Case C-96/04: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of  27 April 2006  (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Niebüll) — Standesamt Stadt Niebüll v Stefan Grunkin, Dorothee Regina Paul (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Determination of a child's surname — Procedure to transfer that determination to one of the parents — Lack of jurisdiction of the Court)
Date: 2006-06-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU law, discrimination on the basis of nationality, equal treatment, interpretation of the law, surname

C 143/6

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

17.6.2006

Re:

Re:

Annulment of Articles 3, 4 and 6 of Council Regulation (EC)
No 1954/2003 of 4 November 2003 on the management of
the fishing effort relating to certain Community fishing areas
and resources and modifying Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93
and repealing Regulations
(EC) No 685/95 and (EC) No
2027/95

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Corte Suprema di Cassa-
zione — Interpretation of Article 4 of Council Directive
69/335/EEC of 17 July 1969 concerning indirect taxes on the
raising of capital
(OJ 1969 L 249, p. 25), as amended by
Council Directive 85/303/EEC of 10 June 1985 (OJ 1985 L
156, p. 23) — Indirect taxes on contributions of capital to
capital companies — Merger of two companies where one
holds all the shares in the other

Operative part of the judgment

1. The action is dismissed.

2. The Kingdom of Spain is ordered to pay the costs.

3. The Commission of the European Communities is ordered to bear

its own costs.

(1) OJ C 71, 20.3.2004.

Operative part of the judgment

In circumstances such as those at issue in the main proceedings,
Council Directive 69/335/EEC of 17 July 1969 concerning indirect
taxes on the raising of capital, as amended by Council Directives
73/80/EEC of 9 April 1973 fixing common rates of capital duty
and 85/303/EEC of 10 June 1985, precludes the charging of a
proportional registration duty of 1 % of the value of the transaction
in the case of a 'reverse' merger, namely a merger by means of acquisi-
tion where all of the shares in the acquiring company are held by the
company acquired.

(1) OJ C 94, 17.4.2004.

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 30 March 2006
(reference for a preliminary ruling from the Corte
Suprema di Cassazione) — Aro Tubi Trafilerie SpA v
Ministero dell'Economia e delle Finanze

(Case C-46/04) (1)

(Directive 69/335 — Indirect taxes on the raising of capital
— National legislation providing for the charging, in the case
of a ‘reverse’ merger, of a proportional registration tax of
1 % of the value of such a transaction — Classification as
capital duty — Increase in capital — Increase in the assets of
the company — Increase in the value of shares — Provision
of services by a member — Decision to merge made by the
members of the member)

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 27 April 2006
(reference for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht
Niebüll) — Standesamt Stadt Niebüll v Stefan Grunkin,
Dorothee Regina Paul

(Case C-96/04) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling — Determination of a
child's surname — Procedure to transfer that determination
to one of the parents — Lack of jurisdiction of the Court)

(2006/C 143/12)

Language of the case: Italian

(2006/C 143/13)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Corte Suprema di Cassazione

Referring court

Amtsgericht Niebüll

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Aro Tubi Trafilerie SpA

Applicant: Standesamt Stadt Niebüll

Defendant: Ministero dell'Economia e delle Finanze

Defendant: Stefan Grunkin, Dorothee Regina Paul

17.6.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 143/7

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Amtsgericht Niebüll —
Interpretation of Articles 12 EC and 18 EC — Interpretation of
the principles of Community law relating to European citizen-
ship and freedom of movement of persons — Minor child born
and residing in one Member State and having the nationality of
another Member State — Application in the latter Member
State for the mother's name to be joined to that of the father
— Refusal

Defendants: R.D. Retail Services Ltd (C-131/04), Frank Staddon
Ltd (C-257/04), Hanson Clay Products Ltd, formerly Marshalls
Clay Products Ltd (C-257/04)

Re:

Operative part of the judgment

The Court of Justice of the European Communities has no jurisdiction
to answer the question referred by the Amtsgericht Niebüll in its deci-
sion of 2 June 2003.

(1) OJ C 106, 30.4.2004.

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Employment Tribunal —
Interpretation of Article 7 of Council Directive 93/104/EC of
23 November 1993 concerning certain aspects of the organisa-
tion of working time (OJ 1997 L 307, p. 18) — Compatibility
with that article of provisions of national law which allow pay
for annual leave to be included in a worker's hourly remunera-
tion and paid as part of the remuneration for working time but
not paid in respect of a period of leave actually taken (‘rolled
up holiday pay’)

Operative part of the judgment

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 16 March 2006
(references for a preliminary ruling from the Court of
Appeal, Employment Tribunal) — C.D. Robinson-Steele v
R.D. Retail Services Ltd (C-131/04) — Michael
Jason
Clarke v Frank Staddon Ltd (C-257/04) and J.C. Caulfield,
C.F. Caulfield, K.V. Barnes v Hanson Clay Products Ltd,
formerly Marshalls Clay Products Ltd (C-257/04)

1. Article 7(1) of Council Directive 93/104/EC of 23 November
1993 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working
time precludes part of the remuneration payable to a worker for
work done from being attributed to payment for annual
leave
without the worker receiving, in that respect, a payment additional
to that for work done. There can be no derogation from that enti-
tlement by contractual arrangement.

(Joined Cases C-131/04 and C-257/04) (1)

(Social policy — Protection of the health and safety of
workers — Directive 93/104/EC — Entitlement
to paid
annual leave — Inclusion of payment for annual leave in the
hourly or daily remuneration (‘rolled-up holiday pay’)

(2006/C 143/14)

Language of the case: English

Referring courts

Court of Appeal, Employment Tribunal

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: C.D. Robinson-Steele (C-131/04), Michael
Jason
Clarke (C-257/04), J.C. Caulfield, C.F. Caulfield, K.V. Barnes (C-
257/04)

the payment

2. Article 7 of Directive 93/104 precludes

for
minimum annual leave within the meaning of that provision from
being made in the form of part payments staggered over the corre-
sponding annual period of work and paid together with the remu-
neration for work done, rather than in the form of a payment in
respect of a specific period during which the worker actually takes
leave.

3. Article 7 of Directive 93/104 does not preclude, as a rule, sums
paid, transparently and comprehensibly,
in respect of minimum
annual leave, within the meaning of that provision, in the form of
part payments staggered over the corresponding annual period of
work and paid together with the remuneration for work done,
from being set off against the payment for specific leave which is
actually taken by the worker.

(1) OJ C 106, 30.04.2004.
OJ C 217, 28.08.2004.