Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of  17 January 2006  in Case C-1/04 Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof in Susanne Staubitz-Schreiber (Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Insolvency proceedings — Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 — Applicability in time — Court having jurisdiction)
Date: 2006-03-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: financial solvency, interpretation of the law

11.3.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 60/3

2. Articles 39 EC and 43 EC do not preclude a Member State from
not allowing partial taking-up of a profession, where shortcomings
in the education or training of the party concerned in relation to
that required in the host Member State may be effectively made up
for through the application of the compensatory measures provided
for in Article 4(1) of Directive 89/48. However, Articles 39 EC
and 43 EC do preclude a Member State from not allowing that
partial taking-up when the party concerned so requests and the
differences between the fields of activity are so great that in reality
a full programme of education and training is required, unless the
refusal for that partial taking-up is justified by overriding reasons
based on the general interest, suitable for securing the attainment
of the objective which they pursue and not going beyond what is
necessary in order to attain that objective.

(1) OJ C 226 of 20.9.2003.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(First Chamber)

of 12 January 2006

in Case C-494/03: Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden in Senior Engineering
Investments BV v Staatssecretaris van Financiën (1)

company)

in favour of

(Directive 69/335 — Indirect taxes on the raising of capital
— National rules taxing a (subsidiary) company by way of
capital duty in respect of a contribution made by its parent
company (the grandparent
its
subsidiary (a sub-subsidiary company) — Capital duty —
‘to the share premium
Increase of capital — Payment
account’ — Increase in the assets of the company — Increase
in the value of shares — Provision of services by a member
— Payment made by a member of a member — Payment to a
subsidiary — ‘Real recipient’ — Levying of capital duty once
only (in the Community) — Article 52 of the EC Treaty
(now, after amendment, Article 43 EC) — Freedom of estab-
lishment — National practice exempting a (subsidiary)
capital company from taxation only if its subsidiary (sub-
is also established in that Member
subsidiary company)

State)

(2006/C 60/05)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

In Case C-494/03: Reference for a preliminary ruling under
Article 234 EC from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Nether-

lands), made by decision of 21 November 2003, received at the
Court on 24 November 2003, in the proceedings Senior Engi-
neering Investments BV v Staatssecretaris van Financiën — the
Court (First Chamber), composed of P. Jann (Rapporteur), Presi-
dent of the Chamber, N. Colneric, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, M.
Ilešič and E. Levits,,
Judges; M. Poiares Maduro, Advocate
General; M. Ferreira, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar,
gave a judgment on 12 January 2006,
in which it ruled as
follows:

In circumstances such as those of
the main proceedings, Article
4(2)(b) of Council Directive 69/335/EEC of 17 July 1969
concerning indirect taxes on the raising of capital, as amended by
Council Directive 85/303/EEC of 10 June 1985, read in conjunction
with Article 2(1)
in its preamble,
thereof and the sixth recital
precludes a Member State from levying duty on a (subsidiary) capital
company in respect of a contribution paid by its parent company (the
grandparent company) to its subsidiary (a sub-subsidiary).

(1) OJ C 21, 24.01.2004.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Grand Chamber)

of 17 January 2006

in Case C-1/04 Reference for a preliminary ruling from the
Bundesgerichtshof in Susanne Staubitz-Schreiber (1)

(Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Insolvency proceed-
ings — Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 — Applicability in
time — Court having jurisdiction)

(2006/C 60/06)

(Language of the case: German)

In Case C-1/04 Reference for a preliminary ruling under Article
234 EC from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany), made by deci-
sion of 27 November 2003, received at the Court on 2 January
in the proceedings brought by Susanne Staubitz-
2004,
Schreiber — the Court
(Grand Chamber), composed of V.
Skouris, President, P. Jann, C.W.A. Timmermans, A. Rosas and
J. Malenovský, Presidents of Chambers, A. La Pergola, J.-P. Puis-
sochet (Rapporteur), R. Schintgen, N. Colneric, S. von Bahr, J.
Klučka, U. Lõhmus and E. Levits,
Judges; D. Ruiz-Jarabo
Colomer, Advocate General; R. Grass, for the Registrar, gave a
judgment on 17 January 2006, in which it ruled as follows:

C 60/4

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

11.3.2006

Article 3(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 of 29 May
2000 on insolvency proceedings must be interpreted as meaning that
the court of the Member State within the territory of which the centre
of the debtor's main interests is situated at the time when the debtor
lodges the request to open insolvency proceedings retains jurisdiction
to open those proceedings if the debtor moves the centre of his main
interests to the territory of another Member State after lodging the
request but before the proceedings are opened.

(1) OJ C 71, 20.03.2004.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Sixth Chamber)

of 12 January 2006

in Case C-139/04 Commission of the European Commu-
nities v Italian Republic (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Ambient
air quality — Limit values)

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Second Chamber)

12 January 2006

(2006/C 60/08)

(Language of the case: Italian)

in Case C-132/04 Commission of the European Commu-
nities v Kingdom of Spain (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Social
policy — Protection of the safety and health of workers —
Directive 89/391/EEC — Scope — Non-civilian personnel in
public authorities — Armed forces and police — Included)

(2006/C 60/07)

(Language of the case: Spanish)

In Case C-132/04 Commission of the European Communities
(Agents: L. Escobar Guerrero and H. Kreppel) v Kingdom of
Spain (Agent: M. Muñoz Pérez) — action under Article 226 EC
for failure to fulfil obligations — the Court (Second Chamber),
composed of C.W.A. Timmermans, President of the Chamber,
J. Makarczyk, R. Schintgen (Rapporteur), R. Silva Lapuerta and
P. Kūris, Judges; F.G. Jacobs, Advocate General; R. Grass, Regis-
trar, gave a judgment on 12 January 2006, in which it:

1. Declared that, by failing to transpose in their entirety into its
national legislation Article 2(1) and (2) and Article 4 of Council
Directive 89/391/EEC of 12 June 1989 on the introduction of
measures to encourage improvement in the safety and health of
workers at work as regards non-civilian personnel in public autho-
rities, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations
under that directive;

2. Ordered the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 106 of 30.04.2004

In Case C-139/04 Commission of the European Communities
(Agents: V. Valero Jordana and R. Amorosi) v Italian Republic
(Agent: I.M. Braguglia) — action for failure to fulfil obligations
under Article 226 EC — the Court (Sixth Chamber), composed
the Sixth
of
(Rapporteur),
Chamber, S. von Bahr and A. Borg Barthet
Judges; F. G. Jacobs, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, gave
a judgment on 12 January 2006, in which it:

J.-P. Puissochet, acting for

the President of

to

the

subject

substances

for 2001 all necessary

1. Declares that, by failing to forward to the Commission of the
information
European Communities
concerning
Council Directive
1999/30/EC of 22 April 1999 relating to limit values for
sulphur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and oxides of nitrogen, particu-
late matter and lead in ambient air, as required under Article
11(1)(a)(i) and (ii) and (b) of Council Directive 96/62/EC of
27 September 1996 concerning ambient air quality assessment
management, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obliga-
tions under Article 11 of Directive 96/62 in conjunction with
Article 4(1) of that directive and with Directive 1999/30 and
Article 1 of Commission Decision 2001/839/EC of 8 November
2001 laying down a questionnaire to be used for annual reporting
on ambient air quality assessment under Directives 96/62 and
1999/30;

2. Orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 106 of 30.4.2004