Case C-292/05: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 15 February 2007 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Efetio Patron — Greece) — I. Lechouritou, V. Karkoulias, G. Pavlopoulos, P. Bratsikas, D. Sotiropoulos, G. Dimopoulos v Dimosio tis Omospondiakis Dimokratias tis Germanias (Brussels Convention — First sentence of the first paragraph of Article 1 — Scope — Civil and commercial matters — Meaning — Action for compensation brought in a Contracting State, by the successors of the victims of war massacres, against another Contracting State on account of acts perpetrated by its armed forces)
Date: 2007-04-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: crime against humanity, interpretation of the law, law of war, war victim

14.4.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 82/5

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of
the Court of First Instance
(Second Chamber) of 26 April 2005 in Joined Cases T-110/03,
T-150/03 and T-405/03 Sison v Council, by which the Court of
First Instance dismissed an application for annulment of the
Council's decision refusing the applicant's request for access to
certain documents on which the Council relied when adopting
Decision 2002/848/EC implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation
(EC) No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures directed
against certain persons and entities with a view to combating
terrorism and repealing Decision 2002/460/EC (OJ 2002 L 295,
p. 12)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders Mr Sison to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 243, 1.10.2005.

17 February 1975 (OJ 1975 L 48, p. 29), Article 2(4) of
Council Directive 92/56/EEC of 24 June 1992 (OJ 1992 L 245,
p. 3) and Article 4(4) of Council Directive 98/59/EC of 20 July
1998 (OJ 1998 L 225, p. 16), on the approximation of the laws
of
the Member States relating to collective redundancies —
Employer's obligation to inform and consult with the workers'
representatives — Scope of the derogating conditions governing
dismissals where activities are terminated following a judicial
decision

Operative part of the judgment

Council Directive 98/59/EC of 20 July 1998 on the approximation
of the laws of the Member States relating to collective redundancies, in
particular Article 1(1)(a),
is to be interpreted as meaning that a
production unit such as that at issue in the main proceedings comes
within the concept of ‘establishment’ for the purposes of the application
of that directive.

(1) OJ C 217, 3.9.2005.

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 15 February
2007 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Arios
Pagos — Greece) — Athinaiki Chartopoiia AE v L. Panagio-
tidis and Others

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 15 February
2007 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Efetio
Patron — Greece) — I. Lechouritou, V. Karkoulias, G.
Pavlopoulos, P. Bratsikas, D. Sotiropoulos, G. Dimopoulos
v Dimosio tis Omospondiakis Dimokratias tis Germanias

(Case C-270/05) (1)

(Case C-292/05) (1)

(Collective redundancies — Council Directive 98/59/EC —
Article 1(1)(a) — Termination of the establishment's activ-
ities of the employer's own volition — Concept of ‘establish-
ment’)

(2007/C 82/08)

Language of the case: Greek

Referring court

Arios Pagos

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Athinaiki Chartopoiia AE

Defendant: L. Panagiotidis and Others

(Brussels Convention — First sentence of the first paragraph
of Article 1 — Scope — Civil and commercial matters —
Meaning — Action for
in a
Contracting State, by the successors of the victims of war
massacres, against another Contracting State on account of
acts perpetrated by its armed forces)

compensation brought

(2007/C 82/09)

Language of the case: Greek

Referring court

Efetio Patron

Intervener: Geniki Sinomospondia Ergaton Elladas (GSEE)

Parties to the main proceedings

Re:

Plaintiffs: I. Lechouritou, V. Karkoulias, G. Pavlopoulos, P. Brat-
sikas, D. Sotiropoulos, G. Dimopoulos

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Arios Pagos — Interpreta-
tion of Article 1(2)(d) of Council Directive 75/129/EEC of

Defendant: Dimosio tis Omospondiakis Dimokratias tis Germa-
nias

C 82/6

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

14.4.2007

Re:

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Efetio Patron — Interpre-
tation of Article 1 of the Brussels Convention — Scope of the
Convention — Action brought by the victims of a war massacre
against a Contracting State as being liable for the acts of its
armed forces in wartime

Operative part of the judgment

On a proper construction of the first sentence of the first paragraph of
Article 1 of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction
and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters,
as amended by the Convention of 9 October 1978 on the Accession
of the Kingdom of Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom of
Great Britain and Northern Ireland, by the Convention of 25 October
1982 on the Accession of the Hellenic Republic and by the Conven-
tion of 26 May 1989 on the Accession of the Kingdom of Spain and
the Portuguese Republic,
‘civil matters’ within the meaning of that
provision does not cover a legal action brought by natural persons in a
Contracting State against another Contracting State for compensation
in respect of
the
victims of acts perpetrated by armed forces in the course of warfare in
the territory of the first State.

the loss or damage suffered by the successors of

(1) OJ C 243, 1.10.2005.

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Hoge Raad der Neder-
landen — Interpretation of Article 17(2) of Sixth Council Direc-
tive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the
laws of
taxes —
the Member States relating to turnover
Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assess-
ment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1) — Services paid for by a taxable
person with a view to establishing the amount of a claim which
arose before he became a taxable person — Deduction of the
tax — Need for a direct and immediate link between the
services and his activity as a taxable person or not

Operative part of the judgment

Article 17(2) 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, is to be interpreted as meaning that the costs for
advisory services which a taxable person obtains with a view to estab-
lishing the amount of a claim forming part of his company's assets
and relating to a sale of shares prior to his becoming liable to VAT do
not, in the absence of evidence establishing that the exclusive reason for
those services is to be found in the economic activity, within the
meaning of that directive, carried out by the taxable person, have a
direct and immediate link with that activity and, consequently, do not
give rise to a right to deduct the VAT charged on them.

(1) OJ C 74, 25.3.2006.

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 8 February
2007 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge
Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — Investrand BV v
Staatssecretaris van Financiën

(Case C-435/05) (1)

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 8 February
2007 — Groupe Danone v Commission of the European
Communities

(Sixth VAT Directive — Article 17(2) — Right to deduct —
Costs related to advisory services obtained in the course of
arbitration proceedings to establish the amount of a claim
that forms part of a company's assets, but arose before its
holder became liable to VAT)

(2007/C 82/10)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands)

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Investrand BV

Defendant: Staatssecretaris van Financiën

(Case C-3/06 P) (1)

(Appeal — Competition — Agreements, decisions and
concerted practices — Fines — Guidelines on the method of
setting fines — Leniency notice)

(2007/C 82/11)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Groupe Danone (represented by: A. Winckler and S.
Sorinas Jimeno, lawyers)

the European
Other party to the proceedings: Commission of
Communities (represented by: A. Bouquet and W. Wils, Agents)