CELEX: C1996/095/25
Language: en
Date: 1996-03-30 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 21 February 1996 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Kingdom of Spain (Case C-52/96)

30 . 3 . 96            EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                  No C 95/ 13
      operations of the European Investment Bank and the               Eerste Aanleg ( Court of First Instance ), Bruges, of
      other existing financial instruments make the recipients         6 February 1996, which was received at the Court Registry
      of Community subsidies subject to the review                     on 16 February 1996, for a preliminary ruling in the case of
      procedures within the meaning of Directive                       BVBA Sanders v. ( 1 ) the Belgian State, Ministry of Finance,
      89/665/EEC, even if they themselves are not contracting          VAT Administration, Registration and State Property, in the
      authorities within the meaning of Article 1 of Directive         person of the Collector of VAT, Roeselare VAT Collection
      93/37/EEC ?                                                      Office, and ( 2 ) the Belgian State, Ministry of Finance, VAT
                                                                       Administration, Registration and State Property, in the
0 ) OJ No L 199 , 1993 , p . 54.                                       person of the Chief Inspector of VAT, Torhout 2 VAT
( 2 ) OJ No L 193 , 1993 , p . 5 .                                     Inspectorate on the following questions :
( 3 ) OJ No L 185 , 1988 , p . 9 .
                                                                       1 . Must Article 18 (4 ) of the Sixth VAT Directive be
                                                                           interpreted as permitting a Member State, instead of
                                                                           refunding to a taxable person a VAT credit for a given
                                                                           tax period, or carrying it forward to a subsequent tax
                                                                           period, to 'withhold' the same by way of protective
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the                                attachment on the basis of an additional demand in
Bundesgerichtshof by order of that court of 11 January                     respect of an earlier tax period, where that additional
1996 in the case of Bayerische Hypotheken- und                             demand is contested in law and is thus not based on any
             Wechselbank AG v. Edgar Dietzinger                            definitive entitlement, and where the Member State has
                          ( Case C-45/96 )                                 not obtained authorization pursuant to Article 27 of the
                                                                           VAT Directive ?
                            ( 96/C 95/23 )
                                                                       2 . In the event that Question 1 is answered in the
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                     affirmative :
European Communities by order of the Bundesgerichtshof
( Federal Court of Justice ) of 11 January 1996, which was                 do the principle of proportionality enshrined in
received at the Court Registry on 15 February 1996 , for a                 Community law and Article 18 ( 4 ) of the Sixth VAT
preliminary ruling in the case of Bayerische Hypotheken­                   Directive permit the Member State to provide :
und Wechselbank AG v. Edgar Dietzinger on the following
question :                                                                 ( 1 ) that the taxable person may contest the attachment
                                                                                 ( as validated by the 'withholding' measure ) only by
where a contract of suretyship is concluded under German                         adducing evidence rebutting the allegations made
law between a financial institution and a natural person
                                                                                 by the Treasury in the official report, and not by
                                                                                 challenging the actual need for, and urgency of, that
who is not acting in that connection in the course of his trade
                                                                                 measure ;
or profession, in order to secure a claim by the financial
institution against a third party in respect of a loan, is it              ( 2 ) that withholding may not be replaced by another
covered by the words 'contracts under which a trader                             form of security nor lifted pending the delivery of
supplies goods or services to a consumer' ( Article 1 ( 1 ) of                   final judgment on the contested demand for
Council Directive 85/577/EEC of 20 December 1985 to
                                                                                 payment made by the Treasury ?
protect the consumer in respect of contracts negotiated
away from business premises, OJ No L 372 , 31 . 12 . 1985 ,
p. 31 )?
                                                                       Action brought on 21 February 1996 by the Commission
                                                                       of the European Communities against the Kingdom of
                                                                                                       Spain
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Beslagrechter of                                    ( Case C-52/96 )
the Rechtbank van Eerste Aanleg, Bruges, by order of that
court of 6 February 1996 in the case of BVBA Sanders                                              ( 96/C 95/25
v. ( 1 ) the Belgian State, Ministry of Finance, VAT
Administration, Registration and State Property, in the                An action against the Kingdom of Spain was brought before
person of the Collector of VAT, Roeselare VAT Collection               the Court of Justice of the European Communities on
Office, and ( 2 ) the Belgian State, Ministry of Finance, VAT          21 February 1996 by the Commission of the European
Administration, Registration and State Property, in the                Communities, represented by Julian Currall and F. Enrique
person of the Chief Inspector of VAT, Torhout 2 VAT                    Gonzalez Diaz, of its Legal Service, with an address for
                             Inspectorate                              service in Luxembourg at the office of Carlos Gomez
                                                                       de la Cruz, also of its Legal Service, Wagner Centre ,
                          ( Case C-47/96 )
                                                                       Kirchberg.
                            ( 96/ C 95/24 )
                                                                       The Commission claims that the Court should :
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by order of the Beslagrechter ( judge             1 . declare that, by failing to adopt the national measures
hearing attachment proceedings ) of the Rechtbank van                      necessary to ensure that officials of the Community
 ---pagebreak--- No C 95/ 14             EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                  30 . 3 . 96
      institutions are able to transfer their rights to the                by order of that court of 1 February 1996 , received at the
       Community pensions scheme, the Kingdom of Spain has                 Court Registry on 22 February 1996, for a preliminary
      failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 11 ( 2 ) of           ruling in the case of Hermes International societe en
   v Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations of officials of the               commandite par actions, Paris v. FHT Marketing Choice BV
      European Communities f 1 ) and Article 5 of the EC                   on the following question :
      Treaty; and
2 . order the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs .                          is an interim measure, such as, for example, is provided for
                                                                           in Article 289 et seq. of the Wetboek van Burgerlijke
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                        Rechtsvordering (Netherlands Code of Civil Procedure )
                                                                           whereby an immediate, enforceable measure may be sought,
Despite the fact that the Kingdom of Spain acknowledges its                covered by the expression 'provisional measures' within the
obligation to comply with the provisions and Royal Decrees                 meaning of Article 50 of the Agreement on Trade-related
have been drafted, no national implementing measures in                    Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS ) (*)?
the field have yet been adopted .
                                                                           (') OJ No L 336 , 1994 , p . 213 .
(') Regulation ( EEC, Euratom, ECSC ) No 259/68 of the Council of
     29 February 1968 ( OJ, English Special Edition 1968 ( I ), p. 30 ),
     as amended by Regulation ( EEC, Euratom, ECSC ) No 571 /92
     ( OJ No L 62 , 1962 , p. 1 ).
                                                                                  Removal from the register of Case C-402/95
                                                                                                    ( 96/C 95/27 )
Reference        for      preliminary         ruling     from      the
Arrondissementsrechtbank, Amsterdam, by order of that
court of 1 February 1996 in the case of Hermes                             An action against the Portuguese Republic was brought
International societe en commandite par actions, Paris v.
                                                                           before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on
                   FHT Marketing Choice BV                                 22 December 1995 by the Commission of the European
                                                                           Communities, represented by Antonio Caeiro, Legal
                           ( Case C-53/96 )                                Adviser, acting as Agent, with an address for service in
                             ( 96/C 95/26 )                                Luxembourg at the office of Carlos Gomez de la Cruz, of its
                                                                           Legal Service, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice
of the European Communities by order of the                                By order of 20 February 1996 the Court has ordered that
Arrondissementsrechtbank ( District Court ), Amsterdam,                    the case be removed from the register.
                                                          COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
 JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE                                   Marc-Albert Lucas, of the Liege Bar, with an address for
                       of 15 February 1996                                 service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Evelyne Korn,
                                                                           21 , Rue de Nassau, v. European Foundation for the
in Case T-5 89/93 : Susan Ryan-Sheridan v. European                        Improvement of Living and Working Conditions ( Agents :
Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working                       John McColgan and subsequently Terry Sheehan, in the
                             Conditions ( 1 )                              written procedure, and Clive Purkiss, in the oral procedure,
(Officials — Servants of the European Foundation for the                   assisted by Denis Waelbroeck ) — application, first, for
Improvement of Living and Working Conditions —                             the annulment of the notice of vacancy concerning
Recruitment procedure — Rejection of an internal                           a post as administrator of the Foundation's publications
candidate — Actions for annulment of measures — Action                     programme, the notice of restricted competition relating to
                             for damages)                                  the filling of that post, the recruitment committee's
                             ( 96/C 95/28 )                                memorandum of 5 November 1993 and the decision of the
                                                                           Director of the Foundation of 22 November 1993 rejecting
                                                                           the applicant's application for that post, and , second, an
                                                                           order requiring the Foundation to pay damages in the sum
                 (Language of the case: French)                            of Bfrs 75 000 the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber ),
                                                                           composed of: C. P. Briet, President, and B. Vesterdorf and
                                                                           A. Potocki , Judges; B. Pastor, Registrar, has given a
                                                                           judgment on 15 February 1996, in which it:
In Case T-589/93 : Susan Ryan-Sheridan, a servant of the
European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and
Working Conditions, represented by Luc Misson and                          1 . dismisses the action;