Case C-337/06: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf (Germany) lodged on 7 August 2006 — Bayerischer Rundfunk, Deutschland Radio, Hessischer Rundfunk, Mitteldeutscher Rundfunk, Norddeutscher Rundfunk, Radio Bremen, Rundfunk Berlin-Brandenburg, Saarländischer Rundfunk, Südwestrundfunk, Westdeutscher Rundfunk, Zweites Deutsches Fernsehen v GEWA, Gesellschaft für Gebäudereinigung und Wartung mbH
Date: 2006-11-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: award of contract, broadcasting, financing method, interpretation of the law, public financing

C 281/18

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

18.11.2006

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandes-
gericht Düsseldorf (Germany) lodged on 7 August 2006 —
Bayerischer Rundfunk, Deutschland Radio, Hessischer
Rundfunk, Mitteldeutscher Rundfunk, Norddeutscher
Rundfunk, Radio Bremen, Rundfunk Berlin-Brandenburg,
Saarländischer
Südwestrundfunk, West-
deutscher Rundfunk, Zweites Deutsches Fernsehen v
GEWA, Gesellschaft für Gebäudereinigung und Wartung
mbH

Rundfunk,

within the Directive's scope of application (by argumentum a
contrario)?

(1) OJ L 134, p. 114.

(Case C-337/06)

(2006/C 281/28)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellants: Bayerischer Rundfunk, Bayerischer Rundfunk,
Deutschland Radio, Hessischer Rundfunk, Mitteldeutscher
Rundfunk, Norddeutscher Rundfunk, Radio Bremen, Rundfunk
Berlin-Brandenburg, Saarländischer Rundfunk, Südwestrund-
funk, Westdeutscher Rundfunk, Zweites Deutsches Fernsehen

Respondent: GEWA, Gesellschaft
Wartung mbH

für Gebäudereinigung und

Intervening party: Heinz W. Warnecke, trading as Großbauten
Spezial Reinigung

Questions referred

of Article

subparagraph

1. Where it appears in the first alternative of letter (c) of the
of Directive
second
2004/18/EC (1), is the term ‘financed … by the State’ to be
interpreted as including indirect financing given to bodies
by means of fees imposed, on persons who have receiving
equipment available for use, by the State pursuant to the
obligation imposed on it by constitutional law to ensure the
independent financing and existence of those bodies?

1(9)

2. If the first question is answered in the affirmative, where it
appears in the first alternative of letter (c) of the second sub-
paragraph of Article 1(9) of Directive 2004/18/EC, is the
term ‘financed … by the State’ to be interpreted as being
satisfied only in circumstances in which the State has direct
influence on the award of contracts by the body financed by
the State?

3. If the second question is answered in the negative, is letter
(c) of the second subparagraph of Article 1(9) of Directive
2004/18/EC to be interpreted, in the light of Article 16(b),
as meaning that the only services removed from the Directi-
ve's scope of application are those specified in Article 16(b)
and that other services which are not related to programme
material but are of a subsidiary or ancillary nature are

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungs-
gericht Chemnitz (Germany) lodged on 8 August 2006 —
Peter Funk v Stadt Chemnitz

(Case C-343/06)

(2006/C 281/29)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgericht Chemnitz

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Peter Funk

Defendant: Stadt Chemnitz

Question(s) referred

1. Is a Member State permitted, in conformity with Article 1(2)
and Article 8(2) and (4) of Council Directive 91/439/EEC (1)
of 29 July 1991, to require a holder of a driving licence
issued in another Member State to apply to the national
authority of the first Member State for recognition of the
right to drive in its territory where the holder of the foreign
EU driving licence has previously, in the territory of the first
Member State, had his driving licence withdrawn or
cancelled for some reason?

If not:

2. Are the combined provisions of Article 1(2) and Article 8(2)
and (4) of Directive 91/439/EEC to be interpreted as
meaning that a Member State within its territory may refuse
to recognise a right to drive under a driving licence issued
by another Member State where the holder of the foreign
EU driving licence has previously, in the territory of the first
Member State, had his driving licence withdrawn by the
administrative authority where the law of the first Member
State considers that in the case of administrative measures
for the withdrawal or cancellation of a driving licence there
is no ban on its reissue and where entitlement to the reissue
of a driving licence does not arise until
the person
concerned has provided evidence of aptitude to drive as a
material prerequisite for the reissue of the driving licence in
the form of a medical/psychological report regulated in
more detail under national law, on an order by the adminis-
trative authority?