Case C-246/06: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 17 January 2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Social Único de Algeciras (Spain)) — Josefa Velasco Navarro v Fondo de Garantía Salarial (Fogasa) (Social policy — Protection of workers in the event of insolvency of their employer — Directive 80/987/EEC amended by Directive 2002/74/EC — Direct effect — Compensation for unfair dismissal agreed under a judicial conciliation settlement — Payment guaranteed by the guarantee institution — Payment conditional upon the adoption of a judicial decision)
Date: 2008-01-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: approximation of laws, employer, financial solvency, interpretation of the law, pay, social security

8.3.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 64/7

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of
the European
Communities (represented by: J. Currall and L. Lozano Palacios,
Agents)

1) Declares that, by failing to repeal Decree-Law No 48 051 of
21 November 1967, making the award of damages to persons
injured by a breach of Community law relating to public contracts,
or the national laws implementing it, conditional on proof of fault
or fraud, the Portuguese Republic has failed to adopt the measures
necessary to comply with the judgment of 14 October 2004 in
Case C-275/03 Commission v Portugal and has thereby failed to
fulfil its obligations under Article 228(1) EC;

2) Orders the Portuguese Republic to pay to the Commission of the
‘European Community
into the account
European Communities,
own resources’, a penalty payment of EUR 19 392 for every day
of delay in implementing the measures necessary to comply with
the judgment in Case C-275/03 Commission v Portugal, from the
day on which the Court of Justice delivers judgment in the present
case until the day on which the judgment in Case C-275/03
Commission v Portugal is complied with;

3) Orders the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 86, 8.4.2006.

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (First
Chamber) of 22 February 2006 in Case T-342/04 Herta Adam v
Commission dismissing an action seeking the annulment of the
Commission decision of 22 September 2003 refusing the appli-
cant the benefit of the expatriation allowance provided for by
Article 4 of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations of Officials of
the European Communities

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders Ms Adam to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 165, 15.7.2006.

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 24 January 2008
the European
— Herta Adam v Commission of

Communities

(Case C-211/06 P) (1)

(Appeal — Officials — Remuneration — Expatriation allow-
ance — Condition provided for by the second indent of Article
4(1)(a) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations — Definition of
‘work done for another State’)

(2008/C 64/08)

Language of the case: French

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 17 January
2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado
de lo Social Único de Algeciras (Spain)) — Josefa Velasco
Navarro v Fondo de Garantía Salarial (Fogasa)

(Case C-246/06) (1)

(Social policy — Protection of workers in the event of insol-
vency of their employer — Directive 80/987/EEC amended by
Directive 2002/74/EC — Direct effect — Compensation for
unfair dismissal agreed under a judicial conciliation settlement
— Payment guaranteed by the guarantee institution —
Payment conditional upon the adoption of a judicial decision)

(2008/C 64/09)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Appellant: Herta Adam (represented by: S. Orlandi and J.-N.
Louis, avocats)

Juzgado de lo Social Único de Algeciras

Referring court

C 64/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

8.3.2008

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Josefa Velasco Navarro

Defendant: Fondo de Garantía Salarial (Fogasa)

Re:

the Member States

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Juzgado de lo Social
Único de Algeciras — Interpretation of Council Directive
80/987/EEC of 20 October 1980 on the approximation of the
laws of
relating to the protection of
employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer
(OJ 1980 L 283, p. 23), as amended by Directive 2002/74/EC
of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September
2002 (OJ 2002 L 270, p. 10) — Scope of the guarantee offered
by the guarantee institution — Compensation on termination of
the employment relationship — National rules under which a
such
judgment or administrative decision is
compensation — Direct effect of the directive, as amended, as
regards a state of insolvency declared between the date of entry
into force of Directive 2002/74 and the deadline for its transpo-
sition

required for

Operative part of the judgment

1. Where Directive 2002/74/EC of the European Parliament and of
the Council of 23 September 2002 amending Council Directive
80/987/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member
States relating to the protection of employees in the event of the
insolvency of their employer has not been transposed into national
law by 8 October 2005, the possible direct effect of the first para-
graph of Article 3 of Council Directive 80/987/EEC of 20 October
1980 on the protection of employees in the event of the insolvency
of their employer, as amended by Directive 2002/74, cannot, in
any event, be relied upon in relation to a state of insolvency which
occurred before that date.

2. Where rules of national

law fall within the scope of Directive
80/987, as amended by Directive 2002/74, the national courts
are bound, as regards a state of insolvency occurring between the
date of the entry into force of Directive 2002/74 and the deadline
for transposition of that directive into national law, to ensure that
the application of those rules of national law is consistent with the
principle of non-discrimination, as recognised by the Community
legal order.

(1) OJ C 212, 2.9.2006.

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 17 January
2008 (reference for
a preliminary ruling from the
Bundesfinanzhof (Germany)) — Theodor Jäger v Finanzamt
Kusel-Landstuhl

(Case C-256/06) (1)

(Free movement of capital — Articles 73b and 73d of the EC
Treaty (now Articles 56 EC and 58 EC) — Inheritance tax —
Valuation of assets forming part of the estate — Agricultural
and forestry assets in another Member State — Less favour-
able method of valuation of assets and calculation of the tax
payable)

(2008/C 64/10)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesfinanzhof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Theodor Jäger

Defendant: Finanzamt Kusel-Landstuhl

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Bundesfinanzhof — Inter-
pretation of Article 56 of the EC Treaty — National inheritance
tax legislation — Application of different methods for assessing
land and forestry depending on
the value of agricultural
in another
territory or
whether
Member State and a deduction in respect of the acquisition of
land on the national territory, resulting in a fiscal charge that is
heavier where the assets include agricultural land and forestry in
another Member State than where all the assets are on the
national territory

they are on the national

Operative part of the judgment

Article 73b(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 56(1) EC), read in
conjunction with Article 73d of the EC Treaty (now Article 58 EC),
must be interpreted as precluding legislation of a Member State which,
for the purposes of calculating the tax on an inheritance consisting of
assets situated in that State and agricultural land and forestry situated
in another Member State,

— provides that account be taken of the fair market value of the
assets in that other Member State, whereas a special valuation
procedure exists for identical domestic assets, the results of which
amount on average to only 10 % of that fair market value, and