Case C-455/05: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 19 April 2007 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Hamburg (Germany)) — Velvet & Steel Immobilien und Handels GmbH v Finanzamt Hamburg-Eimsbüttel (Sixth VAT Directive — Exemptions — Article 13B(d)(2) — Concept of assumption of obligations — Assumption of the obligation to renovate a property — Refusal of exemption)
Date: 2007-04-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: credit institution, guarantee, interpretation of the law, tax exemption, tax harmonisation

C 96/14

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

28.4.2007

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

takes place in a public hospital,

the only condition
ment
imposed by the national legislation for reimbursement is that
prior authorisation be obtained.

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt all the laws, regulations and
administrative provisions necessary to comply with Articles 4, 8
and 9 of Council Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on
waste, as amended by Council Directive 91/156/EEC of 18 March
1991, and Article 14(a),
(b) and (c) of Council Directive
99/31/EC of 26 April 1999 on the landfill of waste, the French
Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under those provisions;

2. Orders the French Republic to pay the costs.

Operative part of the judgment

Article 49 EC precludes legislation of a Member State, such as that at
issue in the main proceedings, which excludes all reimbursement by a
national social security institution of the costs occasioned by treatment
of persons insured with it in private hospitals in another Member
State, except those relating to treatment provided to children under
14 years of age.

(1) OJ C 48, 25.2.2006.

(1) OJ C 60, 11.3.2006.

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 19 April 2007
(reference for a preliminary ruling from the Diikitiko
Protodikio Athinon — Greece) — Aikaterini Stamatelaki v
NPDD Organismos Asfaliseos Eleftheron Epangelmation
(OAEE)

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 19 April 2007
(reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht
Hamburg (Germany)) — Velvet & Steel Immobilien und
Handels GmbH v Finanzamt Hamburg-Eimsbüttel

(Case C-444/05) (1)

(Case C-455/05) (1)

(Restrictions on the freedom to provide services — Reimburse-
ment of the cost of treatment in private hospitals — Justifica-
tion for, and proportionality of, the exclusion)

(Sixth VAT Directive — Exemptions — Article 13B(d)(2) —
Concept of ‘assumption of obligations’ — Assumption of the
obligation to renovate a property — Refusal of exemption)

(2007/C 96/22)

Language of the case: Greek

(2007/C 96/23)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Diikitiko Protodikio Athinon

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Aikaterini Stamatelaki

Referring court

Finanzgericht Hamburg

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Velvet & Steel Immobilien und Handels GmbH

Defendant: NPDD Organismos Asfaliseos Eleftheron Epangelma-
tion (OAEE)

Defendant: Finanzamt Hamburg-Eimsbüttel

Re:

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Diikitiko Protodikio
Athinon — Interpretation of Articles 49 and 50 EC — Condi-
tions governing the
expenses
reimbursement of medical
legislation
incurred in another Member State — National
allowing medical expenses incurred in a private hospital
in
another Member State to be reimbursed only in the case of
treatment of minors under the age of 14 whereas, when treat-

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Finanzgericht Hamburg —
Interpretation of Article 13B(d)(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 (OJ
1977 L 145, p. 1), as amended — Concept of ‘assumption of
obligations’ — Refusal to exempt the assumption of a renova-
tion obligation

28.4.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 96/15

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Article 13B(d)(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 must be interpreted as meaning that the concept of
assumption of obligations excludes from the scope of that provision
obligations which are non-pecuniary, such as the obligation to renovate
a property.

(1) OJ C 60, 11.3.2006.

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 22 March 2007
the European
— Regione Siciliana v Commission of

Communities

(Case C-15/06 P) (1)

The Court:

1. Sets aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the Euro-
pean Communities of 18 October 2005 in Case T-60/03
Regione Siciliana v Commission.

2. Rejects as inadmissible the Regione Siciliana's action for annulment
of Commission Decision C (2002) 4905 of 11 December 2002
relating to the cancellation of
the aid granted to the Italian
Republic by Commission Decision C (87) 2090 026 of
17 December 1987 concerning the provision of assistance by the
European Regional Development Fund as infrastructure investment,
for a sum no less than EUR 15 million, in Italy (region: Sicily),
and for the recovery of the advance on that assistance made by the
Commission.

3. Declares that it is not necessary to rule on the appeal brought by
the Regione Siciliana against the judgment referred to in para-
graph 1 of the present operative part.

4. Orders the Regione Siciliana to pay the costs of these proceedings

and also those incurred in the procedings at first instance.

(Appeal — European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) —
Closure of Community financial assistance — Action for
annulment — Admissibility — Local or regional entity —
Measures of direct and individual concern to that entity —
Direct concern)

(1) OJ C 74, 25.3.2006.

(2007/C 96/24)

Language of the case: Italian

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 19 April 2007
(reference for a preliminary ruling from the Lietuvos
teismas — Republic of
vyriausiasis
Lithuania) — UAB Profisa v Muitinės departamentas prie
Lietuvos respublikos finansц ministerijos

administracinis

(Case C-63/06) (1)

Parties

Appellant: Regione Siciliana, (represented by G. Aiello, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of
the European
Communities, (represented by E. de March and L. Flynn, Agents,
G. Faedo, lawyer)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (First
Chamber, Extended Composition) of 18 October 2005 in Case
T-60/03 Regione Siciliana v Commission, in which the Court of
First Instance dismissed as unfounded an action for annulment
of Commission Decision C(2002) 4905 of 11 December 2002
relating to the cancellation of the aid initially granted by the
European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) for a sum no less
than ECU 15 million in respect of an infrastructure project for
the construction of a dam in Sicily (Italy), and the recovery of
the advance made by the Commission

(Directive 92/83/EEC — Harmonisation of structures of
excise
beverages —
Article 27(1)(f) — Alcohol contained in chocolate products —
Exemption from the harmonised excise duty)

on alcohol

alcoholic

duties

and

(2007/C 96/25)

Language of the case: Lithuanian

Referring court

Lietuvos vyriausiasis administracinis teismas

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: UAB Profisa

Defendant: Muitinės departamentas prie Lietuvos respublikos
finansų ministerijos