CELEX: C1995/351/13
Language: en
Date: 1995-12-30 00:00:00
Title: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Supremo Tribunal Administrativo (Second Chamber - Fiscal Matters) by judgment of that court of 11 October 1995 in the case of Fazenda Pública against UCAL (União das Cooperativas Abastecedoras de Leite de Lisboa, UCRL) (Case C-347/95)

No C 351 /8              EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                       30 . 12 . 95
     12 December 1992 ( ): that Decision forms part of the                 2 . If question 1 is answered in the affirmative :
     primary law binding upon the Member States and on the
     institutions created by the Treaties . It constitutes a legal               ( a ) what period of accommodation can regularly by
     rule relating to the application of the Treaties,                                 regarded as short-term ?
     compliance with which is to be ensured by the Court. By
     deciding to hold eleven periods of plenary sessions in                            Is it no longer 'provision of accommodation in the
     Strasbourg and, in parallel, to fix at eight the number of                        hotel sector' if the operator keeps the rooms ready
     additional sessions in Brussels, the Parliament has failed                        for long-term accommodation and this finds
     to comply to the letter with the Edinburgh decision,                              expression in the conclusion of a long-term letting
     which imposed on it a binding obligation to hold 12                               agreement ( longer than six months )?
     plenary sessions in Strasbourg, the seat of the institution .
     Moreover, the contested decision does not respect the
     inherent balance of that decision and renders it                            ( h ) Is a tax exemption under Article 13 ( B ) ( b ) ( 1 ) for a
                                                                                       proportion of the time possible if it transpires that
     nugatory ,                                                                        all the accommodation can be let on a short or
                                                                                       long-term basis according to choice ?
— lack of competence : the European Parliament is obliged ,
     in the exercise of its powers to regulate its internal
     organization, to respect the competence of the Member                 3 . If question 1 is answered in the negative :
     States to fix the location of the seats of the institutions .
     To allow the European Parliament to hold additional
                                                                                 On the basis of what temporal , spatial and
     plenary sessions in Strasbourg without first holding the                    conceptual criteria must the phrase 'provision of
     1 2 monthly sessions in Strasbourg would effectively call                   accommodation ... in the hotel sector or in sectors with
     in question the reality of the seat of the institution,                     a similar function ' be defined and which of them must
                                                                                 necessarily be present ?
— breach of essential procedural requirements : the
     President of the European Parliament did not have the
     capacity to accept an amendment which is contrary to                  (') OJ No L 145 , p . 1 .
     the Decision adopted in Edinburgh .
      ( In the alternative :) A statement of reasons should have
     been given for the contested Decision , despite the
     absence of any express provision to that effect in the
     Treaties .
                                                                           Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Supremo Tribunal
(■) OJ No C 341 , 23 . 12 . 1992 , p . 1 .                                 Administrativo ( Second Chamber — Fiscal Matters ) by
                                                                           judgment of that court of 11 October 1995 in the case of
                                                                           Fazenda Publica against UCAL ( Uniao das Cooperativas
                                                                                       Abastecedoras de Leite de Lisboa, UCRL )
                                                                                                     ( Case C-347/95 )
                                                                                                       ( 95./C 351 / 13 )
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht
Miinchen by order of that court of 20 September 1995 in the                Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
         case of Elisabeth Blasi v. Finanzamt Miinchen I
                                                                           European Communities by judgment of the Supremo
                           ( Case C-346/95 )                               Tribunal Administrativo ( Supreme Administrative Court )
                              ( 95/C 351 / 12 )                             ( Second Chamber — Fiscal Matters ) of 11 October 1995 ,
                                                                           which was received at the Court Registry on 1 3 November
                                                                            1 995 , for a preliminary ruling in the case of Fazenda Publica
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                      against UCAL (Uniao das Cooperativas Abastecedoras de
European Communities by an order of the Third Senate of                     Leite de Lisboa , UCRL ) on the following questions :
the Finanzgericht Miinchen ( Munich Finance Court ) of
20 September 1995 , which was received at the Court
Registry on 9 November 1995 , for a preliminary ruling in                   1 . are the 'charges ' described, which have the
the case of Elisabeth Blasi v. Finanzamt Miinchen I on the                         characteristics of taxes described above ('), contrary to
 following questions :                                                             Article 95 of the Treaty of Rome ?
 1 . Is Article 13 ( B ) ( b ) ( 1 ) of Council Directive 77/388/EEC        2 . Are they to be regarded as charges having an effect
        of 1 7 May 1 977 on the harmonization of the laws of the                   equivalent to a customs duty on imports, prohibited by
        Member States relating to turnover taxes ( Sixth VAT                       Articles 9 and 12 of that Treaty ?
        Directive ) (') to be interpreted as meaning that the
        provision of accommodation ... in the hotel sector or in
        sectors with a similar function consists solely in the               3 . Are they to be regarded as turnover tax within the
        short-term accommodation of guests ?                                       meaning fo Article 33 of the Sixth Directive ( 2 ), without
 ---pagebreak--- 30 . 12 . 95                EN                        Official Journal of the European Communities                                     No C 351 /9
         prejudice to Article 378 of the Act of Accession ( ) or                 ( a ) is the specific object of the rights attaching to a
         any other Community legislation ?                                               trade-mark to be regarded as including the power
                                                                                         conferred on the proprietor of a trade-mark under
(') Charges on milk products at the marketing stage, whether of                          national law to oppose , with regard to alcoholic drinks
       domestic origin or imported , intended for public consumption ,                   manufactured by him, the removal by a third party of
        levied by Iroma .                                                                labels affixed by the proprietor on bottles and on the
( 2 ) Council Directive 77/388/EEC, OJ No L 145 , p . 1 .                                packaging containing them, and bearing his mark, after
n oi No L 302 , 15 . 11 . 1985 , p . 23 .                                                the drinks have been placed by him on the Community
                                                                                         market in that packaging, and the subsequent
                                                                                         re-application of those labels by that third party or their
                                                                                         replacement by similar labels, without thereby in some
                                                                                         way damaging the original condition of the product ?
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Supremo Tribunal                       ( b ) In so far as the labels are replaced by other similar
Administrativo ( Second Chamber — Fiscal Matters ) by                                    labels, is the position different where the third party
judgment of that court of 19 October 1995 in the case of                                 omits the indication ' pure ' appearing on the original
Fabrica de Queijo Eru Portuguesa Lda. against Ministerio                                 labels and/or, as the case may be, replaces the
                       Publico and Fazenda Publica                                       importer's name with another name ?
                              ( Case C-348/95 )
                                  ( 95/C 351 /14 )                                ( c ) If question ( a ) falls to be answered in the affirmative ,
                                                                                         but the proprietor of the trade-mark avails himself of
                                                                                         the power referred to in that question in order to
 Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                                  prevent the third party from removing the
 European Communities by judgment of the Supremo                                          identification marks which the trade-mark proprietor
Tribunal Administrativo ( Supreme Administrative Court )                                 has affixed on or underneath the labels in order to
 ( Second Chamber — Fiscal Matters ) of 19 October 1995 ,                                enable the trade-mark proprietor to detect shortfalls
 which was received at the Court Registry on 13 November                                 within his sales organization and thus to combat
 1995 , for a preliminary ruling in the case of Fabrica de                                parallel trade in his products , must such an exercise of
 Queijo Eru Portuguesa Lda . against Ministerio Publico and                               the trade-mark right be regarded as a 'disguised
 Fazenda Publica on the following questions :                                             restriction on trade between Member States ' aimed at
                                                                                          achieving an artificial compartmentalization of the
  1 . having regard to the facts deemed to have been proven in                            markets ?
         the present judgment and the applicable Community
          legislation , are the goods in question ( cheese ) (') to be             ( d ) To what extent is the answer to . question ( c ) affected
         classified under subheading 0406 90 1 1 of the Common                            where the trade-mark proprietor has affixed those
          Customs Tariff ( CCT ) nomenclature ( 2 )?                                      identification marks either pursuant to a legal
                                                                                          obligation or voluntarily , but in any event with a view
 2 . If not, under which tariff heading should they be                                    to making a 'product recall ' possible and/or in order to
          classified ?                                                                    limit his product liability and/or to combat
                                                                                          counterfeiting, or, as the case may be , solely in order to
  (') As described in footnote 2 of the information notice for Case                       combat parallel trade ?
         C- 164/95 , published in OJ No C 189 of 22 . 7. 1995 , p. 12 .
  ( 2 ) OJ No L 345 of 31 . 12 . 1994 .
                                                                                   Action brought on 10 November 1995 by the Commission
                                                                                    of the European Communities against the Grand Duchy of
  Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der                                                    Luxembourg
  Nederlanden by judgment of that court of 3 November                                                       (Case C-350/95 )
   1995 in the case of Frits Loendersloot v. George Ballantine                                                ( 95/C 351 / 16 )
                           & Son Ltd and Others
                                ( Case C-349/95 )                                   An action against the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg was
                                    ( 95/C 351 / 15 )                               brought before the Court of Justice of the European
                                                                                    Communities on 10 November 1995 by the Commission of
   Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                           the European Communities , represented by Dimitrios
   European Communities by judgment of the Hoge Raad der                            Gouloussis, Legal Adviser, acting as Agent, with an address
   Nederlanden ( Supreme Court of the Netherlands ) of                              for service in Luxembourg at the office of Carlos Gomez de
   3 November 1995 , which was received at the Court Registry                       la Cruz, of the Legal Service, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.
   on 13 November 1995 , for a preliminary ruling in the case
   of Frits Loendersloot v. George Ballantine & Son Ltd on the                      The Commission of the European Communities claims that
   following questions :                                                            the Court should :