CELEX: C1996/145/03
Language: en
Date: 1996-05-18 00:00:00
Title: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Consiglio di Stato by order of that court of 6 December 1995 in the cases of 1. Maria Antonella Garofalo, 2. Giovanni Pagano, 3. Rosa Bruna Vitale, 4. Francesca Nuccio, 5. Giacomo Cangialosi, 6. Giacoma D'Amico, 7. Giulia Lombardo, 8. Emanuela Giovenco, 9. Caterina Lo Gaglio, 10. Daniela Guerrera, 11. Cesare Di Marco v. Ministero della Sanità and Local Health Authority No 58, Palermo (Cases C-69/96 to C-79/96)

No C 145/2              EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                       18 . 5 . 96
    specific damages, such as the exemplary damages                      Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Consiglio di Stato
    provided for by English law, pursuant to claims or                   by order of that court of 6 December 1995 in the cases of 1 .
    actions founded on Community law, if such damages                    Maria Antonella Garofalo, 2 . Giovanni Pagano, 3 . Rosa
    may be awarded pursuant to similar claims or actions                 Bruna Vitale, 4 . Francesca Nuccio, 5 . Giacomo Cangialosi,
    founded on domestic law.                                             6. Giacoma D'Amico, 7. Giulia Lombardo, 8 . Emanuela
                                                                         Giovenco, 9. Caterina Lo Gaglio, 10. Daniela Guerrera, 11 .
                                                                         Cesare Di Marco v. Ministero della Sanità and Locai Health
5 . The obligation for Member States to make good loss                                       Authority No 58 , Palermo
    or damage caused to individuals by breaches of
                                                                                           ( Cases C-69/96 to C-79/96 )
     Community law attributable to the State cannot be
    limited to damage sustained after the delivery of a                                             ( 96/C 145/03 )
    judgment of the Court finding the infringement in
    question.
                                                                         Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
(') OJ No C 92 , 2 . 4 . 1993 .                                          European Communities by orders of the Consiglio di Stato
    OJ No C 94, 3 . 4 . 1993 .                                           of 6 December 1995 , which were received at the Court
                                                                         Registry on March 1996 , for a preliminary ruling in the
                                                                         cases of 1 . Maria Antonella Garofalo, 2 . Giovanni Pagano,
                                                                         3 . Rosa Bruna Vitale, 4 . Francesca Nuccio, 5 . Giacomo
                                                                         Cangialosi , 6 . Giacoma D'Amico, 7. Giulia Lombardo, 8 .
                                                                         Emanuela Giovenco, 9 . Caterina Lo Gaglio, 10 . Daniela
                                                                         Guerrera , 11 . Cesare Di Marco v. Ministero délia Sanità
                                                                         ( Ministry of Health ) and Local Health Authority No 58 ,
    ORDER OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE COURT                                  Palermo, on the following questions :
                     of 26 February 1996
in Case C- 1 8 1/95 : Biogen Inc. v. Smithkline Beecham
                         Biologicals SA ( 1 )                            ( a ) Must the term 'court or tribunal' in Article 177 of the
                                                                               Treaty be interpreted extensively so as to include not
(Articles 20 and 37 of the Statute of the Court ofJustice of                   only judicial proceedings specifically defined as such in
the European Communities — Participation in proceedings                        national    law    but    also  contentious-administrative
            under Article 1 77 of the EC Treaty)                               proceedings characterized not only by impartiality, the
                          ( 96/ C 145/02 )                                     guarantee of full disclosure between parties, and so
                                                                               forth, but also by the fact that the decision cannot be
                                                                               revoked or amended by any other administrative of
                (Language of the case: French)                                 judicial authority ?
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be
         published in the European Court Reports)                        ( b ) Does the expression 'all those doctors who on
                                                                               31 December 1994 possess such a right' in Article 7 ( 2 )
                                                                               of Directive 86/457/EEC ( 1 ) refer to those who had
In Case C-181 /95 : reference to the Court under Article 177                   theoretically obtained entitlement to enter into a
of the EC Treaty from the Tribunal de Commerce                                 service relationship ( as employees, under contractual
( Commercial Court), Nivelles, Belgium, for a preliminary                      arrangements, as members of temporary staff, etc .)
ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between                    with the national health service, or only those who had
Biogen Inc . and Smithkline Beecham Biologicals SA — on                        already in fact entered into such a relationship ?
the interpretation of Council Regulation ( EEC ) No 1768/92
of 1 8 June 1 992 concerning the creation of a supplementary
protection certificate for medicinal products ( OJ 1992                   'c ) If the answer to the second question upholds the second
L 182 , p . 1 ) — the President of the Court, after hearing                    possibility, is the Directive to be interpreted as meaning
the Advocate-General, N. Fennelly, made an order on                            that the national authority is in any event entitled to
26 February 1996 , the operative part of which is as                           extend the term 'acquired rights' so as to include all
follows :                                                                      those who, on the date indicated, had acquired an
                                                                               ordinary certificate of entitlement to practise medicine,
                                                                               or as meaning that an 'acquired right' must be taken to
1 . The application to intervene by Research Corporation                       refer to a higher level of qualification than an ordinary
     Technologies Inc. is dismissed as inadmissible.                           certificate of entitlement to practise medicine ?
2.   There is no need to rule on costs.
                                                                         (') OJ No L 267, 19 . 9 . 1986 , p . 26 .
(!) OJ No C 208 , 12 . 8 . 1995 .