CELEX: C2001/200/22
Language: en
Date: 2001-07-14 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 10 May 2001 in Case C-144/99: Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of the Netherlands (Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Directive 93/13/EEC — Unfair terms in consumer contracts — Incomplete transposition of the directive into national law)

C 200/12               EN                       Official Journal of the European Communities                                          14.7.2001
                 JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                           Nomenclature is invalid inasmuch as it classifies the adapter
                                                                                 cards described in item 4 of its annex under heading No 8517
                                                                                 of the Combined Nomenclature.
                         (Fifth Chamber)
                                                                           3.    Items of computer network equipment which are connectable to
                                                                                 the central processing unit either directly or through one or
                                                                                 more other units, which are specifically designed as part of a
                         of 10 May 2001
                                                                                 data-processing system, which are able to accept or deliver data
                                                                                 in a form which can be used by the system and which have no
                                                                                 function that they would be capable of performing without the
in Case C-463/98 (reference for a preliminary ruling from                        assistance of an automatic data-processing machine must be
the Appeal Commissioners): Cabletron Systems Ltd v The                           classified under heading No 8471 of the Combined Nomencla-
                  Revenue Commissioners (1)                                      ture both before and after 1 January 1996.
(Common customs tariff — Tariff headings — Tariff                          (1) OJ C 71 of 13.3.1999.
classification of equipment used in local area networks —
Classification in the Combined Nomenclature — Validity of
        Regulations (EC) No 1638/94 and No 1165/95)
                         (2001/C 200/21)
                                                                                             JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                   (Language of the case: English)                                                    (Fifth Chamber)
In Case C-463/98: reference to the Court under Article 177                                            of 10 May 2001
of the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) from the Appeal
Commissioners (Ireland) for a preliminary ruling in the                    in Case C-144/99: Commission of the European Communi-
proceedings pending before them between Cabletron Systems                                ties v Kingdom of the Netherlands (1)
Ltd and The Revenue Commissioners — on the validity of
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1638/94 of 5 July 1994
                                                                           (Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations —
concerning the classification of certain goods in the Combined
                                                                           Directive 93/13/EEC — Unfair terms in consumer contracts
Nomenclature (OJ 1994 L 172, p. 5) and Commission
                                                                           — Incomplete transposition of the directive into national
Regulation (EC) No 1165/95 of 23 May 1995 concerning the
                                                                                                             law)
classification of certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature
(OJ 1995 L 117, p. 15), and on the interpretation of the
Combined Nomenclature of the Common Customs Tariff, set                                               (2001/C 200/22)
out in Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of
23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on
the Common Customs Tariff (OJ 1987 L 256, p. 1), as                                             (Language of the case: Dutch)
amended by Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2505/92 of
14 July 1992 (OJ 1992 L 267, p. 1), by Commission Regulation
(EEC) No 2551/93 of 10 August 1993 (OJ 1993 L 241, p. 1),                  (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
by Commission Regulation (EC) No 3115/94 of 20 December                                        in the European Court Reports)
1994 (OJ 1994 L 345, p. 1) and by Commission Regulation
(EC) No 3009/95 of 22 December 1995 (OJ 1995 L 319, p. 1)
— the Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of: A. La Pergola,                   In Case C-144/99: Commission of the European Communities
President of the Chamber, M. Wathelet, D.A.O. Edward                       (Agents: P. van Nuffel, assisted by M. van der Woude and
(Rapporteur), P. Jann and L. Sevón, Judges; F.G. Jacobs,                  L. Dommering-van Rongen) v Kingdom of the Netherlands
Advocate General; H.A. Rühl, Principal Administrator, for the              (Agents: M.A. Fierstra and J. van Bakel) — application for a
Registrar, has given a judgment on 10 May 2001, in which it                declaration that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and
has ruled:                                                                 administrative provisions necessary for the full transposition
                                                                           into Netherlands law of Articles 4(2) and 5 of Council Directive
                                                                           93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer
1.    Commission Regulation (EC) No 1638/94 of 5 July 1994                 contracts (OJ 1993 L 95, p. 29), the Kingdom of the
      concerning the classification of certain goods in the Combined       Netherlands has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 189
      Nomenclature is invalid inasmuch as it classifies the adapters,      of the EC Treaty (now Article 249 EC) and under that Directive
      link adapters and transceivers described in items 1 to 3 of its      — the Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of: A. La Pergola,
      annex under heading No 8517 of the Combined Nomenclature.            President of the Chamber, M. Wathelet, D.A.O. Edward, P. Jann
                                                                           (Rapporteur) and L. Sevón, Judges; A. Tizzano, Advocate
2.    Commission Regulation (EC) No 1165/95 of 23 May 1995                 General; R. Grass, has given a judgment on 10 May 2001, in
      concerning the classification of certain goods in the Combined       which it:
 ---pagebreak--- 14.7.2001                 EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                              C 200/13
1.    Declares that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and          2.    Article 7(c) of Directive 85/374 is to be interpreted as meaning
      administrative provisions necessary for the full transposition              that the exemption from liability where an activity has no
      into national law of Articles 4(2) and 5 of Council Directive               economic or business purpose does not extend to the case of a
      93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer                       defective product which has been manufactured and used in the
      contracts, the Kingdom of the Netherlands has failed to fulfil              course of a specific medical service which is financed entirely
      its obligations under that Directive;                                       from public funds and for which the patient is not required to
                                                                                  pay any consideration.
