Case C-325/05: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Darmstadt by order of that court of 17 August 2005 in Ismail Derin v Landkreis Darmstadt-Dieburg
Date: 2005-11-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Association Council (EU), Germany, Türkiye, free movement of workers, interpretation of the law, migrant worker, residence permit

12.11.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 281/7

joined parties:

and Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss;
(1) AOK-
Bundesverband KdöR, (2) IKK-Bundesverband, (3) Bundesver-
band der Betriebskrankenkassen, (4) Bundesverband der land-
wirtschaftlichen Krankenkassen, (5) Verband der Angestellten-
Krankenkassen e.V., (6) AEV — Arbeiter-Ersatzkassen-Verband
e.V.
(9) Federal
Republic of Germany, represented by the Federal Ministry of
Health and Social Security, on the following questions:

(7) Bundesknappschaft,

(8) Seekrankenkasse,

1. Is Council Directive 89/105/EEC (1) of 21 December 1988
relating to the transparency of measures regulating the
prices of medicinal products for human use and their inclu-
sion in the scope of national health insurance systems ('the
transparency directive') to be interpreted as precluding rules
of a Member State which, following the exclusion of non-
prescription medicinal products from the range of benefits
provided by the national health system, empower an
authority under that system to adopt rules derogating from
that exclusion in respect of certain medicines without
making provision for a procedure under Article 6(1), second
sentence, and 6(2) of the transparency directive?

2. Is Directive 89/105/EEC of 21 December 1988 to be inter-
preted as granting the manufacturers of
the medicinal
products referred to in point 1 above a subjective right vis-
à-vis the public authorities, in particular a right to a deci-
sion, containing a statement of reasons and information as
to the available avenues of appeal, on the inclusion of one
of their medicinal products on a list of the type mentioned
above, even though the rules of the Member State make no
provision for any corresponding decision-making or appeal
procedures?

(1) OJ 1989 L 40, p. 8.

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungs-
gericht Darmstadt by order of that court of 17 August
2005 in Ismail Derin v Landkreis Darmstadt-Dieburg

(Case C-325/05)

(2005/C 281/13)

(Language of the case: German)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the Euro-
pean Communities by order of the Verwaltungsgericht Darm-
stadt of 17 August 2005, received at the Court Registry on 26
for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings
August 2005,

between Ismail Derin and Landkreis Darmstadt-Dieburg on the
following questions:

1. Does a Turkish national who, as a child, joined his parents
who were employed as workers in the Federal Republic of
Germany, and lived with them as a family, lose his right of
residence derived from the right under the second indent of
the first paragraph of Article 7 of Decision No 1/80 of the
EEC/Turkey Association Council (‘Decision No 1/80’) to free
access to any paid employment — apart from in cases
under Article 14 of Decision No 1/80 or where he leaves
legitimate reason for a
the host Member State without
significant period of time — also where he has attained the
age of 21 and no longer lives with or is maintained by his
parents?

If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative:

2 Notwithstanding the loss of his legal status under the
second indent of the first paragraph of Article 7 of Decision
No 1/80, does that Turkish national enjoy special protection
against expulsion under Article 14 of Decision No 1/80
where, after having ceased to live with his parents as a
family, he was employed from time to time but has not
the legal status conferred by
acquired in his own right
Article 6(1) of Decision No 1/80 by virtue of being a
worker and for a number of years has worked exclusively
on a self-employed basis?

Appeal brought on 30 August 2005 by SGL Carbon AG
against the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities (Second Chamber) of 15 June
2005 in Joined Cases T-71/03,T-74/03, T-87/03 and T-91/03
Tokai and Others v Commission of the European Commu-
nities, in respect of Case T-91/03

(Case C-328/05 P)

(2005/C 281/14)

(Language of the case: German)

On 30 August 2005, SGL Carbon AG, represented by Martin
Klusmann and Frederik Wiemer, of Freshfields Bruckhaus
Deringer, Feldmühleplatz 1, D-40008 Düsseldorf, brought an
appeal before the Court of Justice of the European Commu-
nities against the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities (Second Chamber) of 15 June 2005 in
Joined Cases T-71/03, T-74/03, T-87/03 and T-91/03 Tokai and
Others v Commission of the European Communities, in respect of
Case T-91/03.