CELEX: C1999/226/08
Language: en
Date: 1999-08-07 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court of 15 June 1999 in Case C-321/97 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Stockholms Tingsrätten): Ulla-Brith Andersson and Susanne Wåkerås-Andersson v Svenska Staten (Swedish State) (Article 234 EC (ex-Article 177) - EEA Agreement - Jurisdiction of the Court of Justice - Accession to the European Union - Directive 80/987/EEC - Liability of a State)

7.8.1999                 EN                       Official Journal of the European Communities                                            C 226/5
on package travel, package holidays and package tours (OJ                                     JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
1990 L 158, p. 59) and on the conditions under which a
Member State incurs liability for loss or damage caused to
individuals through a breach of Community law — the Court,                                             of 15 June 1999
composed of: G.C. Rodriguez Iglesias, President, P.J.G. Kap-
teyn, G. Hirsch and P. Jann, Presidents of Chambers, G.F. Man-
cini, J.C. Moitinho de Almeida, C. Gulmann (Rapporteur),
L. Sevón and M. Wathelet, Judges; A. Saggio, Advocate Gen-                  in Case C-321/97 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
eral; H.A. Rühl, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, has             the Stockholms Tingsrätten): Ulla-Brith Andersson and
given a judgment on 15 June 1999, in which it has ruled:                     Susanne Wåkerås-Andersson v Svenska Staten (Swedish
                                                                                                           State) (1)
1. Article 7 of Council Directive 90/314/EEC of 13 June 1990
                                                                             (Article 234 EC (ex-Article 177) — EEA Agreement —
    on package travel, package holidays and package tours applies to
                                                                             Jurisdiction of the Court of Justice — Accession to the
    trips which are offered by a daily newspaper as a gift exclusive to
                                                                             European Union — Directive 80/987/EEC — Liability of a
    its subscribers as part of an advertising initiative that contravenes
                                                                                                            State)
    national competition laws and for which the principal contractor,
    if he travels alone, pays airport taxes and a single room
    supplement or, if he is accompanied by one or more persons
    paying the full rate, airport taxes only.                                                          (1999/C 226/08)
2. A Member State which acceded to the European Union on
    1 January 1995 has not properly transposed Article 7 of the                                 (Language of the case: Swedish)
    directive into national law if it has adopted legislation which
    protects travellers who have booked package travel after 1 January
    1995 but limits that protection to trips with a departure date of
    1 May 1995 or later.                                                     (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                                                                                                in the European Court Reports)
3. Transposition of Article 7 of Directive 90/314 in a way that
    limits the protection prescribed by that provision to trips with a       In Case C-321/97: reference to the Court under Article 234
    departure date four months or more after the expiry of the               EC (ex Article 177) by the Stockholms Tingsrätten, Sweden,
    period prescribed for transposition of the directive constitutes a       for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that
    sufficiently serious breach of Community law, even where the             court between Ulla-Brith Andersson and Susanne Wåkerås-
    Member State has implemented all the other provisions of the             Andersson and Svenska Staten (Swedish State) — on the
    directive.                                                               interpretation of Article 6 of the Agreement on the European
                                                                             Economic Area signed on 2 May 1992 and approved by
                                                                             Decision 94/1/EC, ECSC of the Council and the Commission
4. Article 7 of Directive 90/314 has not been properly transposed            of 13 December 1993 on the conclusion of the Agreement
    where national legislation does no more than require, for the            on the European Economic Area between the European
    coverage of the risk, a contract of insurance or a bank guarantee        Communities, their Member States and the Republic of Austria,
    under which the amount of cover provided must be no less than            the Republic of Finland, the Republic of Iceland, the Principality
    5 % of the organiser’s business turnover in the corresponding            of Liechtenstein, the Kingdom of Norway and the Kingdom of
    quarter of the previous calendar year and which requires an              Sweden (OJ 1994 L 1, p. 1), and Council Directive 80/987/EEC
    organiser just starting up in business to base the amount of cover       of 20 October 1980 on the approximation of the laws of the
    on his estimated turnover from his anticipated business as a             Member States relating to the protection of employees in the
    travel organiser, without taking account of any increase in the          event of the insolvency of their employer (OJ 1980 L 283,
    organiser’s business turnover in the current year.                       p. 23) — the Court, composed of G.C. Rodriguez Iglesias,
                                                                             President, J.-P. Puissochet, G. Hirsch and P. Jann, Presidents of
                                                                             Chambers, J.C. Moitinho de Almeida, C. Gulmann, J.L. Murray,
5. Once a direct causal link has been established, the Member                D.A.O. Edward, H. Ragnemalm, L. Sevór (Rapporteur) and
    State’s liability for breach of Article 7 of the directive cannot be     M. Wathelet, Judges; G. Cosmas, Advocate General; H. von
    precluded by imprudent conduct on the part of the travel organiser       Holstein, Deputy Registrar, has given a judgment on 15 June
                                                                             1999, in which it has ruled:
    or by the occurrence of exceptional or unforeseeable events.
