Case C-68/05 P: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 October 2006 — Koninklijke Coöperatie Cosun UA v Commission of the European Communities (Appeal — Agriculture — Common organisation of the markets — Sugar — Article 26 of Regulation (EEC) No 1785/81 and Article 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 2670/81 — Charge owing for C Sugar disposed of on the internal market — Application for remission — Equity clause laid down in Article 13 of Regulation (EEC) No 1430/79 — Import or export duties — Principles of equality and legal certainty — Equity)
Date: 2006-12-30
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: CCT duties, General Court (EU), action for annulment (EU), appeal, export levy, fraud, sugar, sugar industry

C 326/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.12.2006

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1) Declares that, by exempting almost all,

if not all, categories of
establishments undertaking the public lending of works protected by
copyright from the obligation to pay remuneration to authors for
the lending carried out, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil
its obligations under Articles 1 and 5 of Council Directive
92/100/EEC of 19 November 1992 on rental right and lending
right and on certain rights related to copyright in the field of intel-
lectual property;

2) Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.

1. Declares that, by inserting into Articles 2(1) and 3 of Law No
3037/2002 the prohibition, subject to the criminal and adminis-
trative penalties set out in Articles 4 and 5 of the same law, on the
installation and operation of all electrical, electromechanical and
electronic games,
including all computer games, on all public or
the Hellenic Republic has
private premises apart
failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 28 EC, 43 EC and 49
EC and Article 8 of Directive 98/34/CE of the European Parlia-
ment and of the Council of 22 June 1998 laying down a procedure
for the provision of information in the field of technical standards
and regulations and of rules on Information Society services, as
amended by Directive 98/48/EC of the European Parliament and
of the Council of 20 July 1998;

from casinos,

2. Orders the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 69 of 19.03.2005.

(1) OJ C 82, 02.04.2005.

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 26 October
the European Communities v
2006 — Commission of

Hellenic Republic

(Case C-65/05) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Articles 28
EC and 30 EC — Free movement of goods — Article 43 EC
— Freedom of establishment — Article 49 EC — Freedom to
provide services — Prohibition on the installation and opera-
tion of electrical, electromechanical and electronic games
subject to criminal or administrative sanctions — Directive
98/34/EC — Technical standards and regulations — National
legislation applicable to electrical, electromechanical and elec-
tronic games)

(2006/C 326/16)

Language of the case: Greek

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 October 2006
— Koninklijke Coöperatie Cosun UA v Commission of the
European Communities

(Case C-68/05 P) (1)

(Appeal — Agriculture — Common organisation of
the
markets — Sugar — Article 26 of Regulation (EEC) No
1785/81 and Article 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 2670/81 —
Charge owing for C Sugar disposed of on the internal market
— Application for remission — Equity clause laid down in
Article 13 of Regulation (EEC) No 1430/79 — ‘Import or
export duties’ — Principles of equality and legal certainty —
Equity)

(2006/C 326/17)

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: M. Patakia, Agent)

Parties

Defendant: Hellenic Republic (represented by: A. Samoni-Rantou
and N. Dafniou, Agents)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Arts 28, 43
and 49 EC and Art. 8 of Directive 98/34/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council of 22 June 1998 laying down a
procedure for the provision of information in the field of tech-
nical standards and regulations (OJ 1998 L 204, p. 37) —
National legislation applicable to electronic computer games

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

Applicant: Koninklijke Coöperatie Cosun UA (represented by: M.
Slotboom and N.J. Helder, advocaten)

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of
the European
Communities (represented by: X. Lewis, Agent, F. Tuytschaever,
advocaat)

Re

Appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth
Chamber) of 7 December 2004 in Case T-240/02 Koninklijke
Coöperatie Cosun v Commission, by which the Court of First
Instance dismissed an application for annulment of Commission
Decision REM/19/10 of 2 May 2002 declaring inadmissible the
request for remission of import duties lodged by the Nether-
lands in favour of the applicant

30.12.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 326/9

Operative part of the Judgment

1. The appeal is dismissed;

2. Koninklijke Coöperatie Cosun UA is ordered to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 82, 02.04.2005.

by Annex II to the Treaty, and the criteria for fixing the amount of
such refunds, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No
229/96 of 7 February 1996, is to be interpreted as not precluding an
exporter from providing evidence by other means where it is unable to
provide in support of
its export declaration documentary evidence
relating to the quantities of products actually used in the manufacture
of exported goods, even in a case of force majeure. The national autho-
rities are to assess that other means of evidence, in accordance with the
detailed rules laid down in the national law, provided, however, that
those rules do not affect either the scope or effectiveness of Community
law. For that purpose, national authorities must also take into consid-
eration documents previously exchanged with the exporter when the
application is made under the simplified procedure provided for in the
third subparagraph of Article 3(2) of that regulation.

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 9 November
2006 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanz-
gericht Hamburg — Germany) — Heinrich Schulze GmbH
& Co. KG i.L. v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas

(1) OJ C 143, 11.06.2005.

(Case C-120/05) (1)

(Export refunds — Conditions for granting — Export declara-
tion — Lack of documentary evidence — Use of other types of
evidence)

(2006/C 326/18)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Finanzgericht Hamburg

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Heinrich Schulze GmbH & Co. KG i.L.

Defendant: Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 October 2006
(reference for a preliminary ruling from the Audiencia
Provincial de Madrid — Spain) — Elisa María Mostaza
Claro v Centro Móvil Milenium SL

(Case C-168/05) (1)

(Directive 93/13/EEC — Unfair terms in consumer contracts
— Failure to raise the unfair nature of a term during arbitra-
tion proceedings — Possibility of raising that objection in the
context of an action brought against the arbitration award)

(2006/C 326/19)

Language of the case: Spanish

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Finanzgericht Hamburg —
Interpretation of
the third subparagraph of Article 7(2) of
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1222/94 of 30 May 1994
laying down common detailed rules for the application of the
refunds on certain agricultural
system of granting export
products exported in the form of goods not covered by Annex
II to the Treaty, and the criteria for fixing the amount of such
refunds (OJ 1994 L 136, p. 5) — Exporter unable to fulfil the
obligation to provide the competent authorities, in support of
its declaration, with all documents and information regarded by
those authorities as appropriate — Documents destroyed by
force majeure — Possibility of using other types of evidence.

Referring court

Audiencia Provincial de Madrid

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Elisa María Mostaza Claro

Defendant: Centro Móvil Milenium SL

Re:

Operative part of the judgment

The third subparagraph of Article 7(1) of Commission Regulation
(EC) No 1222/94 of 30 May 1994 laying down common detailed
rules for the application of the system of granting export refunds on
certain agricultural products exported in the form of goods not covered

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Audiencia Provincial de
Madrid — Interpretation of Articles 6(1) and 7(1) of, and point
1(q) of the annex to, Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April
1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (OJ 1993 L 95, p.
29) — Adequate and effective means to prevent the use of
terms — Invalidity of an arbitration agreement not
unfair
pleaded by the consumer during the arbitration proceedings