Case C-430/05: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 5 July 2007 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Simvoulio tis Epikratias — Greece) — Dionik Anonimi Etairia Emporias I/I, Logismikou & Parokhis Ipiresion Mikhanografisis, Ioannis Mikhail Pikoulas v Epitropi Kefalaiagoras (Directive 2001/34/EC — Article 21 — Admission of securities to official stock exchange listing — Listing particulars (prospectus) — Publication of inaccurate information — Persons responsible — Members of the board of directors)
Date: 2007-08-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Greece, administrative sanction, advertising malpractice, interpretation of the law, issue of securities, securities, stock-exchange listing

C 199/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

25.8.2007

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders Internationaler Hilsfonds eV to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 271, 29.10.2005.

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 28 June 2007
(reference for a preliminary ruling from the VAT and
Duties Tribunal, London — United Kingdom) — JP Morgan
Fleming Claverhouse Investment Trust plc, The Association
of Investment Trust Companies v The Commissioners of
HM Revenue and Customs

(Case C-363/05) (1)

(Sixth VAT Directive — Article 13B(d)(6) — Exemption —
Special investment funds — Meaning — Definition by the
Member States — Discretion — Limits — Closed-ended
funds)

States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value
added tax: uniform basis of assessment must be interpreted as
meaning that the words ‘special investment funds’ in that provision
including closed-ended investment funds, such as
are capable of
Investment Trust Companies.

‘special

for the purposes of

2. Article 13B(d)(6) of Sixth Directive 77/388 must be interpreted
as meaning that it allows Member States a discretion in defining
the funds located on their territory which are covered by the notion
the exemption
of
investment funds’
provided for by that provision. However,
in the exercise of that
power, the Member States must respect the objective pursued by
that provision, which is to facilitate investment in securities for
investors through investment undertakings, while guaranteeing the
principle of fiscal neutrality from the point of view of the levying of
VAT on the management of special investment funds which are in
funds such as funds
competition with other special
falling within the scope of Council Directive 85/611/EEC of
20 December 1985 on the coordination of laws, regulations and
administrative provisions
collective
investment in transferable securities (UCITS), as amended by Direc-
tive 2005/1/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of
9 March 2005.

relating to undertakings

investment

for

3. Article 13B(d)(6) of Sixth Directive 77/388 has direct effect, in
that it can be relied on by a taxable person before a national court
in order to challenge the application of national legislation alleged
to be incompatible with that provision.

(2007/C 199/12)

Language of the case: English

(1) OJ C 271, 29.10.2005.

Referring court

VAT and Duties Tribunal, London

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: JP Morgan Fleming Claverhouse Investment Trust plc,
The Association of Investment Trust Companies

Defendant: The Commissioners of HM Revenue and Customs

Re:

Interpretation of Art. 13B(d)(6) 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) — Scope of the exemption of the management of
pooled investment funds — Inclusion of closed-ended funds
such as investment trust companies

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 5 July 2007
(reference for a preliminary ruling from the Simvoulio tis
Epikratias — Greece) — Dionik Anonimi Etairia Emporias
Ipiresion Mikhanografisis,
I/I, Logismikou & Parokhis

Ioannis Mikhail Pikoulas v Epitropi Kefalaiagoras

(Case C-430/05) (1)

(Directive 2001/34/EC — Article 21 — Admission of securi-
ties to official stock exchange listing — Listing particulars
inaccurate information —
(prospectus) — Publication of

Persons responsible — Members of the board of directors)

(2007/C 199/13)

Language of the case: Greek

Operative part of the judgment

Referring court

1. Article 13B(d)(6) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of
17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member

Simvoulio tis Epikratias (Council of State)

25.8.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 199/9

Parties to the main proceedings

Party in the main proceedings

Applicants: Dionik Anonimi Etairia Emporias I/I, Logismikou &
Parokhis Ipiresion Mikhanografisis, Ioannis Mikhail Pikoulas

Giovanni Dell'Orto

Defendant: Epitropi Kefalaiagoras (Capital Market Commission)

Re:

joined party: Saipem SpA

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Simvoulio tis Epikratias —
Interpretation of Article 21 of Directive 2001/34/EC of the
European Parliament and of the Council of 28 May 2001 on
the admission of securities to official stock exchange listing and
those
on
securities
on
(OJ 2001 L 184, p. 1) — Publication of
listing particulars
containing inaccurate and misleading information liable to
deceive investors

information

published

be

to

Operative part of the judgment

Article 21 of Directive 2001/34/EC of the European Parliament and
of the Council of 28 May 2001 on the admission of securities to offi-
cial stock exchange listing and on information to be published on
those securities is to be interpreted as meaning that it does not preclude
a national legislature from laying down, for cases where the informa-
tion recorded in listing particulars published with a view to admitting
securities to official stock exchange listing proves to be inaccurate or
misleading, administrative penalties
imposable not only upon the
persons expressly mentioned in those particulars as responsible but also
upon the issuer of
indiscriminately, upon the
members of the issuer's board of directors, regardless of whether the
board members have been identified as responsible in the listing parti-
culars.

the securities and,

(1) OJ C 60, 11.3.2006.

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 28 June 2007
(reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di
Milano — Italy) — Criminal proceedings against Giovanni
Dell'Orto

(Case C-467/05) (1)

(Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Frame-
work Decision 2001/220/JHA — Directive 2004/80/EC —
Concept of ‘victim’ in criminal proceedings — Legal person —
seized in the
criminal
Return of property
proceedings)

course

of

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Tribunale di Milano —
Interpretation of Articles 2 and 9 of Council Framework Deci-
sion of 15 March 2001 on the standing of victims in criminal
proceedings and Article 17 of Council Directive 2004/80/EC of
29 April 2004 relating to compensation to crime victims
(OJ 2004 L 261, p. 15) — Definition of victim including ‘any
other persons affected by crime’ — Right to compensation of
such persons

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

Council Framework Decision 2001/220/JHA of 15 March 2001 on
the standing of victims in criminal proceedings must be interpreted as
meaning that, in criminal proceedings and, in particular, in enforce-
ment proceedings following a judgment which resulted in a final crimi-
nal conviction, such as those in the main action, the concept of ‘victim’
for the purposes of the Framework Decision does not include legal
persons who have suffered harm directly caused by acts or omissions
that are in violation of the criminal law of a Member State.

(1) OJ C 74, 25.3.2006.

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 28 June 2007
(reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht
Hamburg, Germany) — Bonn Fleisch Ex- und Import
GmbH v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas

(Case C-1/06) (1)

(Agriculture — System of export refunds on agricultural
products — Regulation (EEC) No 3665/87 — Furnishing of
proof of export of the products — Production of equivalent
proof — Article 47(3) — Recognition by the authorities of
their own motion as equivalent proof of documents not accom-
panied by an express reasoned request for them to be regarded
as equivalent — Not applicable to direct export — National
procedural rules — Obligations of the competent national
authorities)

(2007/C 199/14)

Language of the case: Italian

(2007/C 199/15)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Tribunale di Milano

Referring court

Finanzgericht Hamburg