CELEX: C2002/003/28
Language: en
Date: 2002-01-05 00:00:00
Title: Case C-427/01: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Bundessozialgericht by order of that court of 2 August 2001 in the case of Dülger Trans Uluslararasi Tazimacilik Ltd. Sti v Bundesanstalt für Arbeit

C 3/18                EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                         5.1.2002
Question 1                                                             Must Directive 87/102/EEC (1) and Directive 90180/EEC (2) be
                                                                       interpreted as having as their sole purpose consumer protec-
When balancing interests prior to deciding an application for          tion or, as aiming, beyond that, at the organization and
interim measures, as required by Article 2(4) of Council               regulation of the single market in credit?
Directive 89/665/EEC of 21 December 1989 (1) on the coordi-
nation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions
relating to the application of review procedures to the award          Must the obligation to interpret those directives in conformity
of public supply and public works contracts, as amended by             with their purpose, and at least in way protective of consumers,
Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992(2), is the ‘body respon-           prompt the national court to prefer an interpretation of its law
sible for review procedures’ within the meaning of Article 2(8)        that would allow it to raise, of its own motion, issues of
of Directive 89/665/EEC required to take into account the              irregularity affecting consumer credit agreements, such as a
prospects of success of an application for an unlawful decision        failure to indicate in writing the percentage rate of charge, in
of a contracting authority to be set aside pursuant to                 actions for payment of a debt brought before it by credit
Article 2(1)(b) of that Directive?                                     institutions?
Question 2
                                                                       (1) Council Directive 87/102/EEC of 22 December 1986 for the
                                                                           approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative pro-
When balancing interests prior to deciding an application for              visions of the Member States concerning consumer credit (OJ
interim measures, as required by Article 2(4) of Council                   L 42 of 12.2.1987, p. 48).
Directive 89/665/EEC of 21 December 1989 on the coordi-                (2) Council Directive 90/88/EEC of 22 February 1990 amending
nation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions              Directive 87/102/EEC for the approximation of the laws, regu-
relating to the application of review procedures to the award              lations and administrative provisions of the Member States
of public supply and public works contracts, as amended by                 concerning consumer credit (OJ L 61, 10.3.1990, p. 14).
Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992, is the ‘body responsible
for review procedures’ within the meaning of Article 2(8) of
Directive 89/665/EEC entitled to take into account the pros-
pects of success of an application for an unlawful decision of
a contracting authority to be set aside pursuant to
Article 2(1)(b) of that Directive?
(1) OJ 1989 L 395, p. 33.                                              Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Bundessozial-
(2) OJ 1992 L 209, p. 1.                                               gericht by order of that court of 2 August 2001 in the
                                                                       case of Dülger Trans Uluslararasi Tazimacilik Ltd. Sti v
                                                                                            Bundesanstalt für Arbeit
                                                                                                (Case C-427/01)
                                                                                                  (2002/C 3/28)
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunal d’In-
stance, Vienne, by judgment of that court of 19 October
2001 in the case of SA Société ACCEA Finances v                        Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
                         Christian Giner                               European Communities by order of the Bundessozialgericht
                                                                       (Federal Social Court) of 2 August 2001, received at the Court
                                                                       Registry on 30 October 2001, for a preliminary ruling in the
                         (Case C-426/01)
                                                                       case of Dülger Trans Uluslararasi Tazimacilik Ltd. Sti. v
                                                                       Bundesanstalt für Arbeit (Federal Labour Office) on the follow-
                          (2002/C 3/27)                                ing questions:
                                                                       1.     Is Article 41(1) of the Additional Protocol of 23 Novem-
                                                                              ber 1970 to the Agreement establishing an Association
                                                                              between the European Economic Community and Turkey
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                        to be interpreted as meaning that there is also a restriction
European Communities by judgment of the Tribunal d’Instance                   on the freedom to provide services where a Member State
(District Court), Vienne, of 19 October 2001, received at the                 of the Community abolishes an existing work permit
Court Registry on 29 October 2001 for a preliminary ruling                    exemption for Turkish drivers engaged in international
in the case of SA Société ACCEA Finances v Christian Giner                    haulage who are employed by a (Turkish) employer with
on the following questions:                                                   its seat in Turkey?
