CELEX: C1998/340/04
Language: en
Date: 1998-11-07 00:00:00
Title: JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Second Chamber) of 24 September 1998 in Case C-319/96 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Østre Landsret): Brinkmann Tabakfabriken GmbH v. Skatteministeriet (Tax on the consumption of manufactured tobacco - Directive 79/32/EEC - Cigarettes - Smoking tobacco - Concept - Non-contractual liability of a Member State for breach of Community law)

C 340/2               EN                Official Journal of the European Communities                                      7.11.98
on certain rights related to copyright in the field of             working conditions requires Member States to introduce
intellectual property (OJ L 346 of 27.11.1992, p. 61) Ð            into their national legal systems such measures as are
the Court, composed of: G. C. Rodríguez Iglesias,                  necessary to ensure judicial protection for workers whose
President, C. Gulmann, M. Wathelet and R. Schintgen                employer, after the employment relationship has ended,
(Presidents of Chambers), G. F. Mancini, J. C. Moitinho            refuses to provide references as a reaction to legal
de Almeida, J. L. Murray, J.-P. Puissochet (Rapporteur),           proceedings brought to enforce compliance with the
G. Hirsch, L. Sevón and K. M. Ioannou, Judges; A. La               principle of equal treatment within the meaning of that
Pergola, Advocate General; H. von Holstein, Deputy                 directive.
Registrar, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on
22 September 1998, in which it has ruled:                          (1) OJ C 212 of 12.7.1997.
It is not contrary to Articles 30 and 36 of the Treaty or to
Council Directive 92/100/EEC of 19 November 1992 on
rental right and lending right and on certain rights related
to copyright in the field of intellectual property for the
holder of an exclusive rental right to prohibit copies of a                       JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
film from being offered for rental in a Member State even
where the offering of those copies for rental has been                                    (Second Chamber)
authorised in the territory of another Member State.                                    of 24 September 1998
                                                                   in Case C-319/96 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
(1) OJ C 108 of 5.4.1997.
                                                                   the éstre Landsret): Brinkmann Tabakfabriken GmbH v.
                                                                                         Skatteministeriet (1)
                                                                   (Tax on the consumption of manufactured tobacco Ð
                                                                   Directive 79/32/EEC Ð Cigarettes Ð Smoking tobacco Ð
                                                                   Concept Ð Non-contractual liability of a Member State
                                                                                   for breach of Community law)
              JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                    of 22 September 1998                                                    (98/C 340/04)
in Case C-185/97 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Employment Appeal Tribunal, London): Belinda Jane                              (Language of the case: Danish)
            Coote v. Granada Hospitality Ltd (1)
(Council Directive 76/207/EEC Ð Refusal of an employer               (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be
to provide references for a former employee who was                          published in the European Court Reports)
                          dismissed)
                        (98/C 340/03)                              In Case C-319/96: reference to the Court under Article 177
                                                                   of the EC Treaty from the éstre Landsret (Danish Eastern
                                                                   Regional Court) (Denmark), for a preliminary ruling in
               (Language of the case: English)
                                                                   the proceedings pending before that court between
                                                                   Brinkmann Tabakfabriken GmbH and Skatteministeriet Ð
In Case C-185/97: reference to the Court under Article 177         on the interpretation of Articles 3(1) and 4(1) of the
of the EC Treaty from the Employment Appeal Tribunal,              Second Council Directive (79/32/EEC) of 18 December
London, for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings                1978 on taxes other than turnover taxes which affect the
pending before that tribunal between Belinda Jane Coote            consumption of manufactured tobacco (OJ L 10 of
and Granada Hospitality Ltd Ð on the interpretation of             16.1.1979, p. 8), and of the principle of a State's non-
Council Directive 76/207/EEC of 9 February 1976 on the             contractual liability for damage caused to individuals by a
implementation of the principle of equal treatment for             breach of Community law attributable to that State Ð the
men and women as regards access to employment,                     Court (Second Chamber), composed of: R. Schintgen,
vocational training and promotion, and working                     President of the Chamber, G. F. Mancini and G. Hirsch
conditions (OJ L 39 of 14.2.1976, p. 40) Ð the Court,              (Rapporteur), Judges; F. G. Jacobs, Advocate General;
composed of: G. C. Rodríguez Iglesias, President, H.               H. von Holstein, Deputy Registrar, for the Registrar, has
Ragnemalm and R. Schintgen (Presidents of Chambers),               given a judgment on 24 September 1998, in which it has
G. F. Mancini, J. C. Moitinho de Almeida (Rapporteur),             ruled:
J. L. Murray, D. A. O. Edward, J.-P. Puissochet, G.
Hirsch, P. Jann and K. M. Ioannou, Judges; J. Mischo,
                                                                   1. Articles 3(1) and 4(1) of the Second Council Directive
Advocate General; D. Louterman-Hubeau, Principal
                                                                        (79/32/EEC) of 18 December 1978 on taxes other
Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on
                                                                        than turnover taxes which affect the consumption of
22 September 1998, in which it has ruled:
                                                                        manufactured tobacco, in the version in force in May
                                                                        1990, are to be interpreted as meaning that rolls of
Article 6 of Council Directive 76/207/EEC of 9 February                 tobacco wrapped in porous cellulose which have to be
1976 on the implementation of the principle of equal                    inserted into cigarette-paper tubes to be smoked must
treatment for men and women as regards access to                        be deemed to be smoking tobacco within the meaning
employment, vocational training and promotion, and                      of Article 4(1) of that directive.
 ---pagebreak--- 7.11.98                EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                      C 340/3
2. A Member State whose authorities, in interpreting                       indicated in a declaration for release into free
     Articles 3(1) and 4(1) of the Second Directive 79/32/                 circulation, and where the levying of customs duties
     EEC, erroneously classified a product such as that at                 on products covered by the heading under which those
     issue in this case as a cigarette and did not suspend the             goods ought to have been classified was suspended at
     operation of the decision adopted, is not bound by                    the date on which that declaration was accepted but
     Community law to compensate the manufacturer for                      had been re-established when the error was detected,
     the damage sustained by the latter as a result of that                the customs authorities must not take account of that
     erroneous decision.                                                   suspension in order to recalculate the amount of the
                                                                           customs duties legally due on the date on which the
                                                                           declaration was accepted.
(1) OJ C 354 of 23.11.1996.
                                                                      2. When the Commission, after consultation with the
                                                                           Customs Code Committee, has delivered a decision
                                                                           addressed to a Member State holding that there was,
                                                                           in a specific case, no justification for granting
                                                                           remission of import duties pursuant to the provisions
               JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                       of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1430/79 of 2 July
                        (Fifth Chamber)                                    1979 on the repayment or remission of import or
                                                                           export duties, and when that decision does not contain
                     of 24 September 1998                                  any legal or factual indication relating to the legal
                                                                           basis for effecting post-clearance recovery of the
in Case C-413/96 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
                                                                           import duties concerned under Regulation No 1697/
   the Hùjesteret): Skatteministeriet v. Sportgoods A/S (1)
                                                                           79, a national court may rule on the latter question,
(Customs duty Ð Constitution of a customs debt Ð Post-                     having recourse, if appropriate, to the procedure under
clearance recovery of import duties Ð Remission of                         Article 177 of the EC Treaty.
                         import duties)
                         (98/C 340/05)                                (1) OJ C 74 of 8.3.1997.
                (Language of the case: Danish)
  (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be                       JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
          published in the European Court Reports)
                                                                                              (Fifth Chamber)
                                                                                          of 24 September 1998
In Case C-413/96: reference to the Court under Article 177
of the EC Treaty from the Hùjesteret (Danish Supreme                  in    Case    C-35/97: Commission of the             European
Court) for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending                          Communities v. French Republic (1)
before that court between Skatteministeriet and
Sportgoods A/S Ð on the interpretation of Article 2(1) of
                                                                      (Failure to fulfil obligations Ð Article 48 of the EC Treaty
Council Regulation (EEC) No 1697/79 of 24 July 1979 on
                                                                      Ð Unemployment benefits Ð Award of supplementary
                                                                      retirement pension points Ð Conditions of dismissal Ð
the post-clearance recovery of import duties or export
duties which have not been required of the person liable
                                                                      Article 7 of Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 Ð Frontier
for payment on goods entered for a customs procedure
                                                                                                  workers)
involving the obligation to pay such duties (OJ L 197 of                                       (98/C 340/06)
3.8.1979, p. 1) and on the legal effect of a decision
delivered by the Commission following consultation with
the Customs Code Committee Ð the Court (Fifth                                         (Language of the case: French)
Chamber), composed of: C. Gulmann, President of the
Chamber, M. Wathelet, J. C. Moitinho de Almeida,
D. A. O. Edward (Rapporteur) and L. Sevón, Judges; S.                   (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be
Alber, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a                       published in the European Court Reports)
judgment on 24 September 1998, in which it has ruled:
                                                                      In Case C-35/97: Commission of the European
1. Article 2(1) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1697/79                Communities (Agents: Pieter Jan Kuyper and Pieter van
     of 24 July 1979 on the post-clearance recovery of                Nuffel) v. French Republic (Agents: Kareen Rispal-
     import duties or export duties which have not been               Bellanger and Claude Chavance) Ð application for a
     required of the person liable for payment on goods               declaration that, by excluding frontier workers residing in
     entered for a customs procedure involving the                    Belgium from qualifying for supplementary retirement
     obligation to pay such duties must be construed as               pension points after being placed in early retirement, the
     meaning that, where a post-clearance inspection has              French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under
     revealed an error in the tariff classification of goods          Article 48(2) of the EC Treaty and Article 7 of Regulation