CELEX: C2003/007/24
Language: en
Date: 2003-01-11 00:00:00
Title: Case C-395/02: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Rechtbank van Eerste Aanleg (Antwerpen) by judgment of that Court of 4 November 2002 in the case of NV Transport service against 1. The Belgian State, and 2. BVBA Bea Cars

C 7/14                EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                        11.1.2003
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Rechtbank van                 Are vehicles which are designed for off-highway use and
Eerste Aanleg (Antwerpen) by judgment of that Court of                  intended for the transport and dumping of materials, and, in
4 November 2002 in the case of NV Transport service                     particular, are equipped for that purpose with an intricate,
     against 1. The Belgian State, and 2. BVBA Bea Cars                 versatile and precise tipping function, excluded from the scope
                                                                        of the term ‘dumper’ contained in heading 8704 10 of the
                                                                        CCT?
                       (Case C-395/02)
                         (2003/C 7/24)
                                                                        Reference for a preliminary ruling by the La Cour d’appel
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                  de Bruxelles by order of that Court of 6 November 2002
European Communities by judgment of the Rechtbank van                   in the case of 1. Clinique la Ramee, a non-profit-making
Eerste Aanleg (Court of First Instance) of 4 November 2002,             associationy, and 2. Winterthur Europe Assurance SA
received at the Court Registry on 11 November 2002, for a               against 1. Jean-Pierre Riehl, and 2. the Council of the
preliminary ruling in the case of NV Transport service against                                      European Union
1. The Belgian State, and 2. BVBA Bea Cars on the following
question:
                                                                                                     (Case C-397/02)
                                                                                                       (2003/C 7/26)
Does the principle of the neutrality of value added tax preclude
a Member State from claiming additional VAT from a taxable
person which has issued an invoice, correctly or otherwise, in
accordance with the VAT exemption applicable to intra-
Community supplies (Article 39a of the BTW-Wetboek                      Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
(Belgian VAT Code)) where it is evident that the VAT has been           European Communities by order of the La Cour d’appel de
paid by the end user and transferred to the Member State by             Bruxelles (Court of Appeal, Brussels) of 6 November 2002,
the person who drew up the invoice issued to that end user?             received at the Court Registry on 11 November 2002, for a
                                                                        preliminary ruling in the case of 1. Clinique la Ramee, a
                                                                        non-profit-making associationy, and 2. Winterthur Europe
                                                                        Assurance SA against 1. Jean-Pierre Riehl, and 2. the Council
                                                                        of the European Union on the following question:
                                                                        Must Article 85a of the Staff Regulations of officials of the
                                                                        European Communities, as laid down by Articles 2 and 3 of
                                                                        Regulation (EEC, Euratom, ECSC) No 259/68 (1) of the Council
                                                                        of 29 February 1968 and by the regulations amending that
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Gerechtshof                   regulation, be interpreted as conferring on the Communities
(Douanekamer) te Amsterdam by judgment of that Court                    the right to claim from a third party liable for the death of an
of 6 November 2002 in the case of DFDS B.V. against                     official reimbursement in full of the survivor’s pension paid to
          Head of the Rotterdam Customs District                        the surviving spouse pursuant to Articles 79 and 79a of those
                                                                        Staff Regulations, although the legislation applicable to the
                                                                        right to receive payment of compensation for the damage
                                                                        provides that the right to a survivor’s pension is unconnected
                       (Case C-396/02)                                  with the obligation of the perpetrator of a wrongful act to
                                                                        compensate in full for the damage, and although the damage
                                                                        suffered by the surviving husband as a result of the loss of the
                         (2003/C 7/25)                                  deceased wife’s income is less than the amount of the survivor’s
                                                                        pension paid to him?
                                                                        (1 ) Regulation (EEC, Euratom, ECSC) No 259/68 of the Council of
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                       29 February 1968 laying down the Staff Regulations of Officials
European Communities by judgment of the Gerechtshof                          and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the
                                                                             European Communities and instituting special measures tempor-
(Douanekamer) te Amsterdam (Amsterdam Regional Court of
                                                                             arily applicable to officials of the Commission (English special
Appeal — Customs Chamber) of 6 November 2002, received                       edition: Series-I 68(I) P. 30).
at the Court Registry on 11 November 2002, for a preliminary
ruling in the case of DFDS B.V. against Head of the Rotterdam
Customs District on the following question: