CELEX: C2003/031/04
Language: en
Date: 2003-02-08 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 12 December 2002 in Case C-385/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden): F. W. L. de Groot v Staatssecretaris van Financiën (Free movement of workers — Tax convention — Netherlands rules on the avoidance of double taxation)

C 31/2                  EN                           Official Journal of the European Union                                              8.2.2003
A. Dal Ferro) appeal against the judgment of the Court of First                               JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
Instance of the European Communities (Fourth Chamber) of
8 June 2000, in Joined Cases T-79/96, T-260/97 and T-117/                                              (Fifth Chamber)
98 Camar and Tico v Commission and Council [2000] ECR II-
2193, seeking to have that judgment set aside, the other parties                                   of 12 December 2002
to the proceedings being: Camar Srl, established in Florence
(Italy), (avocats: W. Viscardini Donà, M. Paolin and S. Donà),               in Case C-324/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
applicant at first instance in Joined Cases T-79/96, T-260/97                the Finanzgericht Münster): Lankhorst-Hohorst GmbH v
and T-117/98, Tico Srl, established in Padua (Italy), (avocats:                                    Finanzamt Steinfurt (1)
W. Viscardini Donà, M. Paolin and S. Donà), applicant at first
instance in Case T-117/98, Council of the European Union                     (Freedom of establishment — Tax provisions — Corporation
(Agent: by F. Ruggeri Laderchi), defendant at first instance in              tax — Covert distribution of profits — Tax credit —
Case T-260/97, French Republic (Agents: C. Vasak and G. de                             Coherence of the tax system — Tax evasion)
Bergues) intervener at first instance in Joined Cases T-79/96
and T-260/97, and Italian Republic (Agent: U. Leanza, assisted                                          (2003/C 31/03)
by F. Quadri), intervener at first instance in Case T-79/96, —
the Court, composed of: G.C. Rodríguez Iglesias, President,                                     (Language of the case: German)
J.-P. Puissochet, M. Wathelet, R. Schintgen (Rapporteur) and
C.W.A. Timmermans, (Presidents of Chambers), C. Gulmann,                     (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
D.A.O. Edward, A. La Pergola, P. Jann, V. Skouris, F. Macken,                                   in the European Court Reports)
N. Colneric, S. von Bahr, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues and A. Rosas,
Judges; C. Stix-Hackl, Advocate General; R. Grass, for the
                                                                             In Case C-324/00: Reference to the Court under Article 234
Registrar, has given a judgment on 10 December 2002, in
                                                                             EC by the Finanzgericht Münster (Germany) for a preliminary
which it:
                                                                             ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between
                                                                             Lankhorst-Hohorst GmbH and Finanzamt Steinfurt, on the
                                                                             interpretation of Article 43 EC, the Court (Fifth Chamber),
                                                                             composed of: M. Wathelet (Rapporteur), President of the
1.    Set aside the judgment of 8 June 2000 in the Court of First            Chamber, C.W.A. Timmermans, D.A.O. Edward, P. Jann and
      instance in Joined Cases T-79/96, T-260/97 and T-117/98                A. Rosas, Judges; J. Mischo, Advocate General; L. Hewlett,
      Camar and Tico v Commission and Council in so far as it                Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment
      allowed, in Case T-117/98, the application for annulment of            on 12 December 2002, in which it has ruled:
      the Decision of the Commission of the European Communities
      of 23 April 1998 rejecting the application made by Camar Srl           Article 43 EC is to be interpreted as precluding a measure such as
      and Tico Srl on the basis of Article 16(3) of Council Regulation       that contained in Paragraph 8a(1), Head 2, of the Körperschaft-
      (EEC) No 404/93 of 13 February 1993 on the common                      steuergesetz (Law on corporation tax).
      organisation of the markets in the banana sector;
                                                                             (1 ) OJ C 316 of 4.11.2000.
2.    Dismisses the remainder of the appeal;
                                                                                              JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
3.    Dismisses the application annulment in Case T-117/98 as
      inadmissible;                                                                                    (Fifth Chamber)
                                                                                                   of 12 December 2002
4.    Order Camar Srl and Tico Srl to pay the costs in Case T-117/           in Case C-385/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
      98;                                                                    the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden): F. W. L. de Groot v
                                                                                            Staatssecretaris van Financiën ( 1)
5.    Orders the parties to bear their own costs in the appeal               (Free movement of workers — Tax convention — Nether-
      proceedings.                                                                   lands rules on the avoidance of double taxation)
                                                                                                        (2003/C 31/04)
                                                                                                 (Language of the case: Dutch)
( 1) OJ C 302 of 21.10.2000.
                                                                             (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                                                                                                in the European Court Reports)
                                                                             In Case C-385/00: Reference to the Court under Article 234
                                                                             EC by the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands) for a
 ---pagebreak--- 8.2.2003                 EN                            Official Journal of the European Union                                                 C 31/3
preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that                      cation for annulment of Council Decision 2001/469/EC of
court between F. W. L. de Groot and Staatssecretaris van                       14 May 2001 concerning the conclusion on behalf of the
Financiën, on the interpretation of Article 48 of the EC Treaty                European Community of the Agreement between the Govern-
(now, after amendment, Article 39 EC) and Article 7 of                         ment of the United States of America and the European
Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 of the Council of 15 October                       Community on the coordination of energy-efficient labelling
1968 on freedom of movement for workers within the                             programs for office equipment (OJ 2001 L 172, p. 1), the Court
Community (OJ, English Special Edition 1968 (II), p. 475), the                 (Fifth Chamber), composed of: M. Wathelet (Rapporteur),
Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of: M. Wathelet (Rappor-                       President of the Chamber, D.A.O. Edward, A. La Pergola,
teur), President of the Chamber, C.W.A. Timmermans,                            P. Jann and S. von Bahr, Judges; S. Alber, Advocate General;
D.A.O. Edward, P. Jann and A. Rosas, Judges; P. Léger,                         H.A. Rühl, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, has given
Advocate General; M.-F. Contet, Administrator, for the Regis-                  a judgment on 12 December 2002, in which it:
trar, has given a judgment on 12 December 2002, in which it
has ruled:
                                                                               1.    Annuls Council Decision 2001/469/EC of 14 May 2001
1.    Article 48 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 39                  concerning the conclusion on behalf of the European Community
      EC) precludes rules such as those at issue in the main                         of the Agreement between the Government of the United States
      proceedings — irrespective of whether or not they are laid down                of America and the European Community on the coordination
      in a convention for the avoidance of double taxation — whereby                 of energy-efficient labelling programs for office equipment;
      a taxpayer forfeits, in the calculation of the income tax payable
      by him in his State of residence, part of the tax-free amount of         2.    Orders the Council of the European Union to pay the costs.
      that income and of his personal tax advantages because, during
      the year in question, he also received income in another Member
      State which was taxed in that State without his personal and             (1 ) OJ C 275 of 29.9.2001.
      family circumstances being taken into account.
2.    Community law contains no specific requirement with regard to
      the way in which the State of residence must take into account
      the personal and family circumstances of a worker who, during
      a particular tax year, received income in that State and in
      another Member State, except that the conditions governing the
      way in which the State of residence takes those circumstances
      into account must not constitute discrimination, either direct or
      indirect, on grounds of nationality, or an obstacle to the exercise                       JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
      of a fundamental freedom guaranteed by the EC Treaty.
                                                                                                      of 10 December 2002
( 1) OJ C 372 of 23.12.2000.
                                                                               in Case C-491/01 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
                                                                               the High Court of Justice (England & Wales), Queen’s
                                                                               Bench Division (Administrative Court): The Queen v
                                                                               Secretary of State for Health, ex parte: British American
                  JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                        Tobacco (Investments) Ltd and Imperial Tobacco Ltd,
                                                                               supported by Japan Tobacco Inc. and JT International
                           (Fifth Chamber)                                                                       SA (1)
                       of 12 December 2002                                     (Directive 2001/37/EC — Manufacture, presentation and
                                                                               sale of tobacco products — Validity — Legal basis —
in Case C-281/01: Commission of the European Communi-                          Articles 95 EC and 133 EC — Interpretation — Applicability
            ties v Council of the European Union ( 1)                          to tobacco products manufactured in the Community and
                                                                                        intended for export to non-member countries)
(International agreements — Community competence —
Legal basis — Articles 133 EC and 175(1) EC — Energy
Star Agreement — Energy-efficient labelling programmes                                                     (2003/C 31/06)
                        for office equipment)
                            (2003/C 31/05)                                                         (Language of the case: English)
                    (Language of the case: English)
                                                                               In Case C-491/01: Reference to the Court under Article 234
In Case C-281/01, Commission of the European Communities                       EC by the High Court of Justice (England and Wales), Queen’s
(Agents: H. van Lier and B. Martenczuk) v Council of the                       Bench Division (Administrative Court) (United Kingdom) for a
European Union (Agents: J.-P. Jacqué and E. Karlsson): Appli-                  preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that