Case C-421/05: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 18 January 2007 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank van Koophandel te Brussel, Belgium) — City Motors Groep NV v Citroën Belux NV (Competition — Distribution agreement relating to motor vehicles — Block exemption — Regulation (EC) No 1400/2002 — Article 3(4) and (6) — Termination by the supplier — Right to refer the dispute to an expert or arbitrator or to apply to a national court — Express termination clause — Compatibility with the block exemption — Validity of the grounds for the termination — Effective review)
Date: 2007-03-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: contract terms, exclusive distribution agreement, interpretation of the law, motor vehicle industry, termination of a contract, vertical agreement

C 56/10

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

10.3.2007

Operative part of the judgment

1. Article 3(1) of Directive 2002/14/EC of the European Parliament
and of
the Council of 11 March 2002 establishing a general
framework for informing and consulting employees in the European
Community must be interpreted as precluding national legislation
which excludes, even temporarily, a specific category of workers
from the calculation of staff numbers within the meaning of that
provision.

2. Article 1(1)(a) of Council Directive 98/59/EC of 20 July 1998
on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to
collective redundancies must be interpreted as precluding national
legislation which excludes, even temporarily, a specific category of
workers from the calculation of staff numbers set out in that provi-
sion.

(1) OJ C 330, 24.12.2005.

1. Declares that, by failing to take the measures necessary to ensure
that adequate treatment was provided for urban waste waters from
the agglomerations of Bangor, Brighton, Broadstairs, Carrickfergus,
Coleraine, Donaghadee, Larne, Lerwick, Londonderry, Margate,
Newtownabbey, Omagh and Portrush by 31 December 2000 at
the latest, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 4(1) and (3)
of Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning
urban waste-water treatment;

2. Orders the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 48, 25.2.2006.

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 25 January 2007
— Commission of the European Communities v United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

(Case C-405/05) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Directive
91/271/EEC — Pollution and nuisance — Treatment of urban
waste water — Lack of measures to ensure the adequate treat-
ment of urban waste water from a number of agglomerations)

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 18 January
a preliminary ruling from the
2007 (reference for
Rechtbank van Koophandel te Brussel, Belgium) — City
Motors Groep NV v Citroën Belux NV

(Case C-421/05) (1)

(Competition — Distribution agreement relating to motor
vehicles — Block exemption — Regulation (EC) No 1400/
2002 — Article 3(4) and (6) — Termination by the supplier
— Right to refer the dispute to an expert or arbitrator or to
apply to a national court — Express termination clause —
Compatibility with the block exemption — Validity of the
grounds for the termination — Effective review)

(2007/C 56/16)

Language of the case: English

(2007/C 56/17)

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Referring court

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: S. Pardo Quintillán, X. Lewis and H. van Vliet, acting
as Agents)

Defendant: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
Ireland (represented by: C. White, acting as Agent)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement
of Article 4(1) and (3) of Council Directive 91/271/EEC of
21 May 1991 concerning urban waste-water treatment
(OJ
1991 L 135, p. 40) — Failure to ensure adequate treatment of
urban waste water from a number of agglomerations

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

Rechtbank van Koophandel te Brussel

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: City Motors Groep NV

Defendant: Citroën Belux NV

Re:

for

a preliminary

ruling — Rechtbank

van
Reference
te Brussel — Interpretation of Article 3(6) of
koophandel
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1400/2002 of 31 July 2002
on the application of Article 81(3) of the Treaty to categories of
vertical agreements and concerted practices in the motor vehicle
sector (OJ 2002 L 203, p. 30) — Prohibition on inserting an
express termination clause in a motor vehicle concession agree-
ment intended to benefit from the exemption

10.3.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 56/11

Operative part of the judgment

falling within the scope of

Article 3(6) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1400/2002 of
31 July 2002 on the application of Article 81(3) of the Treaty to
categories of vertical agreements and concerted practices in the motor
vehicle sector is to be interpreted as meaning that the mere fact that an
agreement
that regulation contains an
express termination clause, such as that at issue in the main proceed-
ings, under which such an agreement can be terminated by the supplier
as of right and without notice in the event of a breach by the distri-
butor of one of the contractual obligations referred to in that clause,
does not have the effect of rendering the block exemption provided for
in Article 2(1) of that regulation inapplicable to that agreement.

(1) OJ C 36, 11.2.2006.

entitlement to deferral of taxation on capital gains arising from the
sale of a private residential property or of a right to reside in a
private cooperative property conditional on the newly-acquired resi-
dence also being on Swedish territory, the Kingdom of Sweden has
failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 18 EC, 39 EC and 43
EC and under Articles 28 and 31 of the EEA Agreement;

2. Orders the Kingdom of Sweden to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 96, 22.4.2006.

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 18 January
the European Communities v
2007 — Commission of

Kingdom of Sweden

(Case C-104/06) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Tax legisla-
tion — Deferral of taxation on capital gains arising on sale
of residential property — Articles 18 EC, 39 EC and 43 EC
— Articles 28 and 31 of the Agreement on the European
Economic Area)

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 18 January 2007
— Commission of the European Communities v Czech
Republic

(Case C-204/06) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Directive
78/686/EEC — Mutual recognition of diplomas, certificates
and other evidence of formal qualifications — Practitioners of
dentistry — Measures to facilitate the effective exercise of the
right of establishment and freedom to provide services —
Failure to transpose within the prescribed period)

(2007/C 56/19)

Language of the case: Czech

(2007/C 56/18)

Language of the case: Swedish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: L. Ström van Lier and R. Lyal, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of Sweden (represented by: A. Kruse, acting
as Agent)

Re:

Failure of Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of
Articles 18 EC, 39 EC, 43 EC and 56(1) EC and of Articles 28,
31 and 40 of
legislation
making deferral of taxation on capital gains arising on the sale
of owner-occupied property when the taxable person acquires a
replacement property conditional on both properties being on
national territory

the EEA Agreement — National

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Declares that, by adopting and maintaining in force tax provisions,
tax
the
(inkomstskattelagen (1999:1229)), which make

such as
(1999:1229)

in Chapter 47 of

law on income

those

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: K. Walkerová and H. Støvlbæk, Agents)

Defendant: Czech Republic (represented by: T. Boček, Agent)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Failure to have
transposed, within the prescribed period, Council Directive
78/686/EEC of 25 July 1978 concerning the mutual recognition
of diplomas, certificates and other evidence of the formal quali-
fications of practitioners of dentistry,
including measures to
facilitate the effective exercise of the right of establishment and
freedom to provide services (OJ 1978 L 233, p. 1)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

(1) Declares that, by failing to adopt all the laws, regulations and
administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council Direc-
tive 78/686/EEC of 25 July 1978 concerning the mutual recog-
nition of diplomas, certificates and other evidence of the formal
qualifications of practitioners of dentistry,
including measures to
facilitate the effective exercise of the right of establishment and
freedom to provide services, the Czech Republic has failed to fulfil
its obligations under Article 24 of that directive.