Case C-492/07: Action brought on 7 November 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Republic of Poland
Date: 2007-11-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Poland, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, electronic mail, national implementing measure, telecommunications, transmission network

C 22/26

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

26.1.2008

Question referred

Action brought on 7 November 2007 — Commission of
the European Communities v Republic of Poland

in conjunction with the second sentence of
Is Article 6(2)
Article 6(1) of Directive 97/7/EC of the European Parliament
and of the Council of 20 May 1997 on the protection of consu-
mers in respect of distance contracts (1) to be interpreted as
precluding a provision of national law which provides that, in
the case of a revocation by a consumer within the revocation
period, a seller may claim compensation for the value of the use
of the consumer goods delivered?

(1) OJ 1977 L 144, p. 19.

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Landesgericht
für Strafsachen Wien, Austria, lodged on 31 October 2007
— Criminal proceedings against Vladimir Turansky

(Case C-491/07)

(2008/C 22/49)

(Case C-492/07)

(2008/C 22/50)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by A. Nijenhuis and K. Moyzesowicz, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Republic of Poland

Form of order sought

— declare that, by failing to ensure the proper incorporation
into national law of Directive 2002/21/EC of the European
Parliament and of
the Council of 7 March 2002 on a
common regulatory framework for electronic communica-
tions networks and services (Framework Directive) (1) and in
particular Article 2(k) with reference to the definition of a
subscriber, the Republic of Poland has failed to fulfil its obli-
gations under that directive;

Language of the case: German

— order the Republic of Poland to pay the costs.

Referring court

Landesgericht für Strafsachen Wien

Party to the main proceedings

Vladimir Turansky

Question referred

‘Is the bar on a second prosecution for the same acts (ne bis in
idem principle) contained in Article 54 of the Convention imple-
menting the Schengen Agreement of 14 June 1985 between the
Governments of the States of the Benelux Economic Union, the
Federal Republic of Germany and the French Republic on the
gradual abolition of checks at their common borders signed in
Schengen (Luxembourg) on 19 June 1990 (1) to be interpreted
as precluding the prosecution of a suspect in the Republic of
Austria for the same acts in respect of which criminal proceed-
ings in the Slovak Republic were discontinued after its accession
to the European Union by means of a binding order of a police
authority suspending the proceedings without further sanction
taken after examination of the merits of the case?’

(1) OJ L 239, 22.9.2000, p. 19.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period for transposition of the directive expired on 30 April
2004.

(1) OJ L 108 of 24.4.2002, p. 33.

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster
Patent- und Markensenat (Austria) lodged on 14 November
2007 — Silberquelle GmbH v Maselli-Strickmode GmbH

(Case C-495/07)

(2008/C 22/51)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberster Patent- und Markensenat

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Silberquelle GmbH

Defendant: Maselli-Strickmode GmbH