Case C-204/06: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 18 January 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Czech Republic (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)
Date: 2007-03-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Czechia, European Commission, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, dentist, free movement of workers, recognition of diplomas, right of establishment

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.

C 56/12

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

10.3.2007

(2) Orders the Czech Republic to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 143, 17.6.2006.

Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 11 January 2007
(reference for a preliminary ruling of The Okresní soud v
Českém Krumlově, Czech Republic) — Jan Vorel v Nemoc-
nice Český Krumlov

be physically present at the place of work, but in the course of
which he does no actual work, is not treated as wholly consti-
tuting ‘working time’ within the meaning of the said directives;

— not preventing a Member State from applying legislation on
the remuneration of workers and concerning on-call duties
performed by them at the workplace which makes a distinction
between the treatment of periods in the course of which work is
actually done and those during which no actual work is done,
provided that such a system wholly guarantees the practical
effect of the rights conferred on workers by the said directives in
order
their health and
safety.

to ensure the effective protection of

(Case C-437/05) (1)

(1) OJ C 36, 11.2.2006.

(First subparagraph of Article 104(3) of the Rules of Proce-
dure — Social Policy — Protection of the health and safety of
workers — Directives 93/104/EC and 2003/88/EC —
Concept of ‘working time’ — Periods of inactivity during on-
call duty provided by a doctor at his place of work — Classifi-
cation — Effect on the remuneration of the person concerned)

(2007/C 56/20)

Language of the case: Czech

Order of the Court of 9 January 2007 (reference for a preli-
minary ruling from the Finanzgericht München, Germany)
— Juers Pharma Import-Export GmbH v Oberfinanzdirek-
tion Nürnberg

(Case C-40/06) (1)

Referring court

Okresní soud v Českém Krumlově (Český Krumlov District
Court)

(First subparagraph of Article 104(3) of the Rules of Proce-
dure — Common Customs Tariff — Combined Nomenclature
— Tariff classification — Capsules containing primarily
melatonin — Medicaments)

Parties

Applicant: Jan Vorel

(2007/C 56/21)

Language of the case: German

Defendant: Nemocnice Český Krumlov (Český Krumlov Hospital)

Re:

Referring court

Finanzgericht München

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Okresní Soud v Českém
Krumlově — Interpretation of Articles 2(1) and 18 of Council
Directive 93/104/EC of 23 November 1993 concerning certain
aspects of the organisation of working time (OJ 1993 L 307, p.
18) — Meaning of working time — National
legislation
regarding periods of inactivity during the on-call period of a
doctor at his place of work as not constituting working time

Parties in the main proceedings

Applicant: Juers Pharma Import-Export GmbH

Defendant: Oberfinanzdirektion Nürnberg

Operative part of the order

Re:

1. Directive 93/104/EC of

the Council of 23 November 1993
concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time, as
amended by Directive 2000/34/EC of the European Parliament
and of the Council of 22 June 2000, and Directive 2003/88/EC
of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November
2003, concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working
time should be interpreted as:

— precluding national

legislation under which on-call duty
performed by a doctor under a system where he is expected to

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Finanzgericht München —
Interpretation of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1789/2003
of 11 September 2003 amending Annex I to Council Regulation
(EEC) No 2658/87 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and
on the Common Customs Tariff (OJ 2003 L 281, p. 1) —
Heading 3004 (medicaments) and heading 2106 (food prepara-
tions) of the Combined Nomenclature — Classification of mela-
tonin capsules put up as dietary supplements but which may be
supplied only by pharmacies and on prescription — Twinlab
Melatonin Caps