Case C-335/05: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 7 June 2007 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Köln — Germany) — Řízení Letového Provozu ČR, s.p. v Bundesamt für Finanzen (Thirteenth VAT Directive — Article 2(2) — GATS — Most-favoured-nation clause — Interpretation of secondary Community law in the light of international agreements concluded by the Community)
Date: 2007-07-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: GATS, VAT, interpretation of the law, most favoured nation, tax harmonisation, tax rebate, third country

21.7.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 170/5

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 12 June 2007 —
Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade
Marks and Designs) v Shaker di L. Laudato & C. Sas,
Limiñana y Botella, SL

3. Reserves the costs.

(1) OJ C 296, 26.11.2005.

(Case C-334/05 P) (1)

(Appeal — Community trade mark — Regulation (EC)
No 40/94 — Article 8(1)(b) — Likelihood of confusion —
Application for a figurative Community trade mark with the
word elements ‘Limoncello della Costiera Amalfitana’ and
‘shaker’ — Opposition by the proprietor of the national word
mark LIMONCHELO)

(2007/C 170/07)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Appellant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: O. Montalto and
P. Bullock, Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings: Shaker di L. Laudato & C. Sas
(represented by: F. Sciaudone, avvocato), Limiñana y Botella, SL

Re:

the Court of First Instance
Appeal against the judgment of
(Third Chamber) of 15 June 2005 in Case T-7/04 Shaker di L.
Laudato & C. Sas v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs)(OHIM) by which the Court annulled
decision R 993/2002-2 of
the Second Board of Appeal of
OHIM of 24 October 2003 dismissing the appeal against the
decision of the Opposition Division which refused, in part, the
registration of the figurative mark ‘Limoncello della Costiera
Amalfitana’ in opposition proceedings brought by the proprietor
of the national word mark LIMONCHELO for certain goods in
Class 33

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Sets aside the judgment of

the
European Communities of 15 June 2005, Case T-7/04 Shaker v
OHIM — Limiñana
(Limoncello della Costiera
Amalfitana shaker);

the Court of First

Instance of

y Botella

2. Refers the case back to the Court of First Instance of the European

Communities;

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 7 June 2007
(reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht
Köln — Germany) — Řízení Letového Provozu ČR, s.p. v
Bundesamt für Finanzen

(Case C-335/05) (1)

(Thirteenth VAT Directive — Article 2(2) — GATS — Most-
secondary
favoured-nation clause — Interpretation of
Community law in the light of international agreements
concluded by the Community)

(2007/C 170/08)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Finanzgericht Köln

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Řízení Letového Provozu ČR, s.p.

Defendant: Bundesamt für Finanzen

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Finanzgericht Köln —
Interpretation of Article 2(2) of Thirteenth Council Directive
86/560/EEC of 17 November 1986 on the harmonisation of
the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes —
Arrangements for the refund of VAT to taxable persons not
established in Community territory (OJ 1986 L 326, p. 40) —
Possibility of making refunds of VAT to a taxable person estab-
lished in the territory of a third State which is party to the
WTO conditional upon reciprocity on the part of that State —
Compatibility with the most-favoured-nation clause provided for
in Article II(1) of the General Agreement on Trade in Services
(GATS) — Interpretation in conformity with the directive

C 170/6

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

21.7.2007

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

of Thirteenth Council Directive 86/560/EEC of
Article 2(2)
17 November 1986 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member
States relating to turnover taxes — Arrangements for the refund of
value added tax to taxable persons not established in Community terri-
tory must be interpreted as meaning that the ‘third States’ referred to
in that provision include all third States and that that provision is
without prejudice to the ability and the responsibility of the Member
States to comply with their obligations under international agreements
such as the General Agreement on Trade in Services.

The Court hereby:

1. Dismisses the main appeal and the cross-appeal.

2. Orders Mr Wunenburger to pay the costs of the main appeal.

3. Orders the Commission of the European Communities to pay the

costs of the cross-appeal.

(1) OJ C 315 of 10.12.2005.

(1) OJ C 281, 12.11.2005.

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 7 June 2007 —
the European
Jacques Wunenburger v Commission of

Communities

(Case C-362/05 P) (1)

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 7 June 2007 —
Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of
the Netherlands

(Case C-50/06) (1)

(Appeals — Staff cases — Promotion — Selection procedure
— Rejection of the appellant's candidature — Retirement in
the interests of the service — Obligation to state the reasons
on which the decision is based — Error of law — Cross-
in
appeal — Subject-matter of

the dispute — Interest

bringing proceedings)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Citizenship
of the Union — Freedom of movement for nationals of the
Member States — Directive 64/221/EEC — Public policy —
National legislation concerning expulsion — Criminal convic-
tion — Expulsion)

(2007/C 170/09)

Language of the case: French

(2007/C 170/10)

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Appellant:
avocat)

Jacques Wunenburger (represented by: E. Boigelot,

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of
Communities
(represented by:
Agents and V. Dehin, avocat)

the European
J. Currall and G. Berscheid,

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of
the Court of First
Instance (First Chamber) of 5 July 2005 in Case T-370/03
Wunenburger v Commission which dismissed the appellant's appli-
to
cation for annulment of
proceed with his candidature for the post of Director of Directo-
rate
(AIDCO.C) and appointed
another candidate to that post.

the Commission's decision not

‘Africa, Caribbean, Pacific’

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: M. Condou-Durande and R. Troosters, Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: H.G.
Sevenster and M. de Grave, Agents)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement
of Council Directive 64/221/EEC of 25 February 1964 on the
co-ordination of special measures concerning the movement
and residence of
foreign nationals which are justified on
grounds of public policy, public security or public health (OJ,
English Special Edition 1963-1964, p. 117) — National legisla-
tion applying without distinction to all foreign nationals and
thus failing to take account of the special position of citizens of
the European Union — Automatic connection between a
criminal conviction and a measure a ordering expulsion.