Case C-230/06: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 3 April 2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Corte Suprema di Cassazione (Italy), Militzer & Münch GmbH v Ministero delle Finanze (Customs union — Community transit — Recovery of a customs debt — Competent Member State — Proof of the regularity of the operation or of the place of the offence — Time-limits — Liability of the principal)
Date: 2008-04-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Union transit, customs document, customs formalities, customs regulations, interpretation of the law

24.5.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 128/5

their
families moving within the Community (OJ, English
Special Edition 1971 (II), p. 416), as amended — Applicability
of the Flemish care insurance scheme to persons employed in
region of
the Dutch-speaking region or
Bruxelles-Capitale (Brussels Capital) and residing either in one of
those regions or in another Member State, to the exclusion of
persons residing in another part of the national territory.

in the bilingual

Operative part of the judgment

1. Benefits provided under a scheme such as the care insurance scheme
established by the Decree of the Flemish Parliament on the organi-
sation of care insurance (Decreet houdende de organisatie van de
zorgverzekering) of 30 March 1999, in the version contained in
the Decree of
the Flemish Parliament amending the Decree of
30 March 1999 (Decreet van de Vlaamse Gemeenschap houdende
wijziging van het decreet van 30 maart 1999 houdende de organi-
satie van de zorgverzekering) of 30 April 2004, fall within the
scope ratione materiae of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of the
Council of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security
to self-employed persons and to
schemes to employed persons,
members of
families moving within the Community, as
their
amended and updated by Council Regulation (EC) No 118/97 of
2 December 1996, as amended by Council Regulation (EC)
No 307/1999 of 8 February 1999.

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 3 April 2008
(reference for a preliminary ruling from the Corte Suprema
di Cassazione (Italy), Militzer & Münch GmbH v Ministero
delle Finanze

(Case C-230/06) (1)

(Customs union — Community transit — Recovery of a
customs debt — Competent Member State — Proof of the
regularity of the operation or of the place of the offence —
Time-limits — Liability of the principal)

(2008/C 128/07)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Corte Suprema di Cassazione

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Militzer & Münch GmbH

Defendant: Ministero delle Finanze,

Re:

2. On a proper construction of Articles 39 EC and 43 EC, legislation
of a federated entity of a Member State, such as that governing the
care insurance scheme established by the Flemish Community by
the decree of 30 March 1999, as amended by the Decree of the
Flemish Parliament of 30 April 2004,
limiting affiliation to a
social security scheme and entitlement to the benefits provided by
residing in the territory coming
that scheme to persons either
within that entity's competence or pursuing an activity in that terri-
tory but residing in another Member State,
is contrary to those
provisions, in so far as such limitation affects nationals of other
Member States or nationals of the Member State concerned who
have made use of their right to freedom of movement within the
European Community.

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Corte Suprema di Cassa-
zione — Interpretation of Article 11a of Commission Regu-
lation (EEC) No 1062/87 of 27 March 1987 on provisions for
the implementation of the Community transit procedure and
for certain simplifications of that procedure (OJ 1987 L 107,
p. 1)
and Article 215(1) of Council Regulation (EEC)
No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community
Customs Code (OJ 1992 L 302, p. 1) — Discharge by the
customs office of destination evidenced by forged documents —
Period prescribed for notifying the fact that a consignment has
not been presented at the office of destination — Applicability

Operative part of the judgment

3. On a proper construction of Articles 39 EC and 43 EC, legislation
of a federated entity of a Member State limiting affiliation to a
social security scheme and entitlement to the benefits provided by
that scheme only to persons residing in that entity's territory is
in so far as such limitation affects
contrary to those provisions,
nationals of other Member States working in that entity's territory
or nationals of the Member State concerned who have made use of
their right to freedom of movement within the European Com-
munity.

(1) OJ C 178, 29.7.2006.

1. In order

to verify whether

the Member State which recovered
customs duties has jurisdiction, it is for the referring court to deter-
mine whether, at the time when it came to light that the consign-
ment had not been presented at the office of destination, it was
possible to establish the place where the offence or irregularity
occurred. If that is the case, the Member State in which the first
offence or irregularity capable of being classified as a removal from
customs surveillance was committed can be identified as the State
with jurisdiction to recover
to
the
Articles 203(1) and 215(1) of Council Regulation (EEC)
No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community
Customs Code. On the other hand, if the place where the offence or
irregularity was committed cannot be thus established, the Member
State to which the office of departure belongs has jurisdiction to
in accordance with Articles 378 and
recover the customs duties,
379 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July
1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Regulation
No 2913/92.

customs debt, pursuant

C 128/6

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

24.5.2008

2. Where a consignment has not been presented at the office of desti-
nation and the place of the offence or irregularity cannot be estab-
lished, it is for the office of departure alone to make the notification
required within the 11-month and 3-month time-limits laid down
by Article 379(1) and (2) of Regulation No 2454/93.

3. It is not contrary to the principle of proportionality to hold a
customs clearance agent, in his capacity as principal, liable for a
customs debt.

(1) OJ C 190, 12.8.2006.

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 10 April 2008
v
— Commission

European Communities

the

of
Portuguese Republic

(Case C-265/06) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Free move-
ment of goods — Articles 28 EC and 30 EC — Articles 11
and 13 of the EEA Agreement — Quantitative restrictions on
imports — Measures having equivalent effect — Motor vehi-
cles — Affixing of tinted film to windows)

(2008/C 128/08)

Language of the case: Portuguese

2) Orders the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 212, 2.9.2006.

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 1 April 2008
(Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bayerisches
Verwaltungsgericht München (Germany)) — Tadao Maruko
v Versorgungsanstalt der deutschen Bühnen

(Case C-267/06) (1)

(Equal treatment in employment and occupation — Directive
2000/78/EC — Survivors' benefits under a compulsory occu-
pational pensions scheme — Concept of ‘pay’ — Refusal
because the persons concerned were not married — Same-sex
partners — Discrimination based on sexual orientation)

(2008/C 128/09)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bayerisches Verwaltungsgericht München

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: A. Caeiros, P. Guerra e Andrade and M. Patakia,
Agents)

Defendant: Portuguese Republic (represented by: L. Fernandes,
Agent, and by A. Duarte de Almeida, lawyer)

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Tadao Maruko

Defendant: Versorgungsanstalt der deutschen Bühnen

Re:

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement
of Articles 28 EC and 30 EC — National legislation prohibiting
the affixing of tinted film to the windows of passenger or goods
vehicles

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Bayerisches Verwaltungs-
gericht München — Interpretation of Articles 1, 2(2)(a), 3(1)(c)
and (3) of Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000
establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employ-
ment and occupation (OJ 2000 L 303, p. 16) — Meaning of
pay — Registered partner excluded from receipt of a survivor's
pension

Operative part of the judgment

1) Declares

that, by prohibiting in Article 2(1) of Decree-Law
No 40/2003 of 11 March 2003 the affixing of tinted film to the
windows of motor vehicles, the Portuguese Republic has failed to
fulfil its obligations under Articles 28 EC and 30 EC and Arti-
cles 11 and 13 of
the Agreement of 2 May 1992 on the
European Economic Area;

1) A survivor's benefit granted under an occupational pension scheme
such as that managed by the Versorgungsanstalt der deutschen
Bühnen falls within the scope of Council Directive 2000/78/EC of
27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal
treatment in employment and occupation;