Case C-352/06: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 20 May 2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Köln (Germany)) — Brigitte Bosmann v Bundesagentur für Arbeit — Familienkasse Aachen (Social security — Child benefit — Suspension of entitlement to benefits — Article 13(2)(a) of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 — Article 10 of Regulation (EEC) No 574/72 — Legislation applicable — Granting of benefits in the Member State of residence which is not the competent Member State)
Date: 2008-05-20
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: family benefit, interpretation of the law, one-parent family, residence, worker (EU)

5.7.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 171/5

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of
the Court of First Instance
(Third Chamber) in Case T-279/02 Degussa AG v Commission, in
which the Court dismissed in part the action seeking annulment
of Commission Decision 2003/674/EC of 2 July 2002 relating
to a proceeding pursuant to Article 81 of the EC Treaty and
Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (OJ 2003 L 255, p. 1) —
Cartel concerning the market in methionine — Requirements of
the nulla poena sine lege principle in relation to the system of
fines laid down by Article 15(2) of Regulation No 17/62.

— Interpretation of Article 10 of Council Regulation (EEC)
No 574/72 of 21 March 1972 for implementing Regulation
(EEC) No 1408/71 on the application of social security schemes
to employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members
of their families moving within the Community (OJ, English
Special Edition, Series I, Chapter 1972 (I), p. 159) — Interpreta-
tion of Article 39 EC — Interpretation of general principles —
Child benefit for dependent children — Suspension of benefits
paid in the State of residence — Right to benefits of the same
type in the State of employment.

Operative part of the judgment

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. Evonik Degussa GmbH is ordered to bear the costs.

3. The Council of the European Union is ordered to pay its own costs.

(1) OJ C 190 of 12.8.2006.

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 20 May 2008
(reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht
Köln (Germany)) — Brigitte Bosmann v Bundesagentur für
Arbeit — Familienkasse Aachen

(Case C-352/06) (1)

(Social security — Child benefit — Suspension of entitlement
to benefits — Article 13(2)(a)
of Regulation (EEC)
No 1408/71 — Article 10 of Regulation (EEC) No 574/72 —
Legislation applicable — Granting of benefits in the Member
State of residence which is not the competent Member State)

(2008/C 171/07)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Finanzgericht Köln

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Brigitte Bosmann

Defendant: Bundesagentur für Arbeit — Familienkasse Aachen

Re:

Reference for a Preliminary Ruling — Finanzgericht Köln —
Interpretation of Article 13(2)(a) of Council Regulation (EEC)
No 1408/71 of 14 June 1971 on the application of social
security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed persons
and to members of their families moving within the Community
(OJ, English Special Edition Series I, Chapter 1971 (II), p. 416)

Operative part of the judgment

families moving within the Community,

1. Article 13(2)(a) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of
14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to
to self-employed persons and to members of
employed persons,
their
in the version
amended and updated by Council Regulation (EC) No 118/97 of
2 December 1996, as amended by Regulation (EC) No 647/2005
of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 April 2005,
does not preclude a migrant worker, who is subject to the social
security scheme of the Member State of employment, from receiving,
pursuant to the national legislation of the Member State of resi-
dence, child benefit in the latter State.

2. It is for the referring court to determine whether the fact that a
worker, in the situation of the applicant in the main proceedings,
returns at the end of each working day to the family residence in
the Member State concerned is relevant for the purposes of deciding
whether such a worker satisfies the requirements for the grant of
the child benefit in question in that State pursuant to its legisla-
tion.

(1) OJ C 281, 18.11.2006.

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 22 May 2008
(reference for a preliminary ruling from the College van
Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven) — Feinchemie Schwebda
GmbH, Bayer CropScience AG v College voor de toelating
van bestrijdingsmiddelen

(Case C-361/06) (1)

(Plant protection products — Authorisation to place on the
market — Ethofumesate — Directives 91/414/EEC and
2002/37/EC — Regulation (EEC) No 3600/92 — Application
for reopening of the oral procedure)

(2008/C 171/08)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven