CELEX: C2001/118/04
Language: en
Date: 2001-04-21 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 7 December 2000 in Case C-213/99 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Fiscal Aduaneiro do Porto, Portugal): José Teodoro de Andrade v Director da Alfândega de Leixões, intervener: Ministério Público (Release of goods for free circulation — Expiry of the period within which a customs-approved use must be assigned — Procedure for putting goods up for sale or levying an ad valorem duty)

C 118/2                  EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                            21.4.2001
measures necessary to comply with its obligations under                    equal treatment for men and women as regards access to
Article 3(1) and (2) and Article 5 of Council Directive                    employment, vocational training and promotion, and working
91/676/EEC of 12 December 1991 concerning the protection                   conditions (OJ 1976 L 39, p. 40) — the Court (Sixth Chamber),
of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural           composed of: C. Gulmann, President of the Chamber, V. Skou-
sources (OJ 1991 L 375, p. 1), the United Kingdorn has failed              ris, J.-P. Puissochet (Rapporteur), R. Schintgen and F. Macken,
to fulfil its obligations under that directive and the EC Treaty           Judges; F.G. Jacobs, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has
— the Court (Third Chamber), composed of: C. Gulmann,                      given a judgment on 7 December 2000, in which it has ruled:
President of the Chamber, J.-P. Puissochet and F. Macken
(Rapporteur), Judges; P. Léger, Advocate General; R. Grass,                1.     National provisions governing the date of admission to the
Registrar, has given a judgment on 7 December 2000, in                            practical legal training which is a necessary prerequisite of
which it:                                                                         access to employment in the civil service fall within the scope of
                                                                                  Council Directive 76/207/EEC of 9 February 1976 on the
1.    Declares that, by failing to adopt all the laws, regulations                implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and
      and administrative provisions necessary to comply with the                  women as regards access to employment, vocational training
      obligations laid down in Article 3(1) and (2) and Article 5                 and promotion, and working conditions.
      of Council Directive 91/676/EEC of 12 December 1991
      concerning the protection of waters against pollution caused by      2.     National provisions such as those at issue in the main
      nitrates from agricultural sources, the United Kingdom of Great             proceedings do not constitute discrimination directly based on
      Britain and Northern Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations           sex.
      under that directive;
                                                                           3.     National provisions such as those at issue in the main
2.    Orders the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern                     proceedings constitute indirect discrimination based on sex.
      Ireland to pay the costs.
                                                                           4.     Directive 76/207 does not preclude national provisions such as
                                                                                  those at issue in the main proceedings, in so far as such
(1) OJ C 136 of 15.5.1999.                                                        provisions are justified by objective reasons and prompted solely
                                                                                  by a desire to counterbalance to some extent the delay resulting
                                                                                  from the completion of compulsory military or civilian service.
                                                                           (1) OJ C 136 of 15.5.1999.
