Case C-387/07: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 11 December 2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Ancona — Italy) — MI.VER Srl, Daniele Antonelli v Provincia di Macerata (Waste — Concept of temporary storage — Directive 75/442/EEC — Decision 2000/532/EC — Possibility of mixing together items of waste covered by different codes — Concept of mixed packaging )
Date: 2008-12-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Italy, interpretation of the law, packaging product, storage of waste, waste management

7.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 32/7

3. Examination of the fifth questions referred has not raised any factor
liable to affect the validity of point 4 of the Annex to Commission
Regulation (EC) No 400/2006 of 8 March 2006 concerning the
classification of certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature.

(1) OJ C 269, 10.11.2007.

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 11 December
2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Vestre
Landsret — Denmark) — Danfoss A/S, AstraZeneca A/S v
Skatteministeriet

(Case C-371/07) (1)

(Sixth VAT Directive — Article 6(2) — Supplies of services
carried out free of charge by a taxable person for purposes
other than those of his business — Right to deduct VAT —
Second subparagraph of Article 17(6) — Member States'
option to retain exclusions from the right to deduct which
were provided for under their national laws when the Sixth
Directive came into force)

laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common
system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment, must be
interpreted as precluding a Member State from applying, after the
entry into force of the Sixth Directive, an exclusion from the right
to deduct input value added tax on expenditure in respect of meals
provided by company canteens free of charge to business contacts
and staff in the course of work meetings, where, at the moment
when the Sixth Directive entered into force, that exclusion was not
actually applied to that expenditure because of an administrative
practice of taxing services provided by company canteens at cost
price, that is to say, the price of the raw materials plus the cost of
wages for preparation and sale of the food and drinks and the
administration of the canteens, in return for the right to deduct
input value added tax in full;

2) Article 6(2) of Sixth Directive 77/388 must be interpreted in such
a way that, on the one hand, it does not cover the provision, free of
charge, of meals in company canteens to business contacts in the
course of meetings held on the company premises where objective
evidence indicates — this being a matter for the referring court to
determine — that those meals are provided for strictly business-
related purposes. On the other hand, Article 6(2) applies in prin-
ciple to the provision, free of charge, of meals by a company to its
staff on its premises, unless — this likewise being a matter for the
referring court to determine — the needs of the company, such as
the need to ensure that work meetings are run smoothly and
without interruptions, require the employer to ensure that meals are
provided.

(2009/C 32/11)

Language of the case: Danish

(1) OJ C 247, 20.10.2007.

Referring court

Vestre Landsret

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Danfoss A/S, AstraZeneca A/S

Defendant: Skatteministeriet

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Vestre Landsret — Inter-
pretation of Article 6(2) and the second subparagraph of
Article 17(6) 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 L 145, p. 1) — Right to
deduct tax relating to meals provided free of charge to staff and
clients in a company canteen — Possibility for the Member
States to maintain their legislation excluding the right to deduct
on the date of entry into force of the Directive

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 11 December
2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale
di Ancona — Italy) — MI.VER Srl, Daniele Antonelli v
Provincia di Macerata

(Case C-387/07) (1)

(Waste — Concept of
‘temporary storage’ — Directive
75/442/EEC — Decision 2000/532/EC — Possibility of
mixing together items of waste covered by different codes —
Concept of ‘mixed packaging’)

(2009/C 32/12)

Language of the case: Italian

Operative part of the judgment

Referring court

1) The second subparagraph of Article 17(6) of Sixth Council Direc-
tive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the

Tribunale di Ancona

C 32/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

7.2.2009

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: MI.VER Srl, Daniele Antonelli

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 11 December
2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge
Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — Stichting
Intercollegiale
Centraal

Begeleidingsorgaan

voor

de

Toetsing v Staatssecretaris van Financiën

Defendant: Provincia di Macerata

(Case C-407/07) (1)

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Tribunale di Ancona —
Interpretation of Council Directive 75/422/EEC of 15 July 1975
on waste (OJ 1975 L 194, p. 39) and of Commission Decision
2000/532/EC of 3 May 2000 replacing Decision 94/3/EC estab-
lishing a list of wastes pursuant to Article 1(a) of Council Direc-
tive 75/442/EEC and Council Decision 94/904/EC establishing a
list of hazardous waste pursuant to Article 1(4) of Council
Directive 91/689/EEC on hazardous waste (OJ 2000 L 226,
p. 3) — Notion of temporary deposit — Right of the producer
to mix together items of waste covered by different codes in the
European Waste Catalogue
in Decision
2000/532/EC

provided

for

Operative part of the judgment

1. Council Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste, as
amended by Regulation (EC) No 1882/2003 of the European
Parliament and of
the Council of 29 September 2003, and
Commission Decision 2000/532/EC of 3 May 2000 replacing
Decision 94/3/EC establishing a list of wastes pursuant
to
Article 1(a) of Council Directive 75/442/EEC on waste and
Council Decision 94/904/EC establishing a list of hazardous waste
pursuant to Article 1(4) of Council Directive 91/689/EEC on
hazardous waste do not preclude a producer of waste mixing
together
items of waste covered by different codes in the list
annexed to Decision 2000/532 during their temporary storage,
pending collection, on the site where they are produced. However,
the Member States are required to adopt measures requiring produ-
cers of waste to sort and store waste separately during its temporary
storage, pending collection, on the site where it is produced, using,
if they consider such
for that purpose, the codes from that list,
measures to be necessary to achieve the objectives laid down in the
first paragraph of Article 4 of Directive 75/442/EEC, as amended
by Regulation No 1882/2003.

2. Since the national rules repeat the list of waste annexed to Decision
2000/532, code 15 01 06 corresponding to ‘mixed packaging’
may be used to cover waste consisting of packaging of various
materials grouped together.

(Sixth VAT Directive — Article 13A(1)(f) — Exemptions —
Conditions — Services supplied by independent groups —
Services supplied to one or several members of the group)

(2009/C 32/13)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Stichting Centraal Begeleidingsorgaan voor de Inter-
collegiale Toetsing

Defendant: Staatssecretaris van Financiën

Re:

Preliminary ruling — Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Interpreta-
tion of Article 13.A(1)(f) 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) — Services supplied by independent associations for the
purpose of providing their members with services which are
directly necessary for the exercise of an exempted activity

Operative part of the judgment

Article 13A(1)(f) 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 must be interpreted as meaning that, provided the
other conditions in that provision are met, services supplied to their
members by
exemption
contained in that provision, even if those services are supplied only to
one or several of those members.

independent groups are

covered by

the

(1) OJ C 283, 24.11.2007.

(1) OJ C 283, 24.11.2007.