Case C-166/05: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 7 September 2006 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof — Austria) — Heger Rudi GmbH v Finanzamt Graz-Stadt (Sixth VAT Directive — Place of supply for tax purposes — Article 9 — Supply of services connected with immovable property — Transmission of the fishing rights over a particular part of a stretch of water)
Date: 2006-10-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: fishing permit, interpretation of the law, provision of services, tax harmonisation

C 261/6

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

28.10.2006

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 7 September
2006 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour
d'appel de Paris (France)) — Harold Price v Conseil des
ventes volontaires de meubles aux enchères publique

(Case C-149/05) (1)

(Directives 89/48/EEC and 92/51/EEC — Workers — Recog-
nition of professional education and training — Requirement
to undergo an aptitude test without the opportunity to choose
an adaptation period — Voluntary sales of chattels by public
auction)

(2006/C 261/09)

2. A profession access to which requires a diploma in law awarded
on completion of studies of at least two years' duration is a profes-
sion the practice of which, it can be assumed, requires a precise
knowledge of national law within the meaning of the third sub-
paragraph of Article 4(1) of Directive 89/48, as amended by
Directive 2001/19.

For that provision to apply, it is not necessary for the activity in
question to involve the provision of advice and/or assistance
concerning all national
it is sufficient that it concerns a
specialised area and is an essential and constant element of that
activity. In that context, reference should be made in particular to
normal practice of the relevant profession.

law;

Language of the case: French

(1) OJ C 132, 28.05.2005.

Referring court

Cour d'appel de Paris (France)

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Harold Price

Defendant: Conseil des ventes volontaires de meubles aux
enchères publique

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Cour d'appel, Paris —
Interpretation of Article 4 of Council Directive 92/51/EEC of
18 June 1992 on a second general system for the recognition
of professional education and training to supplement Directive
89/48/EEC (OJ L 209 p. 25) — Activity of director of voluntary
sales of chattels by public auction — Requirement to take an
aptitude test without the possibility of choosing an adaptation
period

Operative part of the judgment

1. Council Directive 92/51/EEC of 18 June 1992 on a second
general system for the recognition of professional education and
training to supplement Directive 89/48/EEC, as amended by
Directive 2001/19/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 14 May 2001, does not apply to an applicant relying
on qualifications such as those relied on by the applicant in the
main proceedings who wishes to pursue the profession of director
of voluntary sales of chattels by public auction in France.

However, Council Directive 89/48/EEC of 21 December 1988 on
a general system for the recognition of higher-education diplomas
awarded on completion of professional education and training of
at least three years' duration, as amended by Directive 2001/19,
and in particular point (b) of the first subparagraph of Article 3
thereof, may apply to such an applicant if the profession of director
of voluntary sales of chattels by public auction in the Member
State in which the applicant acquired the qualifications on which
he relies is not a regulated profession within the meaning of
Article 1(c) of that directive. It is for the national court to deter-
mine, if necessary, whether that is the case.

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 7 September
2006 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwal-
tungsgerichtshof — Austria) — Heger Rudi GmbH v
Finanzamt Graz-Stadt

(Case C-166/05) (1)

(Sixth VAT Directive — Place of supply for tax purposes —
Article 9 — Supply of services connected with immovable
property — Transmission of the fishing rights over a particu-
lar part of a stretch of water)

(2006/C 261/10)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgerichtshof — Austria

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Heger Rudi GmbH

Defendant: Finanzamt Graz-Stadt

Re:

Request
for a preliminary ruling — Verwaltungsgerichtshof
(Higher Administrative Court, Austria) — Interpretation of
Article 9(2)(a) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17
May 1977 on the harmonisation 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)
— Determination of place of supply for tax purposes —
Concept of supply of services connected with immoveable
property — Transmission for valuable consideration of the
fishing rights over a particular part of a river

28.10.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 261/7

Operative part of the judgment

The transmission of the right to fish by means of a transfer of fishing
permits for valuable consideration constitutes 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 harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turn-
over taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of
assessment.

(1) OJ C 143, 11.06.2005.

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungs-
gericht Köln (Germany)
lodged on 3 July 2006 —
Deutsche Post AG v Bundesrepublik Deutschland, Third
party: Citipost Gesellschaft für Kurier- und Postdienstleis-
tungen mbH Hannover

(Case C-288/06)

(2006/C 261/12)

Language of the case: German

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungs-
gericht Köln (Germany)
lodged on 3 July 2006 —
Deutsche Post AG v Bundesrepublik Deutschland, Third
party: Marketing Service Magdeburg GmbH

(Case C-287/06)

(2006/C 261/11)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgericht Köln

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Deutsche Post AG

Defendant: Bundesrepublik Deutschland

Third party: Marketing Service Magdeburg GmbH

Question referred

Is Article 47(2), in conjunction with Article 95 EC, the fifth
indent of Article 12, and Article 7(1) of Directive 97/67/EC, in
the version as amended by Directive 2002/39/EC of the Euro-
pean Parliament and of the Council (1), to be interpreted as
meaning that, where a universal service provider applies special
tariffs for business customers who give postal
items to the
sorting office pre-sorted for the postal network, that universal
service provider is obliged to apply those special tariffs also to
undertakings which collect postal items from the sender and
give them pre-sorted for the postal network at the same access
point and on the same terms and conditions as business custo-
mers, without the universal service provider being permitted to
refuse to do so, having regard to its obligation to provide a
universal service?

(1) OJ 2002 L 176, p. 21.

Referring court

Verwaltungsgericht Köln

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Deutsche Post AG

Defendant: Bundesrepublik Deutschland

Third party: Citipost Gesellschaft für Kurier- und Postdienstleis-
tungen mbH Hannover

Question referred

Is Article 47(2), in conjunction with Article 95 EC, the fifth
indent of Article 12, and Article 7(1) of Directive 97/67/EC, in
the version as amended by Directive 2002/39/EC of the Euro-
pean Parliament and of the Council (1), to be interpreted as
meaning that, where a universal service provider applies special
tariffs for business customers who give postal
items to the
sorting office pre-sorted for the postal network, that universal
service provider is obliged to apply those special tariffs also to
undertakings which collect postal items from the sender and
give them pre-sorted for the postal network at the same access
point and on the same terms and conditions as business custo-
mers, without the universal service provider being permitted to
refuse to do so, having regard to its obligation to provide a
universal service?

(1) OJ 2002 L 176, p. 21.

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungs-
gericht Köln (Germany) lodged on 3 July 2006 — Magde-
burger Dienstleistungs- und Verwaltungs GmbH (MDG) v
Bundesrepublik Deutschland, Third party: Deutsche Post
AG

(Case C-289/06)

(2006/C 261/13)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgericht Köln