Case C-94/07: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeitsgericht Bonn (Germany) lodged on 20 February 2007 — Dr Andrea Raccanelli v Max-Planck-Gesellschaft zur Förderung der Wissenschaften e.V.
Date: 2007-05-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: discrimination on the basis of nationality, free movement of workers, interpretation of the law, labour law, worker (EU)

26.5.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 117/3

By his second submission, the applicant maintains that, contrary
to the findings of the judgment under appeal, the new pension
scheme effectively provides for a link to the cost of living in
Brussels, so that the income of pensioners living in Belgium is
set by taking into account solely the cost of living in the capital
of that Member State, whilst the income of pensioners living in
the capitals of other Member States is actually determined by a
weighting which takes into account the average cost of living in
the entire country. The applicant challenges, moreover,
the
finding of the Court of First Instance that the lawfulness of a
Community legislative act cannot depend on the way in which
it is applied in practice, since the measures implementing such
an act are closely linked to the act itself, and relies on a breach
of the rights of the defence and of the principle of the equality
of the parties before the Community judicature, inasmuch as he
knew of the measures implementing the new pension scheme
only after the close of the written procedure.

Respondent: Domenico Valvo

Question referred

May a farmer be refused the compensatory allowance provided
for by Regulation (EEC) No 2328/91 (as amended by Regulation
No 3669/93) and by Regulation (EC) No 950/97 (1) on
improving the efficiency of agricultural structures when he also
receives a pension, in particular, a years-of-service pension?

(1) OJ 1997 L 142, p. 1.

By his final submission, the applicant challenges the Court of
First Instance's finding that he had no legal interest in bringing
proceedings pursuant to Article 241 EC by referring to the
advantage conferred on pensioners living in a ‘less expensive’
Member State.
treatment
reserved for pensioners living in a ‘less expensive’ Member State
as compared with pensioners living in an ‘expensive’ Member
State, he is attacking the breach of the principle of equality of
purchasing power and aiming, thereby, to call into question the
pension scheme resulting from the new Staff Regulations and its
transitional measures.

In complaining of

the different

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di
Giustizia Amministrativa per la Regione siciliana (Italy)
lodged on 13 February 2007 — Ispettorato Provinciale
dell'Agricoltura di Enna, Assessorato all'agricoltura e
foreste della regione Sicilia, Regione Sicilia v Domenico
Valvo

(Case C-78/07)

(2007/C 117/03)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Consiglio di Giustizia Amministrativa per la Regione siciliana
(Italy)

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellants:
Ispettorato Provinciale dell'Agricoltura di Enna,
Assessorato all'agricoltura e foreste della regione Sicilia, Regione
Sicilia

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeitsgericht
Bonn (Germany) lodged on 20 February 2007 — Dr Andrea
Raccanelli v Max-Planck-Gesellschaft zur Förderung der
Wissenschaften e.V.

(Case C-94/07)

(2007/C 117/04)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Arbeitsgericht Bonn

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Dr Andrea Raccanelli

Defendant: Max-Planck-Gesellschaft
Wissenschaften e.V.

zur

Förderung

der

Questions referred

1. Should the applicant be regarded as a worker within the
meaning of the European concept of ‘worker’ if he is not
called upon to provide any more work-related services than
are doctoral students with an employment contract concluded
pursuant to the Bundesangestelltentarifvertrag (federal collec-
tive agreement for public sector workers, ‘BAT/2’)?

2. In the event that the answer to Question 1 is in the negative:
must Article 7 of Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 on freedom
of movement for workers within the Community (1) be inter-
preted as meaning that there is no discrimination only if the
applicant was at least granted the right to choose between an
employment contract and a grant before his period of
doctoral study with the defendant began?

C 117/4

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

26.5.2007

3. In the event that the answer to Question 2 is that the appli-
cant should have been granted the opportunity to conclude
an employment contract, the question must be asked:

What are the consequences in law in the event of discrimina-
tion against foreign nationals?

lating the ‘formalities’ referred to in that provision by means
of the reverse charge procedure governed by the combined
provisions of Articles 17(3), 23 and 25 of DPR 633/72,
make (solely to the detriment of the taxpayer) the exercise of
the right to deduct permitted by Article 17 of the Directive
conditional upon compliance with a time limit such as that
laid down in Article 19 of DPR 633/72?

(1) OJ English Special Edition 1968 (II), p. 475.

(1) OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1.

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Commissione
Tributaria Provinciale di Genova
lodged on
20 February 2007 — Ecotrade SpA v Agenzia Entrate
Ufficio Genoa 3

(Italy)

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Commissione
Tributaria Provinciale di Genova
lodged on
20 February 2007 — Ecotrade SpA v Agenzia Entrate
Ufficio Genova 3

(Italy)

(Case C-95/07)

(2007/C 117/05)

Language of the case: Italian

(Case C-96/07)

(2007/C 117/06)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Commissione Tributaria Provinciale di Genova

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Ecotrade SpA

Defendant: Agenzia Entrate Ufficio Genoa 3

Commissione Tributaria Provinciale di Geonva

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Ecotrade SpA

Questions referred

Defendant: Agenzia Entrate Ufficio Genova 3

1. Does a correct interpretation of Articles 17, 21(1) and 22 of
the Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC (1) of 17 May 1977
on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States
relating to turnover taxes preclude national
legislation (in
particular Article 19 of DPR 633 of 26/10/72) that makes
the exercise of the right to deduct value added tax, payable
by a taxable person in the pursuit of his business activities,
dependent on compliance with a (two-year) time limit and
penalises non-compliance with annulment of that right? That
question is asked with reference, in particular, to cases where
the liability to VAT on the purchase of the goods or service
stems from the application of the reverse charge procedure,
which allows the authorities a longer period (of four years
under Article 57 of DPR 633/72)
in which to demand
payment of the duty than the period allowed to the trader
for deduction of the duty, on expiry of which the trader's
right to such deduction lapses.

2. Does

it

follow from a

of
Article 18(1)(d) of the Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC
of 17 May 1977 that national legislation may not, in regu-

interpretation

correct

Questions referred

1. Does a correct interpretation of Articles 17, 21(1) and 22 of
the Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC (1) of 17 May 1977
on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States
relating to turnover taxes preclude national
legislation (in
particular Article 19 of DPR 633 of 26/10/72) that makes
the exercise of the right to deduct value added tax, payable
by a taxable person in the pursuit of his business activities,
dependent on compliance with a (two-year) time limit and
penalises non-compliance with annulment of that right? That
question is asked with reference, in particular, to cases where
the liability to VAT on the purchase of the goods or service
stems from the application of the reverse charge procedure,
which allows the authorities a longer period (of four years
under Article 57 of DPR 633/72)
in which to demand
payment of the duty than the period allowed to the trader
for deduction of the duty, on expiry of which the trader's
right to such deduction lapses.