Case C-143/06: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 8 November 2007 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Hamburg (Germany)) — Ludwigs-Apotheke München Internationale Apotheke v Juers Pharma Import-Export GmbH (Free movement of goods — Articles 28 EC and 30 EC — Articles 11 and 13 of the EEA Agreement — Imported medicinal products not authorised in the importing State — Prohibition of advertising — Directive 2001/83/EC)
Date: 2007-12-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU law - national law, advertising, import, interpretation of the law, medicinal product, pharmaceutical legislation

C 315/12

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

22.12.2007

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 17 EC and 18 EC preclude, in circumstances such as those in
the cases before the referring court, a condition in accordance with
which, in order to obtain an education or training grant for studies in
a Member State other than that of which the students applying for
such assistance are nationals, those studies must be a continuation of
education or training pursued for at least one year in the Member
State of origin of those students.

(1) OJ C 121, 20.5.2006.

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 18 October
2007 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal
Superior de Justicia de Madrid — Spain) — Navicon SA v
Administración del Estado

(Case C-97/06) (1)

tering of sea-going vessels — Inclusion or non-inclusion of
partial chartering — Compatibility with the directive of a
national law allowing exemption only for full chartering

Operative part of the judgment

1. Article 15(5) 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, as amended by Council Directive
92/111/EEC of 14 December 1992, must be interpreted as
covering both full chartering and partial chartering of vessels used
for navigation on the high seas. Consequently,
that provision
legislation, such as that at issue in the main
precludes national
proceedings, which grants the benefit of the exemption from value
added tax only in the case of full chartering of such vessels.

2. It is for the referring court to determine whether the contract in
issue in the main proceedings satisfies the conditions of a chartering
contract within the meaning of Article 15(5) of Sixth Directive
77/388, as amended by Directive 92/111.

(Sixth VAT Directive — Exemptions — Article 15(5) — The
concept of ‘chartering sea-going vessels’ — Compatibility of a
national law allowing the exemption for full chartering only)

(1) OJ C 131, 3.6.2006.

(2007/C 315/19)

Language of the case: Spanish

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 8 November
2007 (reference for
a preliminary ruling from the
Landgericht Hamburg (Germany)) — Ludwigs-Apotheke
Pharma
München

Internationale Apotheke

Juers

v

Referring court

Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Madrid

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Navicon SA

Respondent: Administración del Estado

Re:

Import-Export GmbH

(Case C-143/06) (1)

(Free movement of goods — Articles 28 EC and 30 EC —
Articles 11 and 13 of the EEA Agreement — Imported medic-
inal products not authorised in the importing State — Prohi-
bition of advertising — Directive 2001/83/EC)

(2007/C 315/20)

Language of the case: German

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Tribunal Superior de
Justicia de Madrid — Interpretation of Article 15(5) of Sixth
Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmoni-
sation 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) — Exemption for the char-

Referring court

Landgericht Hamburg

22.12.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 315/13

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Ludwigs-Apotheke München Internationale Apotheke

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 25 October
2007 — Ermioni Komninou, Grigorios Ntokos, Donatos
Pappas, Vassileios Pappas, Aristeidis Pappas, Eleftheria
Pappa, Lamprini Pappa, Eirini Pappa, Alexandra Ntokou,
Fotios Dimitriou, Zoï Dimitriou, Petros Bolossis, Despoina
Bolossi and Konstantinos Bolossis, Thomas Bolossis v
Commission of the European Communities

Defendant: Juers Pharma Import-Export GmbH

(Case C-167/06 P) (1)

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Landgericht Hamburg —
Interpretation of the third indent of Article 86(2) of Directive
2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of
6 November 2001 on the Community code relating to medic-
inal products for human use (OJ 2001 L 311, p. 67), as
amended by Directive 2004/27/EC of the European Parliament
and of
the Council of 31 March 2004 amending Directive
2001/83/EC on the Community code relating to medicinal
products for human use (OJ 2004 L 136, p. 34) — Scope of
application — National rules prohibiting an importer from
sending pharmacies price lists of medicinal products which,
although not authorised on the national market, may even so be
imported

Operative part of the judgment

A prohibition on advertising such as that laid down by Paragraph 8 of
the Law on the advertising of medicines (Heilmittelwerbegesetz) must
be assessed in the light not of the provisions on advertising of Directive
2001/83/EC of
the Council of
the European Parliament and of
6 November 2001 on the Community code relating to medicinal
products for human use, as amended by Directive 2004/27/EC of the
European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004, but of
Articles 28 EC and 30 EC and Articles 11 and 13 of the Agreement
on the European Economic Area of 2 May 1992. Article 28 EC and
Article 11 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area preclude
such a prohibition, in so far as it applies to the distribution to phar-
macists of lists of non-approved medicinal products, the importation of
which from another Member State or a non-Member State which is a
party to the Agreement on the European Economic Area is authorised
only on an exceptional basis, which contain no information other than
that concerning the trade name, packaging size, dose and price of those
medicinal products.

(1) OJ C 121, 20.5.2006.

(Appeal — Non-contractual
liability of the Community —
Complaint under Article 226 EC — Treatment of complai-
nants by the Commission — Principles of sound administra-
tion, legitimate expectations and legal certainty — Scope —
the
Article 21 EC — Right of complaint — Scope of

Ombudsman's findings)

(2007/C 315/21)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Appellants: Ermioni Komninou, Grigorios Ntokos, Donatos
Pappas, Vassileios Pappas, Aristeidis Pappas, Eleftheria Pappa,
Fotios
Lamprini Pappa, Eirini Pappa, Alexandra Ntokou,
Dimitriou, Zoï Dimitriou, Petros Bolossis, Despoina Bolossi and
Konstantinos Bolossis, Thomas Bolossis (represented by: G.
Dellis and G. Adonakopoulos, dikigoroi)

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of
Communities (represented by: Konstantinidis, Agent)

the European

Re:

Appeal brought against the order of the Court of First Instance
(Fifth Chamber) of 13 January 2006, Komninou and Others v
Commission (T-42/04),
in which the Court dismissed as
unfounded an application for compensation for the non-mate-
rial damage allegedly suffered by the applicants following the
Commission's treatment of their complaint concerning Com-
munity financing of a biological sewage treatment plant
in
Preveza in Greece

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Sets aside the order of the Court of First Instance of the European
Communities of 13 January 2006, Komninou and Others v
Commission (T-42/04), in so far as the Court failed to rule on the
plea alleging breach of Article 21(2) and (3) EC;

2. Dismisses the remainder of the action;