Case C-298/07: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 16 October 2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof — Germany) — Bundesverband der Verbraucherzentralen und Verbraucherverbände — Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband eV v deutsche internet versicherung AG (Directive 2000/31/EC — Article 5(1)(c) — Electronic commerce — Internet service provider — Electronic mail)
Date: 2008-10-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: disclosure of information, electronic commerce, exchange of information, interpretation of the law, means of communication, provision of services

6.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 313/7

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 16 October
2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the High
Court of Justice of England and Wales (Chancery Division),
United Kingdom) — Canterbury Hockey Club, Canterbury
for Her
Ladies Hockey Club v The Commissioners

Majesty's Revenue and Customs

2. The

expression ‘certain services

in
Article 13A(1)(m) of Sixth Directive 77/388, does not allow the
Member States to limit the exemption under that provision by
reference to the recipients of the services in question.

linked to sport’,

closely

(Case C-253/07) (1)

(1) OJ C 183, 4.8.2007.

(Sixth VAT Directive — Exemption — Services linked to sport
— Services supplied to persons taking part
in sport —
Services supplied to unincorporated associations and to corpo-
rate persons — Included — Conditions)

(2008/C 313/10)

Language of the case: English

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 16 October
2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundes-
der
gerichtshof — Germany) — Bundesverband
Verbraucherzentralen
Verbraucherverbände —
und
Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband eV v deutsche internet
versicherung AG

(Case C-298/07) (1)

Referring court

High Court of Justice of England and Wales (Chancery Division)

(Directive 2000/31/EC — Article 5(1)(c) — Electronic
commerce — Internet service provider — Electronic mail)

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Canterbury Hockey Club, Canterbury Ladies Hockey
Club

Defendant: The Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and
Customs

Referring court

(2008/C 313/11)

Language of the case: German

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — High Court of Justice
(Chancery Division) — Interpretation of Article 13A(1)(m) 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) — Exemption of
certain services closely linked to sport or physical education —
Meaning of ‘persons taking part in sport or physical education’
— Scope of persons covered

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant:
und
Verbraucherverbände — Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband eV

der Verbraucherzentralen

Bundesverband

Defendant: deutsche internet versicherung AG

Operative part of the judgment

Re:

1. Article 13A(1)(m) 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 is to be interpreted as
meaning that, in the context of persons taking part in sport,
it
includes services supplied to corporate persons and to unincorpo-
rated associations, provided that — which it is for the national
court to establish — those services are closely linked and essential
to sport, that they are supplied by non-profit-making organisations
and that their true beneficiaries are persons taking part in sport;

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Bundesgerichtshof —
Interpretation of Article 5(1)(c) of Directive 2000/31/EC of the
European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on
certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular
electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (‘Directive on elec-
tronic commerce’) (OJ 2000 L 178, p. 1) — Service provider
offering such services exclusively via the internet by indicating
on his website only his electronic mail address and providing
recipients with a field in which to ask written questions —
Whether this service provider also has to provide a telephone
number

C 313/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

6.12.2008

Operative part of the judgment

Article 5(1)(c) of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament
and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of informa-
tion society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the internal
market
(‘Directive on electronic commerce’) must be interpreted as
meaning that a service provider is required to supply to recipients of
the service, before the conclusion of a contract with them, in addition
to its electronic mail address, other
information which allows the
service provider to be contacted rapidly and communicated with in a
direct and effective manner. That information does not necessarily have
to be a telephone number. That information may be in the form of an
electronic enquiry template through which the recipients of the service
can contact the service provider via the internet, to whom the service
provider replies by electronic mail except in situations where a recipient
of the service, who, after contacting the service provider electronically,
finds himself without access to the electronic network, requests the
latter to provide access to another, non-electronic, means of communi-
cation.

(1) OJ C 223, 22.9.2007.

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 16 October
2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Lunds
tingsrätt — Sweden) — Svenska staten represented by the
Tillsynsmyndigheten i konkurser v Anders Holmqvist

(Case C-310/07) (1)

(Approximation of laws — Protection of employees in the
event of
their employer — Directive
80/987/EEC — Article 8a — Activities carried out in a
number of Member States)

the insolvency of

(2008/C 313/12)

Language of the case: Swedish

Referring court

Lunds tingsrätt

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Svenska staten represented by the Tillsynsmyndigh-
eten i konkurser

Defendant: Anders Holmqvist

Re:

20 October 1980 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 (OJ 1980 L 283,
p. 23), as amended by Directive 2002/74/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2003 (OJ 2002
L 270, p. 10) — Wage guarantee for a worker employed in a
road haulage undertaking having its head office and only estab-
lishment in a Member State and which carries out deliveries of
goods between the Member State of origin and other Member
States.

Operative part of the judgment

Article 8a of Council Directive 80/987/EEC of 20 October 1980 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,
as amended by Directive 2002/74/EC of the European Parliament
and of the Council of 23 September 2003, must be interpreted as
meaning that, in order for an undertaking established in a Member
State to be regarded as having activities in the territory of another
Member State, that undertaking does not need to have a branch or
fixed establishment
in that other State. The undertaking must,
however, have a stable economic presence in the latter State, featuring
human resources which enable it to perform activities there. In the case
of a transport undertaking established in a Member State, the mere
fact that a worker employed by it in that State delivers goods between
that State and another Member State cannot demonstrate that the
undertaking has a stable economic presence in another Member State.

(1) OJ C 211, 8.9.2007.

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 16 October
2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado
de lo Mercantil — Barcelona) — Kirtruna SL, Elisa Vigano
v Red Elite de Electrodomésticos SA, Cristina Delgado
Fernández de Heredia, Sergio Sabini Celio, Miguel Oliván
Bascones, Electro Calbet SA

(Case C-313/07) (1)

(Social policy — Directive 2001/23/EC — Transfer of under-
taking — Safeguarding of employees' rights — Insolvency
proceedings — Assignment of lease)

(2008/C 313/13)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Lunds Tingsrätt — Inter-
pretation of Article 8a of Council Directive 80/987/EEC of

Juzgado de lo Mercantil (Barcelona, Spain)