CELEX: C2002/191/10
Language: en
Date: 2002-08-10 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 20 June 2002 in Case C-287/00: Commission of the European Communities v Federal Republic of Germany (Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Sixth VAT Directive — Articles 2(1) and 13(A)(1)(i) — Research activities of public-sector higher-education establishments carried out for consideration — Exemption)

C 191/6                    EN                       Official Journal of the European Communities                                          10.8.2002
1.     Declares that, by failing to take the appropriate steps to identify     1.    Dismisses the appeal;
       waters affected by pollution and, consequently, to designate the
       corresponding vulnerable zones, in accordance with Article 3 of         2.    Orders Ms Simon to pay the costs.
       and Annex I to Council Directive 91/676/EEC of 12 December
       1991 concerning the protection of waters against pollution
       caused by nitrates from agricultural sources, the French Republic       (1) OJ C 233 of 12.8.2000.
       has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;
2.     Orders the French Republic to pay the costs;
3.     Orders the Kingdom of Spain to bear its own costs.
(1) OJ C 247 of 26.8.2000.                                                                        JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                                                                                                           (Fifth Chamber)
                                                                                                           of 20 June 2002
                                                                               in Case C-287/00: Commission of the European Communi-
                   JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                                    ties v Federal Republic of Germany(1)
                             (Sixth Chamber)                                   (Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Sixth
                                                                               VAT Directive — Articles 2(1) and 13(A)(1)(i) — Research
                                                                               activities of public-sector higher-education establishments
                             of 27 June 2002                                             carried out for consideration — Exemption)
in Case C-274/00 P: Odette Simon v Commission of the                                                       (2002/C 191/10)
                     European Communities (1)
                                                                                                   (Language of the case: German)
(Appeal — Officials — Person claiming the status of a
member of the temporary staff — Application brought out
of time — Inadmissibility of application — Appeal in part                      (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
 manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded)                                          in the European Court Reports)
                             (2002/C 191/09)
                                                                               In Case C-287/00, Commission of the European Communities
                                                                               (Agents: G. Wilms and K. Gross) v Federal Republic of Germany
                      (Language of the case: French)
                                                                               (Agents: W.-D. Plessing and T. Jürgensen): Application for
                                                                               a declaration that, by exempting from value added tax the
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published         research activities of public-sector higher-education establish-
                     in the European Court Reports)                            ments pursuant to Paragraph 4(21a) of the Umsatzsteuergesetz
                                                                               (Law on Turnover Taxes) of 27 April 1993 (BGBl. 1993 I,
                                                                               p. 565), as amended by Paragraph 4(5) of the Umsatzsteuerge-
                                                                               setz-Änderungsgesetz of 12 December 1996 (BGBl. 1996 I,
                                                                               p. 1851), the Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil
In Case C-274/00 P, Odette Simon, resident in Luxembourg,                      its obligations under Article 2 of the Sixth Council Directive
represented initially by J.-N. Louis, and, subsequently, by                    77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the
L. Misson, avocats, with an address for service in Luxembourg:                 laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes —
Appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance of                  Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assess-
the European Communities (single judge) of 10 May 2000 in                      ment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1), the Court (Fifth Chamber),
Case T-177/97 Simon v Commission [2000] ECR-SC I-A-75                          composed of: P. Jann, President of the Chamber, S. von Bahr
and II-319, seeking to have that judgment set aside, the other                 (Rapporteur), D.A.O. Edward, A. La Pergola and C.W.A. Tim-
party to the proceedings being: Commission of the European                     mermans, Judges; F.G. Jacobs, Advocate General; R. Grass,
Communities (Agent: J. Currall, assisted by D. Waelbroeck),                    Registrar, has given a judgment on 20 June 2002, in which it:
the Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of: F. Macken, President
of the Chamber, N. Colneric (Rapporteur), C. Gulmann,
J.-P. Puissochet and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, Judges; F.G. Jacobs,                1.    Declares that, by exempting from value added tax the research
Advocate General; L. Hewlett, Administrator, for the Registrar,                      activities carried out for consideration by public-sector higher-
has given a judgment on 27 June 2002, in which it:                                   education establishments pursuant to Paragraph 4(21a) of the
 ---pagebreak--- 10.8.2002                EN                       Official Journal of the European Communities                                            C 191/7
      Umsatzsteuergesetz (Law on Turnover Taxes) of 27 April                 L. Hewlett, Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a
      1993, as amended by Paragraph 4(5) of the Umsatzsteuerge-              judgment on 20 June 2002, in which it has ruled:
      setz-Änderungsgesetz of 12 December 1996, the Federal
      Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its obligations under
      Article 2 of the Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of                 1.   Article 28 EC precludes legislation and national administrative
      17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member                  practice which — in the context of a system where matters
      States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value                  concerning conformity assessment procedures for the purposes
      added tax: uniform basis of assessment;                                     of placing radio equipment on the market and putting such
                                                                                  equipment into service have been delegated to the administrative
2.    Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs.                    authorities, to be decided at their discretion — prevents
                                                                                  economic operators from importing, marketing or holding in
                                                                                  stock, with a view to selling, radio equipment that has not
(1) OJ C 273 of 23.9.2000.                                                        undergone national type-approval, and which does not admit
                                                                                  other forms of evidence, equally reliable but less burdensome to
                                                                                  obtain, to prove that such equipment is in conformity with
                                                                                  requirements concerning the proper use of the radio frequencies
                                                                                  authorised under national law.
