Case C-399/05: Action brought on  15 November 2005  by the Commission of the European Communities against the Hellenic Republic
Date: 2006-01-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Greece, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, administrative transparency, award of contract, equal treatment, invitation to tender, power plant

28.1.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 22/7

Is the provision in Annex VI. D. (formerly C.) Germany No 1
to Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 (1) on the application of social
security schemes
to self-employed
to employed persons,
persons and to members of their families moving within the
Community (Regulation 1408/71) compatible with higher-
ranking European law, particularly the principle of freedom of
movement — in this case, the principle of the exportability of
benefits under Article 42 of the Treaty establishing the Euro-
pean Community (EC) — inasmuch as it rules out also pension
benefits in respect of contribution periods completed in the
territory of the former German Reich?

(1) OJ, English Special Edition, 1971 (II), p. 416.

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht
Düsseldorf by order of that court of 2 November 2005 in
AGST Draht- und Biegetechnik GmbH v Hauptzollamt
Aachen

(Case C-398/05)

(2006/C 22/12)

(Language of the case: German)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the Euro-
pean Communities by order of
(Finance
Court) Düsseldorf of 2 November 2005, received at the Court
Registry on 15 November 2005, for a preliminary ruling in the
proceedings between AGST Draht- und Biegetechnik GmbH
and Hauptzollamt Aachen on the following question:

the Finanzgericht

Is Council Regulation (EC) No 1599/1999 (1) of 12 July 1999
imposing a definitive countervailing duty and collecting defini-
tively the provisional duty imposed on stainless steel wires with
a diameter of 1 mm or more originating in India and termi-
nating the proceeding concerning imports of stainless steel
wires with a diameter of 1 mm or more originating in the
Republic of Korea invalid in so far as it provides that counter-
vailing duty under subheading 7223 00 19 of the Combined
Nomenclature is to be imposed on wire manufactured by
Venus Wire Industries Ltd, Mumbai, India.

(1) OJ 1999 L 189, p. 1.

Action brought on 15 November 2005 by the Commission
the Hellenic
of

against

the European Communities
Republic

(Case C-399/05)

(2006/C 22/13)

(Language of the case: Greek)

Justice of

An action against the Hellenic Republic was brought before the
the European Communities on 15
Court of
November 2005 by the Commission of the European Commu-
nities, represented by M. Patakia, Commission Legal Adviser,
and A.X.P. Lewis, of the Commission's Legal Service, with an
address for service in Luxembourg.

The Commission claims that the Court should:

— declare that, because the Dimosia Epikhirisi

Ilektrismou
(Public Power Corporation; 'DEI') admitted to the final stage
of
the tender procedure which it had opened for the
construction and bringing into operation of a thermal
power station in Lavrio two companies which did not meet
the relevant conditions in the invitation to tender and the
tender documents, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil
its obligations under Article 4(2) of Directive 93/38/EC (1)
and under the principles of transparency and of equal treat-
ment of tenderers;

— order the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

— The Commission received a complaint

relating to the
carrying out of, and in particular to the failure to observe
tender conditions in, a DEI tendering procedure for the
construction and bringing into operation of a thermal
power station in Lavrio.

— In light of the Court of Justice's case-law, the Commission
submits that, for reasons of equality and transparency, DEI
was obliged to reject the tenders of companies which did
not meet conditions that DEI itself laid down in the invita-
tion to tender and in the specification, that is to say posses-
sion of experience in the planning and management of
turn-key contracts and the offer of maintenance of the gas
turbine exclusively by its manufacturer.

C 22/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

28.1.2006

— The Commission considers that the content of those condi-
tions is clear and that they should have been observed by
DEI however strict they may be, so as to ensure equal treat-
ment not only of the tenderers but also of interested parties
who could have taken part in the tender procedure in ques-
tion had they known that the contracting authority would
adhere to conditions other than those which it itself had
laid down by means of the invitation to tender.

— Also, in the Commission's submission, the need for swift
award of the contracts in question, which is invoked by the
Greek authorities, does not justify the failure to observe
during
conditions which the
contracting authority itself laid down.

tender procedure

the

— The Commission considers that the Hellenic Republic has
failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 4(2) of Directive
93/38/EC and under the principles of transparency and of
equal treatment of tenderers.

(1) OJ No L 199, 9.8.1993, p. 84.

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad
der Nederlanden by judgment of
that court of 18
November 2005 in Staatssecretaris van Financiën v
P. Jurriëns Beheer BV

(Case C-406/05)

(2006/C 22/14)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the Euro-
pean Communities by judgment of the Hoge Raad der Neder-
landen (Supreme Court of the Netherlands) of 18 November
2005, received at the Court Registry on 21 November 2005,
for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings between Staatssecre-
taris van Financiën and P. Jurriëns Beheer BV on the following
questions:

1. As regards the management of a collective investment fund,
is the application of Article 13B(d)(6) of the Sixth Direc-
tive (1) dependent merely on the nature of
the service
provided or is application thereof also subject to the condi-
the management services are provided by the
tion that

person who maintains a legal relationship with the partici-
pants in the fund concerned?

2. Can a service agreed with an organisation which, in regard
to its business activities, consists of the management of a
collective investment fund, be deemed to constitute manage-
ment for the purposes of the exemption mentioned under
Question 1 if the person performing the service does so in
his capacity as a director of that organisation?

(1) Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmo-
nisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes
– Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment
(OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1).

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van
Cassatie van België by judgment of
that court of 8
November 2005 in Reyniers & Sogama bvba v (1) Belgisch
Interventie- en Restitutiebureau (2) Belgian State

(Case C-407/05)

(2006/C 22/15)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the Euro-
pean Communities by judgment of the Hof van Cassatie van
België (Belgian Court of Cassation) of 8 November 2005,
received at the Court Registry on 21 November 2005, for a
preliminary ruling in the proceedings between Reyniers &
Sogama bvba and 1. Belgisch Interventie- en Restitutiebureau
2. Belgian State on the following questions:

that procedure,

‘Are Article 11a of Commission Regulation (EEC) No
1062/87 (1) of 27 March 1987 on provisions for the imple-
mentation of the Community transit procedure and for certain
simplifications of
inserted by Article 1 of
Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1429/90 (2) of 29 May 1990
amending that regulation, Article 34 of Council Regulation
(EEC) No 2726/90 (3) of 17 September 1990 on Community
transit, and Article 49 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No
1214/92 (4) of 21 April 1992 on provisions for the implemen-
tation of the Community transit procedure and for certain
simplifications of that procedure, to be interpreted as meaning: