Case C-371/08: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof Baden-Württemberg (Germany) lodged on  14 August 2008 — Nural Örnek v Land Baden-Württemberg
Date: 2008-08-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Baden-Württemberg, EU Member State, Türkiye, immigration, interpretation of the law, public safety, removal

C 285/24

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

8.11.2008

Vehicle inspection is a purely technical task which, although it
may have legal consequences, cannot be regarded as constituting
a direct exercise of official authority.

So far as concerns Article 46 EC, which provides for the possi-
bility of justification for unequal treatment on grounds of public
policy, public security or public health, the case-law of
the
Court of Justice provides that, in order for reliance to be placed
on this ground of justification, there must be a genuine and
sufficiently serious threat affecting one of the aforementioned
interests. As the German authorities have not
fundamental
provided evidence of any such threat,
for
invoking the derogating rule under Article 46 EC have not been
met. The Commission is satisfied that
the objective being
pursued by the measures under challenge, namely the mainte-
nance of road safety, could also be achieved by less restrictive
measures, such as,
for instance, an appropriate monitoring
system for all inspection engineers and inspection organisations
in Germany.

the conditions

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundes-
finanzhof (Germany) lodged on 13 August 2008 — Data
I/O GmbH v Bundesfinanzdirektion Südost

to be programmed, to be classified under heading 8471 of
the Combined Nomenclature?

2. If this question is answered in the negative: is the aforemen-
tioned adapter then to be classified under heading 8471 of
the Combined Nomenclature if
it contains a so-called
memory-chip, on which the programming process is stored
and from which it can be retrieved?

(1) OJ 1987 L 256, p. 1.
(2) OJ 2004 L 327, p. 1.

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwal-
lodged
tungsgerichtshof Baden-Württemberg (Germany)
on 14 August 2008 — Nural Örnek v Land Baden-
Württemberg

(Case C-371/08)

(2008/C 285/39)

Language of the case: German

(Case C-370/08)

(2008/C 285/38)

Referring court

Language of the case: German

Verwaltungsgerichtshof Baden-Württemberg

Referring court

Bundesfinanzhof

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Data I/O GmbH

Respondent: Bundesfinanzdirektion Südost

Questions referred

1. Is Note 5(B) to Chapter 84 of the Combined Nomenclature
of the Common Customs Tariff in Annex I to Council Regu-
lation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and
statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs
Tariff (1), as amended by the Annex to Commission Regu-
lation (EC) No 1810/2004 of 7 September 2004 (2), to be so
interpreted that
it allows an electrical adapter, which is
designed to provide the electrical connection between an
automatic programming machine and electrical components

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Nural Örnek

Respondent: Land Baden-Württemberg

Question referred

Is the protection against expulsion provided for in Article 14(1)
of Decision No 1/80 of the EEC-Turkey Association Council and
enjoyed by a Turkish national, whose legal status derives from
the second indent of the first paragraph of Article 7 of Decision
No 1/80 and who has resided for the previous ten years in the
Member State in respect of which this legal status applies, to be
determined in accordance with Article 28(3)(a) of Directive
2004/38/EC (1), as implemented by the relevant Member State,
with the result that expulsion is permitted only on imperative
grounds of public security, as defined by Member States?

(1) OJ 2004 L 158, p. 77.