                                                                             1. The Court has no jurisdiction to reply to the first question.
(1) OJ C 181 of 14.6.1996.
                                                                             2. Community law does not enable individuals to rely before the
                                                                                 courts or tribunals of a European Free Trade Area State which
                                                                                 has acceded to the European Union on rights derived directly
                                                                                 from 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
 ---pagebreak--- C 226/6                   EN                       Official Journal of the European Communities                                            7.8.1999
     employer, or for that State to be held liable for damage caused to       2. National legislation restricting imports of alcoholic drinks by
     them by failure to transpose the directive correctly, where the               travellers arriving from non-member countries in order to
     events which give rise to the operation of the guarantee provided             maintain public order is not, in principle, contrary to Regulation
     for in the directive occurred prior to the date of accession.                 No 918/83 or Directive 69/169.
                                                                              3. National legislation restricting imports by travellers arriving
(1) OJ C 331 of 1.11.1997.                                                         from third countries of alcoholic drinks, on the basis of the
                                                                                   duration of the journey, with a view to combating disturbances
                                                                                   of public order connected with the consumption of alcohol, is not
                                                                                   contrary to Regulation No 918/83 or Directive 69/169.
                                                                              (1) OJ C 41 of 7.2.1998.
                   JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                            (Fifth Chamber)
                            of 15 June 1999
in Case C-394/97 (reference for a preliminary ruling from                                       JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
the Helsingin Käräjäoikeus): Criminal proceedings against
                           Sami Heinonen (1)
                                                                                                         (Fifth Chamber)
(Goods contained in travellers personal luggage — Travellers
arriving from non-member countries — Duty-free allow-                                                    of 15 June 1999
ances — Prohibition on imports linked to minimum period
                              spent abroad)                                   in Case C-421/97 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
                                                                              the Tribunal de Grande Instance de Meaux): Yves Tarantik
                            (1999/C 226/09)                                      v Direction des Services Fiscaux de Seine-et-Marne(1)
                     (Language of the case: Finnish)                          (Article 95 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article
                                                                                        90 EC) — Differential tax on motor vehicles)
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published                                   (1999/C 226/10)
                     in the European Court Reports)
In Case C-394/97: reference to the Court under Article 234                                         (Language of the case: French)
EC (ex Article 177) by the Helsingin Käräjäoikeus, Finland, for
a preliminary ruling in the criminal proceedings before that
court against Sami Heinonen — on the interpretation of                        (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
Council Regulation (EEC) No 918/83 of 28 March 1983                                               in the European Court Reports)
setting up a Community system of reliefs from customs duty
(OJ 1983 L 105, p. 1) and Council Directive 69/169/EEC of
28 May 1969 on the harmonisation of provisions laid                           In Case C-421/97: reference to the Court under Article 234
down by law, regulation or administrative action relating to                  EC (ex Article 177) by the Tribunal de Grande Instance de
exemption from turnover tax and excise duty on imports in                     Meaux, France, for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings
international travel (OJ, English Special Edition 1969 (I),                   pending before that court between Yves Tarantik and Direction
p. 232) — the Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of                              des Services Fiscaux de Seine-et-Marne — on the interpretation
J.-P. Puissochet, President of the Chamber, P. Jann (Rappor-                  of Article 95 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment,
teur), J.C. Moitinho de Almeida, C. Gulmann and M. Wathelet,                  Article 90 EC) — the Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of:
Judges; A. Saggio, Advocate General; H. von Holstein, Deputy                  J.-P. Puissochet, President of the Chamber, J.C. Moitinho de
Registrar, has given a judgment on 15 June 1999, in which it                  Almeida, C. Gulmann, L. Sevón and M. Wathelet (Rapporteur),
has ruled:                                                                    Judges; F.C. Jacobs, Advocate General; H. von Holstein, Deputy
                                                                              Registrar, has given a judgment on 15 June 1999, in which it
1. National legislation prohibiting or restricting imports of certain         has ruled:
     goods by travellers arriving from non-member countries on
     grounds of public morality, public policy, public security or            National rules on motor vehicle tax such as those in point in the
     protection of health and life of humans is not contrary to Council       main proceedings do not, as a result of the increase in the progression
     Regulation (EEC) No 918/83 of 28 March 1983 setting up a                 coefficient of the tax between the 15-16 CV tax band, on the one
     Community system of reliefs from customs duty and Council                hand, and the tax bands above 18 CV, which contain only imported
     Directive 69/169/EEC of 28 May 1969 on the harmonisation                 vehicles, on the other, have discriminatory or protective effects which
     of provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative             are incompatible with the first paragraph of Article 95 of the EC
     action relating to exemption from turnover tax and excise duty           Treaty (now, after amendment, the first paragraph of Article 90 EC)
     on imports in international travel.                                      where: