CELEX: C2003/304/10
Language: en
Date: 2003-12-13 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 23 October 2003 in Case C-109/02: Commission of the European Communities v Federal Republic of Germany (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Sixth VAT Directive — National legislation providing for a reduced rate for musical ensembles and soloists provided the latter organise the concert themselves)

13.12.2003               EN                          Official Journal of the European Union                                                 C 304/7
3.    Protocol No 2 concerning Article 119 of the Treaty establishing        1.    Articles 1(4)(k) and 6(8) of Council Directive 90/496/EEC of
      the European Community and the Protocol concerning                           24 September 1990 on nutrition labelling for foodstuffs must
      Article 141 EC annexed to the EC Treaty are to be interpreted                be interpreted as meaning that, first, the value of a nutrient
      as precluding the application of Article 119 of the Treaty and               such as vitamin C which is indicated on a foodstuff following
      Article 141(1) and (2) EC respectively to benefits provided                  an analysis of the foodstuff carried out by the manufacturer
      under an occupational social security scheme payable in respect              may correspond to the value of that nutrient in the foodstuff in
      of periods of employment prior to 17 May 1990, subject to the                question at the end of its minimum conservation period and,
      exception for workers or those claiming under them who have                  second, that the determination of the permissible differences
      before that date initiated legal proceedings or raised an                    between the value stated and the value established in the course
      equivalent claim under the applicable national law.                          of an official check is, in the present state of Community law,
                                                                                   within the competence of the Member States.
(1) OJ C 109 of 4.5.2002.                                                    2.    Consideration of the third question has not disclosed any factor
                                                                                   of such a kind as to affect the validity of Directive 90/496.
                                                                             (1) OJ C 109 of 4.5.2002.
                  JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                          (Sixth Chamber)
                                                                                               JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                        of 23 October 2003
                                                                                                        (Fifth Chamber)
in Case C-40/02 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Unabhängiger Verwaltungssenat im Land Niederöster-                                               of 23 October 2003
reich): Margareta Scherndl v Bezirkshauptmannschaft
                            Korneuburg (1)
                                                                             in Case C-109/02: Commission of the European Communi-
                                                                                         ties v Federal Republic of Germany (1)
(Directive 90/496/EEC — Nutrition labelling of foodstuffs
— Vitamin content — Declared value — Average value
— Reference date — Permissible differences between the                       (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Sixth
declared value and the value established in the course of an                 VAT Directive — National legislation providing for a
     official check — Proportionality — Legal certainty)                     reduced rate for musical ensembles and soloists provided the
                                                                                          latter organise the concert themselves)
                           (2003/C 304/09)
                                                                                                        (2003/C 304/10)
                    (Language of the case: German)
                                                                                                 (Language of the case: German)
(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-40/02: Reference to the Court under Article 234 EC
by the Unabhängiger Verwaltungssenat im Land Niederöster-                    In Case C-109/02, Commission of the European Communities
reich (Austria) for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings                  (Agents: E. Traversa and G. Wilms) v Federal Republic of
pending before that court between Margareta Scherndl and                     Germany (Agents: W.-D. Plessing and M. Lumma): Application
Bezirkshauptmannschaft Korneuburg, on the interpretation                     for a declaration that, by applying a reduced rate of value
and validity of Articles 1(4)(k) and 6(8) of Council Directive               added tax to services provided directly to the public by musical
90/496/EEC of 24 September 1990 on nutrition labelling for                   ensembles or for a concert organiser and to services provided
foodstuffs (OJ 1990 L 276, p. 40), the Court (Sixth Chamber),                directly to the public by soloists, but applying the standard
composed of: J.-P. Puissochet, President of the Chamber,                     rate of that tax to the services of soloists working for an
R. Schintgen, V. Skouris, F. Macken and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues                 organiser, the Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil
(Rapporteur), Judges; J. Mischo, Advocate General; R. Grass,                 its obligations under the third subparagraph of Article 12(3)(a)
Registrar, has given a judgment on 23 October 2003, in which                 of the Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977
