Case C-336/07: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 22 December 2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Hannover — Germany) — Kabel Deutschland Vertrieb und Service GmbH & Co. KG v Niedersächsische Landesmedienanstalt für privaten Rundfunk (Directive 2002/22/EC — Article 31(1) — Reasonable must carry obligations — National law requiring analogue cable network operators to provide access to their cable networks to all television programmes allowed to be broadcast terrestrially — Principle of proportionality)
Date: 2008-12-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: cable distribution, computer network, interpretation of the law, television

C 44/14

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

21.2.2009

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 22 December
2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour
Administrative d'Appel de Lyon — France) — Régie
Networks v Direction de Contrôle Fiscal Rhône-Alpes
Bourgogne

(Case C-333/07) (1)

of

stage

(State aid — Aid scheme to support local radio stations —
Financed by a parafiscal charge on advertising companies —
Favourable decision by the Commission at the conclusion of
the preliminary
review procedure under
the
Article 93(3) of the EC Treaty (now Article 88(3) EC) — Aid
that may be
common market —
Article 92(3) of
the EC Treaty (now, after amendment,
Article 87(3) EC) — Decision challenged on the ground that
it is unlawful — Obligation to state the reasons on which the
decision is based — Assessment of the facts — Whether the
parafiscal charge is compatible with the EC Treaty)

compatible with the

(2009/C 44/22)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour Administrative d'Appel de Lyon

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Régie Networks

Defendant: Direction de Contrôle Fiscal Rhône-Alpes Bourgogne

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Cour Administrative
d'Appel de
Lyon — Validity of Commission Decision
No N 679/97 of 10 November 1997 by which the Commission
decided not to raise any objections to amendments made to the
radio broadcasting aid scheme introduced by Decree 92-1053
of 30 September 1992 (JORF No 228 of 1 October 1992)
(SG(97) D/9265) — Parafiscal charge on advertisements broad-
cast on sound radio and television in French territory,
the
revenue from which is allocated to a fund to support radio
broadcasting — Aid scheme which benefits only national under-
takings — Applicability to that scheme — and to the charge
which funds
in
Article 87(3)(c) EC

exception provided for

it — of

the

Operative part of the judgment

the Commission of

the European Communities of
The decision of
10 November 1997 not to raise any objections to the new version of
an aid scheme to support local radio stations (State aid No N 679/97
— France) is invalid.

The effects of the declaration that that decision of the Commission of
the European Communities of 10 November 1997 is invalid are
suspended pending the adoption of a new decision by the Commission

under Article 88 EC. Those effects are to be preserved for a period not
exceeding two months from the date of delivery of this judgment if the
Commission decides to adopt such a new decision under Article 88(3)
EC, and for a reasonable further period if the Commission decides to
initiate the procedure under Article 88(2) EC. Only undertakings
which, prior to the date of delivery of this judgment, brought legal
proceedings or made an equivalent complaint regarding the levying of
the parafiscal charge on advertising broadcast by sound radio or televi-
sion, established by Article 1 of Decree No 97-1263 of 29 December
1997 creating a parafiscal charge for the benefit of a fund to support
radio broadcasting, are excluded from the temporal limitation of the
effects of this judgment.

(1) OJ C 211, 8.9.2007.

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 22 December
2008 (reference for
a preliminary ruling from the
Verwaltungsgericht Hannover — Germany) — Kabel
Deutschland Vertrieb und Service GmbH & Co. KG v
privaten
Landesmedienanstalt
Niedersächsische
Rundfunk

für

(Case C-336/07) (1)

(Directive 2002/22/EC — Article 31(1) — Reasonable ‘must
carry’ obligations — National law requiring analogue cable
network operators to provide access to their cable networks to
all television programmes allowed to be broadcast terrestrially
— Principle of proportionality)

(2009/C 44/23)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgericht Hannover

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Kabel Deutschland Vertrieb und Service GmbH & Co.
KG

Defendant: Niedersächsische Landesmedienanstalt
Rundfunk

für privaten

Intervening parties: Norddeutscher Rundfunk, Zweites Deutsches
Fernsehen, ARTE GEIE, Bloomberg LP, Mitteldeutscher Rund-
funk, MTV Networks Germany GmbH, successor in law to VIVA
Plus Fernsehen GmbH, VIVA Music Fernsehen GmbH & Co. KG,
MTV Networks Germany GmbH, successor in law to MTV
Networks GmbH & Co. oHG, Westdeutscher Rundfunk, RTL
Television GmbH, RTL II Fernsehen GmbH & Co. KG, VOX Film

