CELEX: C2001/275/05
Language: en
Date: 2001-09-29 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 12 July 2001 in Case C-399/98 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per la Lombardia): Ordine degli Architetti delle Province di Milano et Lodi v Comune di Milano (Public works contracts — Directive 93/37/EEC — National legislation under which the holder of building or planning permission may execute infrastructure works directly in lieu of tax — National legislation permitting the public authorities to negotiate directly with an individual the terms of administrative acts concerning him)

29.9.2001               EN                       Official Journal of the European Communities                                            C 275/3
1.   Article 22(1)(c) and (i) of Council Regulation (EEC)                                    JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
     No 1408/71 of 14 June 1971 on the application of socia1
     security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed persons                                  (Sixth Chamber)
     and to members of their families moving within the Community,
     in the version amended and updated by Council Regulation                                          of 12 July 2001
     (EEC) No 2001/83 of 2 June 1983, is to be interpreted as
     meaning that, when an insured person has been authorised by            in Case C-399/98 (reference for a preliminary ruling
     the competent institution to go to another Member State for            from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per la
     treatment, the institution of the place where the treatment is         Lombardia): Ordine degli Architetti delle Province di
     provided is required to provide him with benefits in kind in                       Milano et Lodi v Comune di Milano (1)
     accordance with the rules on assumption of the costs of health
     care which the latter administers, as if the person concerned          (Public works contracts — Directive 93/37/EEC — National
     were registered with it.                                               legislation under which the holder of building or planning
                                                                            permission may execute infrastructure works directly in
     Where the request of an insured person for authorisation on the        lieu of tax — National legislation permitting the public
     basis of Article 22(1) (c) of that regulation as been refused by       authorities to negotiate directly with an individual the terms
     the competent institution and it is subsequently established that                   of administrative acts concerning him)
     such refusal was unfounded, the person concerned is entitled to
     be reimbursed directly by the competent institution by an                                        (2001/C 275/05)
     amount equivalent to that which would have been borne by the
     institution of the place of stay under the rules laid down by the                          (Language of the case: Italian)
     legislation applied by the latter institution if authorisation had
     been properly granted in the first place.                              (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                                                                                               in the European Court Reports)
     As Article 22 of that regulation is not intended to regulate any
     reimbursement at the tariffs in force in the Member State of           In Case C-399/98: reference to the Court under Article 177 of
     registration, it does not have the effect of preventing or             the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) from the Tribunale
     prescribing payment by that State of additional reimbursement          Amministrativo Regionale per la Lombardia (Regional Admin-
     covering the difference between the system of cover laid down by       istrative Court of Lombardy) (Italy) for a preliminary ruling in
     the legislation of that State and the system applied by the            the proceedings pending before that court between Ordine
     Member State of stay, where the former is more advantageous            degli Architetti delle Province di Milano et Lodi, Piero De
     than the latter and such reimbursement is provided for by the          Amicis, Consiglio Nazionale degli Architetti, Leopoldo Freyrie
     legislation of the Member State of registration.                       and Comune di Milano, Interveners: Pirelli SpA, Milano
                                                                            Centrale Servizi SpA, Fondazione Teatro alla Scala, formerly
     Article 59 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 49          Ente Autonomo Teatro alla Scala — on the interpretation of
     EC) is to be interpreted as meaning that, if the reimbursement         Council Directive 93/37/EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning the
     of costs incurred on hospital services provided in a Member            coordination of procedures far the award of public works
     State of stay, calculated under the rules in force in that State, is   contracts (OJ 1993 L 199, p. 54) — the Court (Sixth Chamber),
     less than the amount which application of the legislation in           composed of: C. Gulmann, President of the Chamber, V. Skou-
     force in the Member State of registration would afford to a            ris (Rapporteur), J-P. Puissochet, R. Schintgen and F. Macken,
     person receiving hospital treatment in that State, additional          Judges; P. Léger, Advocate General; L. Hewlett, Administrator,
     reimbursement covering that difference must be granted to the          for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 12 July 2001, the
     insured person by the competent institution.                           operative part of which is as follows:
2.   Article 36 of Regulation No 1408/71, in the version amended            Council Directive 93/37/EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning the
     and updated by Regulation No 2001/83, cannot be interpreted            coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts
     as meaning that it follows from that provision that a covered          precludes national urban development legislation under which, in
     person who has requested authorisation on the basis of                 disregard of the procedures laid down in the Directive, the holder of a
     Article 22(1)(c) of that regulation and been refused by the            building permit or planning permission may execute an infrastructure
     competent institution is entitled to reimbursement of all the          work directly, in return for exemption, wholly or in art, from the
     medical costs which he incurred in the Member State in which           charge payable upon such permission being granted, in cases where
     he received treatment once it is established that the rejection of     the value of that work is not less than the ceiling fixed by the
     his request for authorisation was unfounded.                           Directive.
(1) OJ C 397 of 19.12.1998.                                                 (1) OJ C 1 of 4.1.1999.