CELEX: C2002/084/07
Language: en
Date: 2002-04-06 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 29 November 2001 in Case C-221/99 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Giudice di Pace di Genova ): Giuseppe Conte v Stefania Rossi (Architects' fees — Summary procedure for the recovery of debts — Opinion of the professional association — Articles 5 and 85 of the EC Treaty (now Articles 10 EC and 81 EC))

C 84/4                   EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                            6.4.2002
2.    The fact that, in concluding a collective agreement specific to       1.    Declares that, by providing for a second system of training
      one undertaking, a domestic employer can pay wages lower                    leading to entry to the profession of dentist, which does not
      than the minimum wage laid down in a collective agreement                   comply with Council Directive 78/687/EEC of 25 July 1978
      declared to be generally applicable, whilst an employer estab-              concerning the coordination of provisions laid down by law,
      lished in another Member State cannot do so, constitutes an                 regulation or administrative action in respect of the activities of
      unjustified restriction on the freedom to provide services.                 dental practitioners, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its
                                                                                  obligations under that directive.
(1) OJ C 204 of 17.7.1999.                                                  2.    Dismisses the remainder of the action.
                                                                            3.    Orders the Italian Republic and the Commission of the
                                                                                  European Communities to pay their own costs.
                                                                            (1) OJ C 226 of 7.8.1999.
                  JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                            (Fifth Chamber)
                       of 29 November 2001
in Case C-202/99: Commission of the European Communi-                                        JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                      ties v Italian Republic (1)
                                                                                                      (Fifth Chamber)
(Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations —
Directive 78/687/EEC — Maintenance of a second system of
training leading to entry to the profession of dentist —                                          of 29 November 2001
Maintenance of the possibility of dual registration in the
register of doctors and in that of dentists for doctors                     in Case C-221/99 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
      mentioned in Article 19 of Directive 78/686/EEC)                      the Giudice di Pace di Genova ): Giuseppe Conte v
                                                                                                      Stefania Rossi (1)
                             (2002/C 84/06)
                                                                            (Architects’ fees — Summary procedure for the recovery of
                     (Language of the case: Italian)                        debts — Opinion of the professional association — Articles 5
                                                                              and 85 of the EC Treaty (now Articles 10 EC and 81 EC))
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                    in the European Court Reports)                                                     (2002/C 84/07)
                                                                                                (Language of the case: Italian)
In Case C-202/99: Commission of the European Communities
(Agents: E. Traversa and B. Mongin) v Italian Republic (Agent:              (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
U. Leanza, assisted by P. G. Ferri) — application for a                                        in the European Court Reports)
declaration that, by maintaining a second system of training
for entry into the dental profession, which is contrary to
Council Directive 78/687/EEC of 25 July 1978 concerning the
coordination of provisions laid down by law, regulation or                  In Case C-221/99: reference to the Court under Article 234
administrative action in respect of the activities of dental                EC from the Giudice di Pace di Genova (Magistrate’s Court,
practitioners (OJ 1978 L 233, p. 10), and by maintaining the                Genoa) (Italy) for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings
possibility for doctors who practise as dentists to be doubly               pending before that court between Giuseppe Conte and
registered in the registers of medical and dental practitioners,            Stefania Rossi — on the interpretation of Articles 5 and 85 of
the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under             the EC Treaty (now Articles 10 EC and 81 EC) — the Court
that directive — the Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of:                    (Fifth Chamber), composed of: S. von Bahr, President of the
P. Jann, President of the Chamber, D.A.O. Edward (Rappor-                   Fourth Chamber, acting for the President of the Fifth Chamber,
teur), A. La Pergola, L. Sevón and C.W.A. Timmermans, Judges;              D.A.O. Edward, A. La Pergola, M. Wathelet (Rapporteur) and
P. Léger, Advocate General; L. Hewlett, Administrator, for the              C.W.A. Timmermans, Judges; P. Léger, Advocate General;
Registrar, has given a judgment on 29 November 2001, in                     H. von Holstein, Deputy Registrar, for the Registrar, has given
which it:                                                                   a judgment on 29 November 2001, in which it has ruled:
 ---pagebreak--- 6.4.2002                 EN                       Official Journal of the European Communities                                               C 84/5
1.    Articles 5 and 85 of the EC Treaty (now Articles 10 EC and             1.    Sets aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the
      81 EC) do not preclude national legislation which, in the                    European Communities of 22 April 1999 in Case T-112/97
      context of a summary procedure for the recovery of debts relating            Monsanto v Commission;
      to the fees of an architect, a member of a professional
      association, requires the court seised of the dispute to follow the    2.    Dismisses the application for annulment of Decision C(97)
      opinion of that association in relation to the settlement of those           148 final of the Commission of 14 January 1997 concerning
      fees in so far as that opinion ceases to be binding where the                the definition of a position, in accordance with Article 175 of
      debtor initiates proceedings inter partes.                                   the EC Treaty, on the inclusion of bovine somatotrophin in
                                                                                   Annex II to Regulation No 2377/90;
2.    Articles 5 and 85 of the Treaty do not preclude national
      legislation which provides that the members of a profession may        3.    Orders Monsanto Company to bear its own costs and to
      set at their discretion the fees for certain services which they             pay the costs incurred by the Commission of the European
      perform.                                                                     Communities both before the Court of First Instance and the
                                                                                   Court of Justice;
(1) OJ C 246 of 28.8.1999.                                                   4.    Orders the French Republic to bear its own costs incurred both
                                                                                   before the Court of First Instance and the Court of Justice.