                  JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                          (Sixth Chamber)
                                                                                              JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                        of 7 December 2000
                                                                                                      (Sixth Chamber)
in Case C-79/99 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Verwaltungsgericht Frankfurt am Main): Julia Schnor-                                            of 7 December 2000
                       bus v Land Hessen (1)
                                                                           in Case C-213/99 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
(Equal treatment for men and women — Rules on access to                    the Tribunal Fiscal Aduaneiro do Porto, Portugal): José
practical legal training in Land Hesse — Priority for                      Teodoro de Andrade v Director da Alfândega de Leixões,
 applicants who have completed military or civilian service)                                intervener: Ministério Público (1)
                           (2001/C 118/03)                                 (Release of goods for free circulation — Expiry of the period
                                                                           within which a customs-approved use must be assigned —
                                                                           Procedure for putting goods up for sale or levying an ad
                   (Language of the case: German)                                                        valorem duty)
                                                                                                       (2001/C 118/04)
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                    in the European Court Reports)
                                                                                              (Language of the case: Portuguese)
In Case C-79/99: reference to the Court under Article 177 of
the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) from the Verwaltungsge-
richt Frankfurt am Main (Administrative Court, Frankfurt am                (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
Main), Germany for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings                                      in the European Court Reports)
pending before that court between Julia Schnorbus and Land
Hessen - on the interpretation of Council Directive 76/207/EEC             In Case C-213/99: reference to the Court under Article 177 of
of 9 February 1976 on the implementation of the principle of               the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) from the Tribunal Fiscal
 ---pagebreak--- 21.4.2001                EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                              C 118/3
Aduaneiro do Porto, (Customs Court, Oporto) Portugal, for a                                   JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that
court between José Teodoro de Andrade and Director da
Alfândega de Leixões, intervener: Ministério Publico — on the                                        (Sixth Chamber)
interpretation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of
12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code
(OJ 1992 L 302, p. 1) and, in particular, Articles 6, 53 and                                        of 7 December 2000
243 thereof, and of the Community rules relating to value
added tax, — the Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of:
C. Gulmann, President of the Chamber, V. Skouris, J.-P. Puisso-             in Case C-214/99 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
chet (Rapporteur), R. Schintgen and F. Macken, Judges; N. Fen-              the Tampereen Käräjäoikeus, Finland): Neste Markkinointi
nelly, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a                                    Oy v Yötuuli Ky and Others (1)
judgment on 7 December 2000, in which it has ruled:
                                                                            (Competition — Exclusive purchasing agreements — Ser-
                                                                            vice-station agreements — Duration — Significant contri-
                                                                            bution made by one supplier’s contracts to the closing-off of
1.    Article 53 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of                  the market — Distinction between the contracts of the same
      12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code                                              supplier)
      does not preclude the automatic application, without prior
      notification, of a procedure such as that established by
      Portuguese legislation, which provides for goods to be put up                                    (2001/C 118/05)
      for sale where the statutory time-limits for making a declaration
      for release for free circulation or an application for another
      customs-approved treatment or use for the goods have expired.                             (Language of the case: Finnish)
                                                                            (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
2.    Use of a procedure providing either for such goods to be put up                           in the European Court Reports)
      for sale or for an ad valorem surcharge to be levied in order to
      regularise the situation of the goods is not in itself contrary to
      the principle of proportionality. It is for the national court to     In Case C-214/99: reference to the Court under Article 177 of
      determine whether the surcharge applied in the present case           the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) from the Tampereen
      complies with that principle.                                         Käräjäoikeus (Tampere District Court), Finland, for a prelimi-
                                                                            nary ruling in the proceedings pending before that court
                                                                            between Neste Markkinointi Oy and Yötuuli Ky and Others —
                                                                            on the interpretation of Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now
3.    Article 6(3) and Article 243 of Regulation No 2913/92 do              Article 81(1) EC) — the Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of:
      not preclude use of a procedure, such as that at issue in the         C. Gulmann (Rapporteur), President of the Chamber, V. Skou-
      main proceedings, which does not provide for interested parties       ris, J.-P. Puissochet, R. Schintgen and F. Macken, Judges;
      to receive prior notification.                                        N. Fennelly, Advocate General; H.A. Rühl, Principal Adminis-
                                                                            trator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 7 December
                                                                            2000, in which it has ruled:
4.    A surcharge intended to penalise a failure to comply with             The prohibition laid down by Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now
      customs formalities cannot be subject to value added tax.             Article 81(1) EC) does not apply to an exclusive purchasing
                                                                            agreement entered into by a motor-fuels supplier which the retailer
                                                                            may terminate upon one year’s notice at any time where all
                                                                            that supplier’s exclusive purchasing agreements, whether considered
                                                                            separately or as a whole, taken together with the network of similar
                                                                            agreements made by the totality of suppliers, have an appreciable
                                                                            effect on the closing-off of the market but where the agreements of
(1) OJ C 226 of 7.8.1999.                                                   the same kind as the agreement at issue in the main proceedings by
                                                                            reason of their duration represent only a very small part of the totality
                                                                            of one supplier’s exclusive purchasing agreements, of which the
                                                                            majority are fixed term contracts entered into for more than one year.
                                                                            (1) OJ C 246 of 28.8.1999.