 ---pagebreak--- 5.1.2002              EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                         C 3/19
2.   Does such a restriction concern exclusively the freedom           2.    If the answer to Question 1 is affirmative, in light of the
     to provide services or does it also or solely concern                   considerations set out in the grounds hereof can the
     conditions of access to employment within the meaning                   transitional rules under examination come within the
     of Article 13 of Decision No 1/80 of the Association                    provision in Article 87(3)(b) of the EC Treaty?
     Council of 19 September 1980 on the development
     of the Association between the European Economic
     Community and Turkey?                                             3.    If the answer to Question 2 is negative, in light of the
                                                                             general principles of Community law and in particular
                                                                             those mentioned in the grounds hereof, can the tran-
3.   Is Article 13 of Decision No 1/80 of the Association                    sitional rules under examination be deemed compatible
     Council of 19 September 1980 on the development                         with the EC Treaty and the Community legal order?
     of the Association between the European Economic
     Community and Turkey also to be applied to Turkish
     employees of an employer with its seat in Turkey who,
     as long-distance lorry drivers engaged in international
     haulage, regularly pass through a Member State of the
     Community without belonging to the (legitimate) labour
     force of that Member State?
4.   Is Article 13 of Decision No 1/80 of the Association
     Council of 19 September 1980 on the development                   Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Cour d’appel de
     of the Association between the European Economic                  Mons (6ème chambre fiscale) by judgment of 2 November
     Community and Turkey to be interpreted as prohibiting               2001 in the case of Philippe Mertens against État belge
     a Member State of the Community in general from
     introducing national provisions which, in comparison
     with the position under national law on 1 December                                         (Case C-431/01)
     1980, lay down new restrictions on access to the
     employment market for Turkish workers, or does that
     provision prohibit the introduction of new restrictions                                      (2002/C 3/30)
     only in respect of the employment or continued employ-
     ment of workers who were already legally resident and
     employed in Germany before the entry into force of the
     new restriction?
                                                                       Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
                                                                       European Communities by order of 2 November 2001 of the
                                                                       Cour d’appel de Mons (6ème chambre fiscale) (Court of
                                                                       Appeal, Mons, 6th fiscal chamber), received at the Court
                                                                       Registry on 7 November 2001, for a preliminary ruling in the
                                                                       case of Philippe Mertens against État belge (Belgian State), on
                                                                       the following question:
Reference. for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunale di
Catania — 4th Civil Section — by order of 15 October
    2001 in the case of Costanzo SpA v Elettrica SpA                   Does Article 39 and/or Article 43 of the Treaty establishing
                                                                       the European Community preclude legislation by a Member
                        (Case C-428/01)                                State under which, for assessment to tax of individuals, a
                                                                       business loss suffered in that Member State by an individual
                                                                       residing in that Member State in the course of a previous
                          (2002/C 3/29)                                period of assessment may be deducted from the profit of that
                                                                       individual for a subsequent period of assessment, only to the
                                                                       extent that the business loss may not be set off against
                                                                       emoluments relating to that earlier period of assessment
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                 arising from a salaried activity carried on by that individual in
European Communities by an order of the Tribunale (District            another Member State, and if the business loss thus set off may
Court) Catania — 4th Civil Section — by order of that court            be deducted neither in that Member State nor in the other
of 15 October 2001, which was received at the Court Registry           State from the taxable income of that individual for assessment
on 31 October 2001, for a preliminary ruling in the case of            to tax of individuals, although if the individual had carried on
Costanzo SpA v Elettrica SpA on the following questions:               his salaried activity in the same Member State as that in which
                                                                       he carries on the self-employed activity, the business losses
                                                                       could be properly and lawfully deducted from the taxable
1.   On an interpretation of Article 87 et seq. EC may                 income of that individual?
     transitional rules, such as those laid down in Article 106
     of Legislative Decree No 270/99, constitute new State aid
     and come within the scope of the prohibition under
     Article 87 EC?