it has ruled:                                                                on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating
 ---pagebreak--- C 304/8                  EN                          Official Journal of the European Union                                           13.12.2003
to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax:                        Administration des douanes et droits indirects and Rioglass SA,
uniform basis of assessment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1), as amended                Transremar SL on the interpretation of Article 28 EC, the
by Council Directive 1999/49/EC of 25 May 1999 amending,                     Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of: J.-P. Puissochet, President
with regard to the level of the standard rate, Directive 77/388              of the Chamber, C. Gulmann, V. Skouris (Rapporteur),
(OJ 1999 L 139, p. 27), the Court (Fifth Chamber), composed                  F. Macken and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, Judges; J. Mischo,
of: D.A.O. Edward, acting as President of the Fifth Chamber,                 Advocate General; M.-F. Contet, Principal Administrator, for
A. La Pergola and P. Jann (Rapporteur), Judges; J. Mischo,                   the Registrar, has given a judgment on 23 October 2003, in
Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment                  which it has ruled:
on 23 October 2003, in which it:
                                                                             Article 28 EC is to be interpreted as precluding the implementation,
1.    Declares that, by applying a reduced rate of value added tax to        pursuant to a legislative measure of a Member State concerning
      services provided directly to the public by musical ensembles or       intellectual property, of procedures for detention by the customs
      for a concert organiser and to services provided directly to the       authorities of goods lawfully manufactured in another Member State
      public by soloists, but applying the standard rate of that tax to      and intended, following their transit through the territory of the first
      the services of soloists working for an organiser, the Federal         Member State, to be placed on the market in a non-member country.
      Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its obligations under
      the third subparagraph of Article 12(3)(a) of the Sixth Council
      Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation               (1) OJ C 131 of 1.6.2002.
      of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes —
      Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assess-
      ment, as amended by Council Directive 1999/49/EC of
      25 May 1999 amending, with regard to the level of the
      standard rate, Directive 77/388;
2.    Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs.
(1) OJ C 131 of 1.6.2002.
                                                                                              JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                                                                                                      (Sixth Chamber)
                                                                                                    of 23 October 2003
                  JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                      in Case C-154/02 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
                                                                                        the Hässleholms tingsrätt): Jan Nilsson (1)
                          (Sixth Chamber)
                                                                             (International trade in endangered species of wild fauna
                        of 23 October 2003                                   and flora — CITES — Regulation (EC) No 338/97 —
                                                                             Articles 2(w) and 8(3) — Notion of ‘worked specimen’ —
in Case C-115/02 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from                    Stuffed animal — Concept of ‘specimen acquired more than
the Cour de cassation): Administration des douanes et                        50 years previously’ — Manner of acquisition — Exemption
      droits indirects v Rioglass SA, Transremar SL (1)                        — Regulation (EC) No 1808/2001 — Articles 29 and 32)
(Free movement of goods — Measures having equivalent                                                   (2003/C 304/12)
effect — Procedures for detention under customs control —
Goods in transit intended for the market of a non-member
              country — Spare parts for motor cars)                                             (Language of the case: Swedish)
                           (2003/C 304/11)                                   (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                                                                                                in the European Court Reports)
                     (Language of the case: French)
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                    in the European Court Reports)                           In Case C-154/02: Reference to the Court under Article 234
                                                                             EC by Hässleholms tingsrätt (Sweden) for a preliminary ruling
                                                                             in the criminal proceedings pending before that court against
                                                                             Jan Nilsson, on the interpretation of Council Regulation (EC)
In Case C-115/02: Reference to the Court under Article 234                   No 338/97 of 9 December 1996 on the protection of species
EC by the Cour de cassation (France) for a preliminary                       of wild fauna and flora by regulating trade therein (OJ 1997
ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between                  L 61, p. 1), as amended by Commission Regulation (EC)