Case C-288/07: Reference for a preliminary ruling from High Court of Justice (Chancery Division) (United Kingdom) made on 14 June 2007 — The Commissioners of Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs v Isle of Wight Council, Mid-Suffolk District Council, South Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council, West Berkshire District Council
Date: 2007-08-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: interpretation of the law, parking area, public institution, restriction on competition

25.8.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 199/23

Reference for a preliminary ruling from High Court of
Justice (Chancery Division)
(United Kingdom) made on
14 June 2007 — The Commissioners of Her Majesty's
Revenue & Customs v Isle of Wight Council, Mid-Suffolk
District Council, South Tyneside Metropolitan Borough
Council, West Berkshire District Council

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Galatea BVBA

Defendant: Sanoma Magazines Belgium NV

(Case C-288/07)

(2007/C 199/35)

Language of the case: English

Referring court

High Court of Justice (Chancery Division)

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: The Commissioners of Her Majesty's Revenue &
Customs

Defendants: Isle of Wight Council, Mid-Suffolk District Council,
South Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council, West Berkshire
District Council

Questions referred

1. Is the expression ‘distortions of competition’ to be ascer-
tained on a public body by public body basis such that, in
the context of the present case, it should be determined by
reference to the area or areas where the particular body in
question provides off-street parking or by reference to the
totality of the national territory of the Member States?

2. What is meant by the expression ‘would lead to’? In particu-
lar, what degree of probability or level of certainty is required
for that condition to be satisfied?

3. What is meant by the word ‘significant’? In particular, does
‘significant’ mean an effect on competition that is more than
trivial or de minimis, a ‘material’ effect or an ‘exceptional’
effect?

Question referred

Do Article 49 of the EC Treaty concerning the freedom to
provide services and Directive 2005/29/EC (1) of the European
Parliament and of the Council concerning unfair commercial
practices preclude national legislation, such as Article 54 of the
Belgian Law of 14 July 1991 on trade practices and consumer
information and protection, which — except in the cases listed
exhaustively in that law — prohibits any linked offer by a
vendor to a consumer whereby the acquisition, whether or not
free of charge, of products, services, advantages or vouchers
with which they can be obtained is linked to the acquisition of
other, even identical, products or services, and this regardless of
the circumstances of the case, and especially regardless of the
influence which the specific offer may have on the average
consumer and regardless of whether that offer can be considered
in the specific circumstances to be contrary to professional dili-
gence or fair commercial practices?

(1) Directive 2005/29/EC of

the European Parliament and of

the
Council of 11 may 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer
commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council
Directive
and
2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and
Regulation No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the
Council (OJ 2005 L 149, p. 22).

84/450/EEC, Directives

98/27/EC

97/7/EC,

Action brought on 4 July 2007 — Commission of the
European Communities v Portuguese Republic

(Case C-307/07)

(2007/C 199/37)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank van
koophandel te Antwerpen (Belgium) lodged on 27 June
2007 — Galatea BVBA v Sanoma Magazines Belgium NV

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: H. Støvlbæk and P. Andrade, Agents)

(Case C-299/07)

(2007/C 199/36)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Defendant: Portuguese Republic

Form of order sought

— Declare that the Portuguese Republic, by failing to recognise
diplomas which give access to the profession of pharmacist
specialising in medical biology, has failed in relation to that
under Directive
to
profession
89/48/EEC (1).

obligations

fulfil

its

Rechtbank van koophandel te Antwerpen

— Order the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.