CELEX: C2001/161/14
Language: en
Date: 2001-06-02 00:00:00
Title: Case C-125/01: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Sozialgericht Leipzig, by order of that court of 21 February 2001 in the case of Peter Pflücke against Bundesanstalt für Arbeit

C 161/8                EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                        2.6.2001
b)     Failure to comply with Article 10 of                            3.     Is the Chamber obliged, pursuant to the case-law of the
       Directive 94/47/EC                                                    Court of Justice, to refrain from applying the provision
                                                                             concerning the prescriptive period?
Article 12 of Decree No 427/98 does not lay down any
penalties or specify any other type of consequence resulting           (1) OJ L 283, 28.10.1980, p. 3.
from a vendor’s failure to comply with its obligation to provide
any person requesting the same with a document setting out
at least brief and accurate information on the particulars
mentioned in points (a) to (g), (i) and (1) of the annex to the
directive. In particular, the decree does not provide for any
fine or similar sanction in the event of omission of the
particulars mentioned in points (a), (b), (c), (i) and (1) of the
annex to the directive.
                                                                       Action brought on 20 March 2001 by the Commission of
Furthermore, the information in question must be given in the            the European Communities against the Italian Republic
document mentioned not only to ensure effective protection
of purchasers, but also to avoid distortions of competition
between vendors at the level of the internal market.                                             (Case C-128/01)
For those reasons, the Commission submits that Article 10 of                                     (2001/C 161/15)
the directive has not been fully and properly transposed by the
Italian Republic.                                                      An action against the Italian Republic was brought before the
                                                                       Court of Justice of the European Communities on 20 March
                                                                       2001 by the Commission of the European Communities,
(1) OJ L 280, 1994, p. 83.                                             represented by Luca Visaggio, acting as Agent.
                                                                       The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                       —     declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations
                                                                             and administrative provisions necessary to comply with
                                                                             Council Directive 96/51/EC of 23 July 1996 (1) amending
                                                                             Directive 70/524/EEC concerning additives in feeding-
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Sozialgericht                    stuffs, or by failing to communicate such provisions, the
Leipzig, by order of that court of 21 February 2001 in the                   Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under
   case of Peter Pflücke against Bundesanstalt für Arbeit                    that directive and the Treaty;
                                                                       —     order the Italian Republic to pay the costs.
                         (Case C-125/01)
                         (2001/C 161/14)                               Pleas in law and main arguments
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                 According to Article 249 EC, directives are binding upon the
European Communities by order of the Sozialgericht Leipzig             Member States as to the result to be achieved. Article 10 EC
(Leipzig Social Court) of 21 February 2001, received at the            provides that the Member States are to take all appropriate
Court Registry on 19 March 2001, for a preliminary ruling in           measures, whether general or particular, to ensure fulfilment
the case of Peter Pflücke against Bundesanstalt für Arbeit on          of the obligations arising out of the Treaty or resulting from
the following questions:                                               action taken by the institutions of the Community, and to
                                                                       facilitate the achievement of the Community’s tasks.
1.    Is a prescriptive period for bringing claims for payment
      by the guarantee institution of outstanding wage claims
      compatible with Article 9 of Council Directive                   The Commission submits that, because the Italian Republic
      80/98/EEC (1) of 20 October 1980 on the approximation            failed to adopt, or to communicate, the provisions necessary
      of the laws of the Member States relating to the protection      to conform to the directive mentioned, it has failed to fulfil its
      of employees in the event of the insolvency of their             obligations under the directive and the Treaty.
      employer?
2.    Does the Court of Justice share the Chamber’s view that          (1) OJ L 235, 1996, p. 39.
      such a prescriptive period does not constitute a legal
      provision which is more favourable to employees within
      the meaning of Article 9 of Directive 80/987/EEC?