Case C-224/07: Action brought on 4 May 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg
Date: 2007-07-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Community certification, European Commission, Luxembourg, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, national implementing measure, rail transport, trans-European network, transport licence, transport policy, transport safety

C 155/14

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

7.7.2007

respect of mammals which are imported from another EU
Member State and which come under category B, C or D in
the Regulation or are not referred to in the Regulation,
where those mammals are held in that Member State in
accordance with the legislation of that State and that legisla-
tion complies with the provisions of the Regulation?

2. Does Article 30 EC of

the EC Treaty or Regulation
No 338/97 preclude the adoption by a Member State of
rules which, under existing legislation on animal welfare,
prohibit any commercial use of specimens, save where those
specimens are explicitly referred to in those national rules,
where the objective of the protection of those species, as
referred to in Article 30 EC, can be achieved just as effec-
tively by measures which obstruct intra-Community trade
less?

(1) OJ 1997 L 61, p. 1.

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal
Supremo (Spain) lodged on 3 May 2007 — UTECA (Unión
de Televisiones Comerciales Asociadas) v Federación de
Asociaciones de Productores Audiovisuales, Ente Público
RTVE y Administración del Estado

(Case C-222/07)

(2007/C 155/26)

Language of the case: Spanish

revenue for the pre-funding of European cinematographic
films and films made for television?

2. If

the reply to the previous question is affirmative,

is a
national measure which, in addition to laying down the pre-
funding obligation referred to above, reserves 60 % of that
compulsory funding for original Spanish-language works
compatible with that directive and with Article 12 EC, taken
in conjunction with the other special provisions to which
that article refers?

3. Does an obligation imposed by a national measure on televi-
sion operators to the effect that the latter must earmark a
percentage of their operating revenue for the pre-funding of
cinematographic films, where 60 % of that amount must be
earmarked specifically for original Spanish-language films the
majority of which are produced by the Spanish film industry,
amount to State aid in favour of that industry within the
meaning of Article 87 EC?

(1) OJ L 298, p. 23.
(2) OJ L 202, p. 60.

Action brought on 4 May 2007 — Commission of the
European Communities v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg

(Case C-224/07)

(2007/C 155/27)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal Supremo

Parties

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: N. Yerrel and P. Dejmek, Agents)

Applicant: UTECA (Unión
Asociadas)

de

Televisiones

Comerciales

Defendant: Grand Duchy of Luxembourg

Defendants: Federación de Asociaciones de Productores Audiovi-
suales, Ente Público RTVE y Administración del Estado

Form of order sought

Questions referred

1. Does Article 3 of Council Directive 89/552/EEC (1) of
3 October 1989 on the coordination of certain provisions
laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in
Member States concerning the pursuit of television broad-
casting activities, as amended by Directive 97/36/EC (2) of
the European Parliament and of
the Council of 30 June
1997, permit Member States to impose on television opera-
tors the obligation to earmark a percentage of their operating

— declare that, by failing to adopt all the laws, regulations and
administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive
2004/49/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council
of 29 April 2004 on safety on the Community's railways
and amending Council Directive 95/18/EC on the licensing
of railway undertakings and Directive 2001/14/EC on the
allocation of railway infrastructure capacity and the levying
of charges for the use of railway infrastructure and safety
certification (Railway Safety Directive) (1), the Grand Duchy
of Luxembourg has failed to fulfil
its obligations under
Article 33 of that directive;

7.7.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 155/15

or in the alternative:

declare that, by failing to communicate to the Commission
the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary
to comply with Directive 2004/49/EC of
the European
Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on safety
on the Community's railways and amending Council Direc-
tive 95/18/EC on the licensing of railway undertakings and
Directive 2001/14/EC on the allocation of railway infra-
structure capacity and the levying of charges for the use of
railway infrastructure and safety certification (Railway Safety
Directive), the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to
fulfil its obligations under Article 33 of that directive;

— order the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period for transposition of Directive 2004/49/EC expired
on 30 April 2006.

(1) OJ 2004 L 164, p. 44, and corrigendum OJ 2004 L 220, p. 16.

which has claimed a refund of that tax, can rely directly on this
provision?

(1) OJ 2003 L 283, p. 51.

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal
administratif de Paris (France) lodged on 9 May 2007 —
Diana Mayeur v Ministre de la santé et des solidarités

(Case C-229/07)

(2007/C 155/29)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal administratif de Paris

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht
Düsseldorf (Germany) lodged on 7 May 2007 — Flughafen
Köln/Bonn GmbH v Hauptzollamt Köln

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Diana Mayeur

(Case C-226/07)

(2007/C 155/28)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Finanzgericht Düsseldorf

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Flughafen Köln/Bonn GmbH

Defendant: Hauptzollamt Köln

Question referred

Is Article 14(1)(a) of Council Directive 2003/96/EC of
27 October 2003 restructuring the Community framework for
the taxation of energy products and electricity (1) to be inter-
preted as meaning that an undertaking which used gas oil on
which tax was paid coming within heading 2710 of
the
Combined Nomenclature in order to produce electricity, and

Defendant: Ministre de la santé et des solidarités

Question referred

Do the provisions of Article 23 of Directive 2004/38/EC of
29 April 2004 (1) entitle a national of a non-Member State,
who is married to a Community national, to rely on the Com-
munity rules relating to the mutual recognition of diplomas and
to the freedom of establishment, and do they require the compe-
tent authorities of the Member State, from which authorisation
to practise a regulated profession is sought, to take into consid-
eration all
the diplomas, certificates and other evidence of
formal qualifications, even if they were obtained outside the
European Union but if, at least, they have been recognised in
another Member State, and the relevant experience of
the
person concerned, by comparing the specialised knowledge and
abilities certified by those diplomas and that experience with the
knowledge and qualifications required by the national rules?

(1) Directive 2004/38/EC of

the Parliament and of

the Council of
29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family
the
members to move and reside freely within the territory of
Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and
repealing Directives
72/194/EEC,
73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and
93/96/EEC (OJ 2004 L 158, p. 77, and corrigenda — OJ 2004
L 229, p. 35 and OJ 2005 L 197, p. 34).

64/221/EEC,

68/360/EEC,