CELEX: C1996/031/31
Language: en
Date: 1996-02-03 00:00:00
Title: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht by order of that court of 29 September 1995 in the case of Süleyman Eker v. Land Baden-Württemberg, parties to the proceedings: (1) Oberbundesanwalt beim Bundesverwaltungsgericht, (2) Vertreter des öffentlichen Interesses bei den Gerichten der allgemeinen Verwaltungsgerichtsbarkeit in Baden-Württemberg (Case C-386/95)

3 . 2 . 96                 EN |                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                  No C 31 /15
( a ) Must a taxable farmer, who in 1990 extensified his                           conditions to be met by ornamental plant
        potato production in Brandenburg ( Federal Republic of                     propagating material and ornamental plants
        Germany) to such an extent that at least 20 % of his                       pursuant to Council Directive 91 /682/EEC, and
        potato crop was not harvested by him, be regarded as
        having supplied a service to a specific recipient within                — Commission Directive 93/61 /EEC (4 ) of 2 July 1993
        the meaning of Article 6 ( 1 ) of the Sixth Council                         setting out the schedules indicating the conditions to
        Directive of 17 May 1977 ( 77/388/EEC ) on the                              be met by vegetable propagating and planting
        harmonization of the laws of the Member States                             material, other than seed pursuant to Council
        relating to turnover taxes ( J ) ('the Sixth Directive')?                  Directive 92/33/EEC ,
( b ) Does a subsidy paid for the extensification of potato                     the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its
        production on the basi? of the decree of 13 July 1990                   obligations under the Treaty.
        promoting the extensification of agricultural
        production constitute a payment chargeable to tax                  2 . order the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs of the
        pursuant to Article 11 . A ( 1 ) ( a ) of the Sixth                     proceedings .
        Directive ?
                                                                           Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
 ( c ) If the answer to question ( a ) is in the affirmative:
                                                                           The pleas in law and main arguments are analogous to those
        Does the service supplied qualify for taxation at the              in Case C-360/95 ( 5 ); the timelimit for transposition expired
        reduced rate provided for by the fourth sentence of                on 1 January 1994 (Directive 92/45/EEC ) and 31 December
        Article 12 ( 3 ) ( a ) in conjunction with Annex H to the          1993 respectively.
        Sixth Directive ?
                                                                           (•)  OJ No  L 268 , 14 . 9 . 1992 , p . 35 .
 ( 1 ) OJ No L 145 , 13 . 6 . 1977, p . 1 .                                (2 ) OJ No  L 250 , 7 . 10 . 1993 , p . 1 .
                                                                           (3)  OJ No  L 250, 7 . 10 . 1993 , p. 9 .
                                                                           (4)  OJ No  L 250 , 7 . 10 . 1993 , p . 19 .
                                                                           (5)  OJ No  C 16 , 20 . 1 . 1996 , p . 7.
 Action brought on 8 December 1995 by the Commission of
 the European Communities against the Portuguese
                                   Republic                                Reference for a preliminary ruling from the
                             ( Case C-385/95 )                             Bundesverwaltungsgericht by order of that court of 29
                                ( 96/C 31 /30 )                            September 1995 in the case of Süleyman Eker v. Land
                                                                           Baden-Württemberg, parties to the proceedings: ( 1 )
                                                                           Oberbundesanwalt beim Bundesverwaltungsgericht, ( 2 )
 An action against the Portuguese Republic was brought                     Vertreter des öffentlichen Interesses bei den Gerichten
  before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on               der       allgemeinen          Verwaltungsgerichtsbarkeit     in
  8 December 1995 by the Commission of the European                                                Baden-Württemberg
  Communities, represented by Antonio Caeiro, Legal
  Adviser, acting as Agent, with an address for service in                                            ( Case C-386/95 )
  Luxembourg at the office of Carlos Gomez de la Cruz, of its                                            96/C 31 /31
  Legal Service, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.
                                                                            Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
  The applicant claims that the Court should :                              European Communities by an order of the First Senate of the
                                                                            Bundesverwaltungsgericht ( Federal Administrative Court )
  1 . declare that, by not adopting within the prescribed                   of 29 September 1995 , which was received at the Court
        period all the measures necessary to comply fully with              Registry on 11 December 1995 , for a preliminary ruling in
        the following directives :                                          the case of Siileyman Eker v. Land Baden-Wiirttemberg,
                                                                            parties to the proceedings : ( 1 ) Oberbundesanwalt beim
        — Council Directive 92/45/EEC ( ] ) of 16 June 1992 on              Bundesverwaltungsgericht, ( 2 ) Vertreter des offentlichen
            public health and animal health problems relating to            Interesses bei den Gerichten der allgemeinen Verwaltungs­
            the killing of wild game and the placing on the                 gerichtsbarkeit in Baden-Wiirttemberg, on the following
            market of wild-game meat,                                       question:
        — Commission Directive 93/48/EEC ( 2 ) of 23 June                   Does a Turkish worker fulfil the requirements of the first
            1993 setting out the schedule indicating the                    indent of Article 6 ( 1 ) of Decision No 1/80 of the
            conditions to be met by fruit plant propagating                 EEC/Turkey Association Council even if during the first
            material and fruit plants intended for fruit                    year of employment he has, with the permission of the
            production,         pursuant     to  Council     Directive      national authorities , worked without interruption but for
            92/34/EEC ,                                                     different employers and wishes to continue employment
                                                                            with his last employer ?
        — Commission Directive 93/49/EEC ( 3 ) of 23 June
             1993 setting out the schedule indicating the