Case C-499/06: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 22 May 2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Okręgowy w Koszalinie, Republic of Poland) — Halina Nerkowska v Zakład Ubezpieczeń Społecznych Oddział w Koszalinie (Disability pension granted to civilian victims of war or repression — Condition requiring residence in national territory — Article 18(1) EC)
Date: 2008-05-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Poland, disability insurance, interpretation of the law, residence

5.7.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 171/7

Re:

Re:

for

Reference
a preliminary ruling — Oberlandesgericht
Dresden — Interpretation of Article 20(1) of Directive
2003/54/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of
26 June 2003 concerning common rules for
the internal
market in electricity and repealing Directive 96/92/EC (OJ 2003
L 176, p. 37) — National legislation which excludes networks
wholly situated on the premises of an undertaking (Betriebs-
netze) from the principle of free access of third persons to elec-
tricity transport and distribution networks

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Cour de Cassation (France)
— Interpretation of Articles 6(1), 18(1) and 19 of Council
Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdic-
tion and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil
and commercial matters (OJ 2001 L 12, p. 1) — Rules on juris-
diction over individual contracts of employment — Situation of
a dismissed worker who had worked, in non-Member States, for
two companies in a group with their seats in two different
Member States

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Article 20(1) of Directive 2003/54/EC of the European Parliament
and of the Council of 26 June 2003 concerning common rules for the
internal market in electricity and repealing Directive 96/92/EC must
be interpreted as precluding a provision such as the first point of Para-
graph 110(1) of the Law on electricity and gas supply, referred to as
‘the Law on energy management’ (Gesetz über die Elektrizitäts- und
Gasversorgung (Energiewirtschaftsgesetz)) of 7 July 2005, which
exempts certain operators of energy supply systems from the obligation
to provide third parties with open access to those systems on the
grounds that they are located on a geographically connected operation
zone and that they predominantly serve to supply the energy needs of
the undertaking itself and of connected undertakings.

(1) OJ C 326, 30.12.2006.

The rule of special jurisdiction provided for in Article 6, point 1, of
Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on
jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil
and commercial matters cannot be applied to a dispute falling under
Section 5 of Chapter II of that regulation concerning the jurisdiction
rules applicable to individual contracts of employment.

(1) OJ C 326, 30.12.2006.

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 22 May 2008
(reference for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Okręgowy
w Koszalinie, Republic of Poland) — Halina Nerkowska v
Zakład Ubezpieczeń Społecznych Oddział w Koszalinie

(Case C-499/06) (1)

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 22 May 2008
(reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de
Laboratoires
cassation,

France) — Glaxosmithkline,

Glaxosmithkline v Jean-Pierre Rouard

(Disability pension granted to civilian victims of war or
repression — Condition requiring residence in national terri-
tory — Article 18(1) EC)

(Case C-462/06) (1)

(Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 — Section 5 of Chapter II —
Jurisdiction over
contracts of employment —
Section 2 of Chapter II — Special jurisdiction — Article 6,
point 1 — More than one defendant)

individual

(2008/C 171/11)

(2008/C 171/12)

Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Sąd Okręgowy w Koszalinie

Language of the case: French

Parties to the main proceedings

Referring court

Cour de cassation

Applicant: Halina Nerkowska

Defendant: Zakład Ubezpieczeń Społecznych Oddział w Kosza-
linie

Re:

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Glaxosmithkline, Laboratoires Glaxosmithkline

Defendant: Jean-Pierre Rouard

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Sąd Okręgowy w Kosza-
linie — Interpretation of Article 18 EC — Compatibility of a
national provision under which payment of a benefit granted to
victims of war and of its consequences is subject to a require-
ment of residence in national territory

C 171/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

5.7.2008

Operative part of the judgment

2. The Italian Republic is ordered to bear the costs, including those

linked to the interlocutory proceedings.

Article 18(1) EC is to be interpreted as precluding legislation of a
Member State under which it refuses, generally and in all circum-
stances, to pay to its nationals a benefit granted to civilian victims of
war or repression solely because they are not resident in the territory of
that State throughout the period of payment of the benefit, but in the
territory of another Member State.

(1) OJ C 82, 14.4.2007.

(1) OJ C 20, 27.1.2007.

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 15 May 2008 —
the European Communities v Italian
Commission of

Republic

(Case C-503/06) (1)

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 22 May 2008
(reference for a preliminary ruling from the Corte Suprema
di Cassazione (Italy)) — Ampliscientifica Srl, Amplifin SpA
v Ministero dell'Economia e delle Finanze, Agenzia delle
Entrate

(Case C-162/07) (1)

(Sixth VAT directive — Taxable persons — Second sub-
paragraph of Article 4(4) — Parent companies and subsidi-
aries — Implementation by the Member State of the single
taxable person scheme — Conditions — Consequences)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Directive
79/409/EEC — Conservation of wild birds — Derogations
from the system of protection of wild birds — Region of
Liguria)

(2008/C 171/14)

Language of the case: Italian

(2008/C 171/13)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Corte Suprema di Cassazione

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: D. Recchia, Agent)

Defendant: Italian Republic (represented by: I. Braguglia, Agent
and G. Fiengo, avvocato dello Stato)

Re:

Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Adoption
and application, by the region of Liguria, of legislation author-
ising derogations from the system of protection for wild birds
which fails to satisfy the conditions laid down in Article 9 of
Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 concerning the
conservation of wild birds (OJ 1979 L 103, p. 1)

Operative part of the judgment

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Ampliscientifica Srl, Amplifin SpA

Defendant: Ministero dell'Economia e delle Finanze, Agenzia
delle Entrate

Re:

Reference for a Preliminary Ruling — Interpretation of
the
second subparagraph of Article 4(4) 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 (OJ 1977
L 145, p. 1) — ‘Persons who, while legally independent, are
closely bound to one another by financial, economic and orga-
nisational
links’ — Concept sufficiently precise to enable the
Member States to apply the VAT scheme set out? — Concept of
link — National provision requiring that a link exist for a
minimum period of time in order to prevent the abuse or rights

1. By adopting and applying, for the region of Liguria,

legislation
authorising derogations from the system of protection for wild birds
which fails to satisfy the conditions laid down in Article 9 of
Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 concerning the
conservation of wild birds, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil
its obligations under that directive.

Operative part of the judgment

1. The second subparagraph of Article 4(4) of

the 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 is