21.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 44/15

und Fernseh-GmbH & Co. KG, RTL Disney Fernsehen GmbH &
Co. KG, SAT. 1 Satelliten-Fernsehen GmbH and Others, Regio.
TV GmbH, Eurosport SA, TM-TV GmbH & Co. KG, ONYX Tele-
vision GmbH, Radio Bremen, Hessischer Rundfunk, Nederland
2, Hamburg 1 Fernsehen Beteiligungs GmbH & Co. KG, Turner
Broadcasting System Deutschland GmbH, n-tv Nachrichtenfern-
sehen GmbH & Co. KG, Bayerischer Rundfunk, Deutsches Sport-
fernsehen GmbH, NBC Europe GmbH, BBC World, Medien-
dienst Borkum — Kurverwaltung NSHB Borkum GmbH, Frie-
sischer Rundfunk GmbH, Home Shopping Europe GmbH & Co.
KG, Euro News SA, Reise-TV GmbH & Co. KG, SKF Spielekanal
Fernsehen GmbH, TV 5 Europe, DMAX TV GmbH & Co. KG,
formerly XXP TV — Das Metropolenprogramm GmbH &
Co. KG, RTL Shop GmbH

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 18 December
2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwal-
tungsgericht Stuttgart — Germany) — Ibrahim Altun v
Stadt Böblingen

(Case C-337/07) (1)

(EEC-Turkey Association Agreement — Article 7, first para-
graph of Decision No 1/80 of the Association Council —
Right of residence of a child of a Turkish worker — Worker
duly registered as belonging to the labour force — Involuntary
unemployment — Applicability of that agreement to Turkish
refugees — Conditions governing the loss of acquired rights)

Re:

(OJ 2002 L 108, p. 51) — National

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Verwaltungsgericht Hann-
over — Interpretation of Article 31(1) of Directive 2002/22/EC
of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March
2002 on universal service and users' rights relating to electronic
communications networks and services (Universal Service Direc-
tive)
legislation which
requires analogue cable network operators to provide access on
their cable networks to all the television programmes approved
for terrestrial broadcasting and provides that, in the event of a
shortage of channels, the competent national authority has to
establish an order of priority of applicants which results in full
use of the channels available to the cable network operator
concerned.

Operative part of the judgment

1. Article 31(1)

rights

relating to electronic

the European
of Directive 2002/22/EC of
Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on universal
service and users'
communications
networks and services (Universal Service Directive) is to be inter-
preted as meaning that it does not preclude national
legislation,
such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which requires a
cable operator to provide access to its analogue cable network to
television channels and services that are already being broadcast
terrestrially, thereby resulting in the utilisation of more than half of
the channels available on that network, and which provides, in the
event of a shortage of channels available, for an order of priority of
applicants which results in full utilisation of the channels available
on that network, provided that those obligations do not give rise to
unreasonable economic consequences, which is a matter for the
national court to establish;

2. The

concept of

‘television services’ within the meaning of
Article 31(1) of Directive 2002/22 includes services of television
broadcasters or providers of media services, such as teleshopping,
provided that the conditions laid down in that provision are met,
which is a matter for the national court to establish.

(1) OJ C 247, 20.10.2007.

(2009/C 44/24)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgericht Stuttgart

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Ibrahim Altun

Defendant: Stadt Böblingen

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Verwaltungsgericht Stutt-
gart — Interpretation of the first indent of Article 7 of Decision
No 1/80 of the EEC-Turkey Association Council — Right to stay
of a Turkish national who has entered national territory as a
minor for the purpose of family reunion — Criminal conviction
— Effect on the right to stay — Applicability to Turkish refugees
— Asylum granted to the father on the basis of false statements
— Withdrawal of grant of asylum as a condition for refusal of
the derived right to stay — Derived right conditional on lawful
registration as belonging to the labour force of a Member State
for a period of three years during which the father lives together
in a household with the minor

Operative part of the judgment

1. The first indent of the first paragraph of Article 7 of Decision
No 1/80 of 19 September 1980 on the development of the Asso-
ciation set up by the Agreement establishing an Association
between the European Economic Community and Turkey is to be
interpreted as meaning that the child of a Turkish worker may
enjoy rights arising by virtue of that provision where, during the
three-year period when the child was co-habiting with that worker,
the latter was working for two and a half years before being unem-
ployed for the following six months.

2. The fact that a Turkish worker has obtained the right of residence
in a Member State and, accordingly, the right of access to the
labour market of that State as a political refugee does not prevent a
member of his family from enjoying the rights arising under the
first paragraph of Article 7 of Decision No 1/80.