(Case C-176/05)

(2005/C 143/45)

(Language of the case: German)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the Euro-
pean Communities by order of the Landesgericht für ZRS Wien
(Vienna Regional Civil Court)
(Austria) of 8 April 2005,
received at the Court Registry on 20 April 2005, for a preli-
minary ruling in the proceedings between KVZ retec GmbH
for Agriculture,
and Republic of Austria (Federal Minister
Forestry,
the Environment and Water Management) on the
following questions:

1. Is the shipment (transit or return) of meat-and-bone meal,
whether or not free of special risk material, subject, in so far
as it involves waste, to the notification obligation in Council
Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 (‘the Waste Shipment Regu-
lation’)?

If so,