                                                                             2.   The provisions of the second sentence of Article 6(1),
                  JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                           Article 7(1) and Article 8(1) of Directive 1999/5/EC of the
                                                                                  European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 1999 on
                          (Sixth Chamber)                                         radio equipment and telecommunications terminal equipment
                                                                                  and the mutual recognition of their conformity confer on
                                                                                  individuals rights which may be relied upon before national
                           of 20 June 2002
                                                                                  courts even though the Directive itself has not been formally
                                                                                  implemented in national law within the period prescribed.
In Joined Cases C-388/00 and C-429/00 (Reference for a                            Article 7(2) of the Directive does not allow for the maintenance
preliminary ruling from the Giudice di pace di Genova):                           in force of legislation or administrative practice which, after
           Radiosistemi Srl v Prefetto di Genova (1)                              8 April 2000, prohibits the marketing or the putting into
                                                                                  service of radio equipment which does not bear the national
(Directive 1999/5/EC — Radio equipment and telecommuni-                           type-approval stamp, where it has been confirmed that such
cations terminal equipment — Compatibility of national                            equipment makes efficient and proper use of the radio frequencies
legislation prohibiting the marketing of radio apparatus                          authorised under national law, or where it is easy to verify that
which does not bear the national type-approval stamp —                            this is the case.
Whether penalties provided for by the national legislation
                             are precluded)                                  3.   The term ‘measure’ within the meaning of Article 1 of Decision
                                                                                  No 3052/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the
                           (2002/C 191/11)                                        Council of 13 December 1995 establishing a procedure for the
                                                                                  exchange of information on national measures derogating from
                                                                                  the principle of the free movement of goods within the
                     (Language of the case: Italian)                              Community includes any measures, other than judicial decisions,
                                                                                  taken by a Member State having the effect of restricting the free
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published            movement of goods lawfully produced or marketed in another
                    in the European Court Reports)                                Member State. Where the administrative authorities, having
                                                                                  seized a particular model or a particular type of product which
                                                                                  is lawfully marketed in another Member State, continue to
                                                                                  withhold that model or product after a check has been carried
In Joined Cases C-388/00 and C-429/00: Reference to the                           out by the public authorities responsible for technical checks to
Court under Article 234 EC by the Giudice di pace di Genoa                        ascertain that the product in question is in conformity with both
(Italy) for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending                       national and Community legislation, that is a ‘measure’ which
before that court between Radiosistemi Srl and Prefetto di                        must be notified to the Commission within the meaning of that
Genova, on the interpretation of Article 28 EC, of Directive                      provision.
1999/5/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of
9 March 1999 on radio equipment and telecommunications
terminal equipment and the mutual recognition of their                       4.   Where national provisions have been recognised as being
conformity (OJ 1999 L 91, p. 10), and of Decision No 3052/                        contrary to Community law, the imposition of fines or other
95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of                            coercive measures for infringements of those provisions is also
13 December 1995 establishing a procedure for the exchange                        incompatible with Community law.
of information on national measures derogating from the
principle of the free movement of goods within the Com-
munity (OJ 1995 L 321, p. 1), the Court (Sixth Chamber),                     (1) OJ C 28 of 27.1.2001.
composed of: F. Macken, President of the Chamber, N. Colne-
ric, J.-P. Puissochet, V. Skouris and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues
(Rapporteur), Judges; L.A. Geelhoed, Advocate General;