                                                                             (1) OJ C 265 of 18.9.1999.
                  JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                           (Fifth Chamber)                                                     JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                           8 January 2002                                                              5 February 2002
                                                                             in Case C-255/99 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
in Case C-248/99 P: French Republic v Monsanto Com-                                   the Oberster Gerichtshof): Anna Humer (1)
                                pany (1)
                                                                             (Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 — Definition of ‘family
(Appeal — Regulation (EEC) No 2377/90 — Application to                       benefits’ — Payment of advances on maintenance payments
include a recombinant bovine somatotrophin (BST) in the                      — Condition that the minor child must be resident within
list of substances not subject to a maximum residue limit —                     the national territory — Entitlement to benefits abroad)
Prohibition on placing that substance on the market —
            Rejection of the application for inclusion)                                                 (2002/C 84/09)
                            (2002/C 84/08)                                                       (Language of the case: German)
                    (Language of the case: English)                          (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                                                                                                 in the European Court Reports)
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                    in the European Court Reports)
                                                                             In Case C-255/99: Reference to the Court under Article 234 EC
                                                                             by the Oberster Gerichtshof (Austria) for a preliminary ruling
                                                                             in the proceedings pending before that court concerning the
In Case C-248/99 P, French Republic (agents: initially                       minor Anna Humer, on the interpretation of Articles 3, 4(1)(h),
R. Abraham and J.-F. Dobelle and K. Rispal-Bellanger and                     73 and 74 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of
C. Vasak, and, subsequently, G. de Bergues): Appeal against                  14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to
the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the European                  employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members
Communities (Second Chamber) of 22 April 1999 in                             of their families moving within the Community, as amended
Case T-112/97 Monsanto v Commission [1999] ECR II-1277,                      and updated by Council Regulation (EC) No 118/97 of
seeking to have that judgment set aside, the other parties to                2 December 1996 (OJ 1997 L 28, p. 1), and of Articles 3(1)
the proceedings being: Monsanto Company, registered in                       and 7(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 of the Council of
accordance with the laws of the State of Delaware (United                    15 October 1968 on freedom of movement for workers
States of America), (agents: C. Stanbrook, QC, and D. Holland,               within the Community (OJ, English Special Edition 1968 (II),
barrister), and Commission of the European Communities                       p. 475), the Court, composed of: P. Jann, President of the First
(agents: J.-L. Dewost, R. Wainwright and T. Christoforou) the                and Fifth Chambers, acting for the President, F. Macken
Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of: P. Jann, President of the                and N. Colneric (Presidents of Chambers), C. Gulmann,
Chamber, A. La Pergola, L. Sevón (Rapporteur), M. Wathelet                  D.A.O. Edward (Rapporteur), A. La Pergola, M. Wathelet,
and C.W.A. Timmermans, Judges, Advocate General: S. Alber,                   R. Schintgen and V. Skouris, Judges, Advocate General:
Registrar: L. Hewlett, Administrator, has given a judgment on                S. Alber, Registrar: H.A. Rühl, Principal Administrator, has
8 January 2002, in which it:                                                 given a judgment on 5 February 2002, in which it has ruled: