CELEX: C2000/302/22
Language: en
Date: 2000-10-21 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 6 July 2000 in Case C-73/99 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Sozialgericht Münster): Viktor Movrin v Landesversicherungsanstalt Westfalen (Social security — EC Treaty — Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 — Recipient of retirement pensions — Compulsory sickness insurance scheme in Member State of residence — Contribution — Grant under the legislation of another Member State)

C 302/12                 EN                       Official Journal of the European Communities                                           21.10.2000
      employment, vocational training and promotion, and working             Siegen (Germany) for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings
      conditions and Article 141(4) EC preclude national legislation         pending before that court between Margrit Dietrich and
      under which a candidate for a public post who belongs to the           Westdeutscher Rundfunk — on the interpretation of
      under-represented sex and possesses sufficient qualifications for      Article 2(a) and 1(3)(a) of Council Directive 90/270/EEC of
      that post must be chosen in preference to a candidate of the           29 May 1990 on the minimum safety and health requirements
      opposite sex who would otherwise have been appointed, where            for work with display screen equipment (fifth individual
      this is necessary to secure the appointment of a candidate of the      Directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive
      under-represented sex and the difference between the respective        89/391/EEC) (OJ 1990 L 156, p. 14) — the Court (Sixth
      merits of the candidates is not so great as to give rise to a          Chamber), composed of: J.C. Moitinho de Almeida (Rappor-
      breach of the requirement of objectivity in making appointments.       teur), President of the Chamber, R. Schintgen, C. Gulmann,
                                                                             J.-P. Puissochet and V. Skouris, Judges; A. Saggio, Advocate
2.    Article 2(1) and (4) of Directive 76/207 and Article 141(4)            General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment on 6 July
      EC also preclude national legislation of that kind where it            2000, in which it has ruled:
      applies only to procedures for filling a predetermined number of
      posts or to posts created as part of a specific programme of a         1.     The term ‘graphic display screen’, for the purposes of Article 2(a)
      particular higher educational institution allowing the appli-                 of Council Directive 90/270/EEC of 29 May 1990 on the
      cation of positive discrimination measures.                                   minimum safety and health requirements for work with display
                                                                                    screen equipment (fifth individual Directive within the meaning
3.    Article 2(1) and (4) of Directive 76/207 does not preclude a                  of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC), must be interpreted
      rule of national case-law under which a candidate belonging to                as including screens that display film recordings in analogue or
      the under-represented sex may be granted preference over a                    digital form.
      competitor of the opposite sex, provided that the candidates
      possess equivalent or substantially equivalent merits, where the       2.     Article 1(3)(a) of Directive 90/270 is to be interpreted as
      candidatures are subjected to an objective assessment which                   meaning that the term ‘control cabs for ... machinery’ does not
      takes account of the specific personal situations of all the                  extend to a job such as that at issue in the main proceedings, in
      candidates.                                                                   which analogue or digital images are processed with the aid of
                                                                                    technical devices and/or computer programmes in order to
4.    The question whether national rules providing for positive                    produce television broadcasts.
      discrimination in the making of appointments in higher
      education are lawful cannot depend on the level of the post to
      be filled.                                                             (1) OJ C 71 of 13.3.1999.
(1) OJ C 1 of 4.1.1999.
                                                                                                JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                  JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                                                                                                        (Sixth Chamber)
                           (Sixth Chamber)
                                                                                                          of 6 July 2000
                            of 6 July 2000
                                                                             in Case C-73/99 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
in Case C-11/99 (reference for a preliminary ruling from                     the Sozialgericht Münster): Viktor Movrin v Landesver-
the Arbeitsgericht Siegen): Margrit Dietrich v                                                 sicherungsanstalt Westfalen (1)
                   Westdeutscher Rundfunk (1)
                                                                             (Social security — EC Treaty — Council Regulation (EEC)
(Directive 90/270/EEC on the minimum safety and health                       No 1408/71 — Recipient of retirement pensions — Compul-
requirements for work with display screen equipment —                        sory sickness insurance scheme in Member State of residence
Scope — Meaning of display screen equipment for the                          — Contribution — Grant under the legislation of another
purposes of Article 2 — Meaning of ‘drivers’ cabs or control                                              Member State)
cabs for vehicles or machinery’ for the purposes of Article 1)
                                                                                                         (2000/C 302/22)
                           (2000/C 302/21)
                                                                                                  (Language of the case: German)
                    (Language of the case: German)
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published       (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                    in the European Court Reports)                                                in the European Court Reports)
In Case C-11/99: reference to the Court under Article 177 of                 In Case C-73/99: reference to the Court under Article 177 of
the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) from the Arbeitsgericht                   the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) by the Sozialgericht (Social
 ---pagebreak--- 21.10.2000                 EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                             C 302/13
Court) Münster, Germany, for a preliminary ruling in the                     of Belgium (Agent: A. Snoecx, assisted by F.P. Louis and
proceedings pending before that court between Viktor Movrin                  A. Vallery) — application for a declaration that, by communi-
and Landesversicherungsanstalt Westfalen (Regional Insurance                 cating to the Commission a programme for the implemen-
Office, Westphalia) on the interpretation of the EC Treaty and               tation of Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991
of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of 14 June 1971 on                    concerning urban waste water treatment (OJ 1991 L 135,
the application of social security schemes to employed persons,              p. 40) which does not comply with the directive as regards the
to self-employed persons and to members of their families                    Brussels-Capital Region, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to
moving within the Community, as amended and updated by                       fulfil its obligations under that directive and, in particular,
Council Regulation (EC) No 118/97 of 2 December 1996 (OJ                     Article 17 thereof — the Court (Sixth Chamber), composed
1997 L 28, p. 1) the Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of:                     of: J.C. Moitinho de Almeida, President of the Chamber,
J.C. Moitinho de Almeida (Rapporteur), President of the                      R. Schintgen, J.-P. Puissochet, G. Hirsch and F. Macken (Rap-
Chamber, R. Schintgen, C. Gulmann, J.-P. Puissochet and                      porteur), Judges; F.G. Jacobs, Advocate General; D. Louterman-
V. Skouris, Judges; F.G. Jacobs, Advocate General; H. von                    Hubeau, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a
Holstein, Deputy Registrar, for the Registrar, has given a                   judgment on 6 July 2000, in which it:
judgment on 6 July 2000, in which it held that:
                                                                             1.    Declares that, by communicating to the Commission a pro-
On a proper construction of Article 1(t) and Article 10(1) of Council              gramme for the implementation of Council Directive
Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of 14 June 1971 on the application                     91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning urban waste water
of social security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed                   treatment which does not comply with that directive as regards
persons and to members of their families moving within the                         the Brussels-Capital Region, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed
Community, as amended and updated by Council Regulation (EC)                       to fulfil its obligations under Article 17 of that directive;
No 118/97 of 2 December 1996, a sickness insurance contribution
subsidy provided for in the legislation of a Member State, such as the       2.    Orders the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.
subsidy at issue in the main proceedings, constitutes an old-age cash
benefit for the purposes of those provisions. The recipient of an old-
age pension payable under that legislation may claim such a subsidy          (1) OJ C 246 of 28.8.1999.
even if he is resident in another Member State where he is compulsorily
affiliated to the sickness insurance scheme.
(1) OJ C 136 of 15.5.1999.
                                                                                                    ORDER OF THE COURT
                                                                                                          of 21 June 2000
                    JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                    in Case C-514/99: French Republic v Commission of the
                                                                                                   European Communities (1)
                            (Sixth Chamber)
                                                                                (Application for annulment — Manifest inadmissibility)
                              of 6 July 2000
                                                                                                          (2000/C 302/24)
in Case C-236/99: Commission of the European Communi-
                    ties v Kingdom of Belgium (1)
                                                                                                    (Language of the case: French)
(Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Failure
                 to transpose Directive 91/271/EEC)
                                                                             (Provisional translation: the definitive translation will be published
                                                                                                   in the European Court Reports)
                             (2000/C 302/23)
                                                                             In Case C-514/99: French Republic (Agents: R. Abraham,
                       (Language of the case: French)                        K. Rispal-Bellanger and R. Loosli-Surrans) v Commission of
                                                                             the European Communities (Agents: D. Booß and G. Berscheid)
                                                                             — application for annulment of the Commission’s decision
                                                                             refusing to modify or revoke its Decision 1999/514/EC of
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published       23 July 1999 setting the date on which dispatch from the
                      in the European Court Reports)
                                                                             United Kingdom of bovine products under the date-based
                                                                             export scheme may commence by virtue of Article 6(5) of
In Case C-236/99: Commission of the European Communities                     Council Decision 98/256/EC (OJ 1999 L 195, p. 42) — the
(Agents: G. Valero Jordana and O. Couvert-Castéra) v Kingdom                 Court, composed of. G.C. Rodrı́guez Iglesias, President,