2.    Orders the Kingdom of the Netherlands to pay the costs.
                                                                            3.    Article 9 of Directive 85/374 is to be interpreted as meaning
                                                                                  that, save for non-material damage whose reparation is
(1) OJ C 226 of 7.8.1999.
                                                                                  governed solely by national law and the exclusions detailed in
                                                                                  that article as regards damage to an item of property, a Member
                                                                                  State may not restrict the types of material damage, resulting
                                                                                  from death or from personal injury, or from damage to or
                                                                                  destruction of an item of property, which are to be made good.
                                                                            4.    The national court is required, under Directive 85/374, to
                   JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                          examine under which head the circumstances of the case are to
                                                                                  be categorised, namely whether the case concerns damage
                            (Fifth Chamber)                                       covered either by point (a) or by point (b) of the first paragraph
                                                                                  of Article 9 or non-material damage which may possibly be
                                                                                  covered by national law. The national court may, however, not
                            of 10 May 2001                                        decline to award any damages at all under the Directive on the
                                                                                  ground that, where the other conditions of liability are fulfilled,
in Case C-203/99 (reference for a preliminary ruling from                         the damage incurred is not such as to fall under any of the
the Højesteret): Henning Veedfald v Århus Amtskommu-                              foregoing heads.
                                  ne (1)
                                                                            (1) OJ C 226 of 7.8.1999.
(Approximation of laws — Directive 85/374/EEC — Liab-
ility for defective products — Exemption from liability —
                               Conditions)
                            (2001/C 200/23)
                     (Language of the case: Danish)                                            JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published                                  (Fifth Chamber)
                     in the European Court Reports)
                                                                                                        of 10 May 2001
In Case C-203/99: reference to the Court under Article 177 of
the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) from the Højesteret                      in Joined Cases C-223/99 and C-260/99 (reference for a
(Supreme Court) (Denmark) for a preliminary ruling in the                   preliminary ruling from the Tribunale amministrativo
proceedings pending before that court between Henning                       regionale per la Lombardia): Agorà Srl v Ente Autonomo
Veedfald and Århus Amtskommune — on the interpretation                      Fiera Internazionale di Milano, and between Excelsior
of Article 7(a) and (c) and points (a) and (b) of the first                 Snc di Pedrotti Bruna & C. and Ente Autonomo Fiera
paragraph of Article 9 of Council Directive 85/374/EEC of                         Internazionale di Milano, Ciftat soc. coop. arl (1)
25 July 1985 on the approximation of the laws, regulations
and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning               (Public service contracts — Definition of contracting auth-
liability for defective products (OJ 1985 L 210, p. 29) — the                            orities — Body governed by public law)
Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of: A. La Pergola, President
of the Chamber, M. Wathelet, D.A.O. Edward, P. Jann (Rappor-
teur) and L. Sevón, Judges; D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer, Advocate                                           (2001/C 200/24)
General; H. von Holstein, Deputy Registrar, for the Registrar,
has given a judgment on 10 May 2001, in which it has ruled:
                                                                                                  (Language of the case: Italian)
1.    Article 7(a) of Council Directive 85/374/EEC of 25 July
      1985 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and
      administrative provisions of the Member States concerning             (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
      liability for defective products is to be interpreted as meaning                           in the European Court Reports)
      that a defective product is put into circulation when it is used
      during the provision of a specific medical service, consisting in     In Joined Cases C-223/99 and C-260/99: reference to the
      preparing a human organ for transplantation, and the damage           Court under Article 234 EC from the Tribunale amministrativo
      caused to the organ results from that preparatory treatment.          regionale (Regional Administrative Court) per la Lombardia