Case C-116/06: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 20 September 2007 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tampereen käräjäoikeus — Finland) — Sari Kiiski v Tampereen kaupunki (Equal treatment for men and women — Protection of pregnant employees — Article 2 of Directive 76/207/EEC — Right to maternity leave — Articles 8 and 11 of Directive 92/85/EEC — Effect on the right to obtain an alteration of the duration of child-care leave )
Date: 2007-11-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: gender equality, interpretation of the law, maternity leave, motherhood, parental leave

C 269/12

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

10.11.2007

Defendant: Hellenic Republic (represented by: P. Mylonopoulos
and K. Boskovits, Agents)

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Staat der Nederlanden

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement
of Article 90 EC — Discriminatory taxation on imported
second-hand cars

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

second-hand vehicles

1) Declares that, by applying a single criterion of depreciation, based
for the purpose of determining the
on the age of the vehicles,
taxable value of
imported from another
Member State into Greek territory in order to establish the registra-
tion tax, and by adopting a reduction in value of 7 % for vehicles
between 6 and 12 months old or 14 % for vehicles more than a
year old, which does not ensure that the tax due does not exceed,
even if only in certain cases, the amount of the residual tax incor-
porated in the value of similar second-hand vehicles already regis-
tered in the national territory, the Hellenic Republic has failed to
fulfil its obligations under Article 90 EC;

2) Dismisses the remainder of the action;

3) Orders the Hellenic Republic and the Commission to bear their

own costs.

Antroposana,

Defendants:
voor
Antroposofische Gezondheidszorg, Nederlandse Vereniging van
Antroposofische Artsen, Weleda Nederland NV, Wala Nederland
NV

Patiëntenvereniging

Re:

Preliminary ruling — Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Interpreta-
tion of Directive 2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and
of the Council of 6 November 2001 on the Community code
relating to medicinal products for human use (OJ 2001 L 311,
p. 67) — Marketing authorisation for anthroposophic medicinal
products which are not homeopathic medicinal products within
the meaning of Chapter 2 of Title III of the directive — National
legislation which makes anthroposophic medicinal products
subject to the conditions set out in Chapter 1 of Title III of the
directive — Articles 28 EC and 30 EC.

Operative part of the judgment

Anthroposophic medicinal products may be marketed only on condition
that they have been authorised under one of the procedures referred to
in Article 6 of Directive 2001/83 of the European Parliament and of
the Council of 6 November 2001 on the Community code relating to
medicinal products for human use.

(1) OJ C 108, 6.5.2006.

(1) OJ C 108, 6.5.2006.

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 20 September
2007 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge
Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands)) — Staat der
Nederlanden v Antroposana, Patiëntenvereniging voor
Antroposofische Gezondheidszorg, Nederlandse Vereniging
van Antroposofische Artsen, Weleda Nederland NV, Wala
Nederland NV,

(Case C-84/06) (1)

(Community code relating to medicinal products for human
use — Articles 28 EC and 30 EC — Registration and
authorisation — Anthroposophic medicinal
marketing

products)

(2007/C 269/23)

Language of the case: Dutch

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 20 September
a preliminary ruling from the
2007 (reference for
Tampereen käräjäoikeus — Finland) — Sari Kiiski v
Tampereen kaupunki

(Case C-116/06) (1)

(Equal treatment for men and women — Protection of preg-
nant employees — Article 2 of Directive 76/207/EEC —
Right to maternity leave — Articles 8 and 11 of Directive
92/85/EEC — Effect on the right to obtain an alteration of
the duration of ‘child-care leave’)

(2007/C 269/24)

Language of the case: Finnish

Referring court

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Tampereen käräjäoikeus

10.11.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 269/13

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Sari Kiiski

Defendant: Tampereen kaupunki

Re:

treatment

Interpretation of Article 2 of Council Directive 76/207/EEC of
9 February 1976 on the implementation of the principle of
for men and women as regards access to
equal
employment, vocational training and promotion, and working
conditions (OJ 1976 L 39, p. 40), as amended by Directive
2002/73/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of
23 September 2002 (OJ 2002 L 269, p. 15), and of Articles 8
and 11 of Council Directive 92/85/EEC of 19 October 1992 on
the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the
safety and health at work of pregnant workers and workers who
have recently given birth or are breastfeeding (OJ 1992 L 348,
p. 1) — Refusal of an employer to shorten the duration of
child-care leave — Application made before the start of the
leave on the ground of a new pregnancy of
the person
concerned — National
legislation requiring unforeseeable and
justified grounds as a condition for altering the duration of
child-care leave, the practice adopted under the collective agree-
ment excluding pregnancy from such grounds.

Operative part of the judgment

as

and working conditions,

Article 2 of Council Directive 76/207/EEC of 9 February 1976 on
the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and
women as regards access to employment, vocational
training and
amended by Directive
promotion,
2002/73/EC of
the Council of
the European Parliament and of
23 September 2002, which prohibits all direct and indirect discrimina-
tion on grounds of sex as regards working conditions, and Articles 8
and 11 of Council Directive 92/85/EEC of 19 October 1992 on the
introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and
health at work of pregnant workers and workers who have recently
given birth or are breastfeeding (10th individual Directive within the
meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC), which govern
maternity leave, preclude provisions of national law concerning child-
care leave which, in so far as they fail to take into account changes
affecting the worker concerned as a result of pregnancy during the
period of at least 14 weeks preceding and after childbirth, do not allow
the person concerned to obtain at her request an alteration of the
period of her child-care leave at the time when she claims her rights to
maternity leave and thus deprive her of the rights attaching to that
maternity leave.

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 20 September
the European Communities v
2007 — Commission of

Kingdom of Spain

(Case C-177/06) (1)

(State Aid — Aid scheme — Incompatibility with the
common market — Commission decision — Implementation
— Abolition of the aid scheme — Cancellation of outstanding
aid — Recovery of aid made available — Failure to fulfil obli-
gations — Defences — Illegality of the decision — Absolute
impossibility of giving effect to a decision)

(2007/C 269/25)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: F. Castillo de la Torre and C. Urraca Caviedes, acting
as Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: N. Díaz Abad,
Agent)

Re:

Member State's failure to fulfil
its obligations — Failure to
adopt, within the period prescribed, the measures necessary to
ensure implementation of Articles 2 and 3 of the Commission's
Decisions of 20 December 2001 on a State aid scheme imple-
mented by Spain in 1993 for certain newly established firms in
Guipúzcoa (Spain) (C(2001) 4448) (OJ L 77 of 24 March 2003,
p. 1), in Álava (Spain) (C(2001) 4475) (OJ L 17 of 22 January
2003, p. 20) and in Vizcaya (Spain) (C(2001) 4478) (OJ L 40 of
14 February 2003, p. 11).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court rules:

1. In failing to take the necessary measures within the prescribed

period, to comply with Articles 2 and 3 of each of:

— Commission Decision 2003/28/EC of 20 December 2001 on
a State aid scheme implemented by Spain in 1993 for certain
newly established firms in Álava (Spain);

— Commission Decision 2003/86/EC of 20 December 2001 on
a State aid scheme implemented by Spain in 1993 for certain
newly established firms in Vizcaya (Spain);

— Commission Decision 2003/192/EC of 2 December 2001 on
a State aid scheme implemented by Spain in 1993 for certain
newly established firms in Guipúzcoa (Spain),

the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil
those provisions;

its obligations under

2. The Kingdom of Spain is ordered to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 116, 20.5.2006.

(1) OJ C 143, 17.6.2006.