CELEX: C2003/304/12
Language: en
Date: 2003-12-13 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 23 October 2003 in Case C-154/02 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hässleholms tingsrätt): Jan Nilsson (International trade in endangered species of wild fauna and flora — CITES — Regulation (EC) No 338/97 — Articles 2(w) and 8(3) — Notion of "worked specimen" — Stuffed animal — Concept of "specimen acquired more than 50 years previously" — Manner of acquisition — Exemption — Regulation (EC) No 1808/2001 — Articles 29 and 32)

C 304/8                  EN                          Official Journal of the European Union                                           13.12.2003
to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax:                        Administration des douanes et droits indirects and Rioglass SA,
uniform basis of assessment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1), as amended                Transremar SL on the interpretation of Article 28 EC, the
by Council Directive 1999/49/EC of 25 May 1999 amending,                     Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of: J.-P. Puissochet, President
with regard to the level of the standard rate, Directive 77/388              of the Chamber, C. Gulmann, V. Skouris (Rapporteur),
(OJ 1999 L 139, p. 27), the Court (Fifth Chamber), composed                  F. Macken and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, Judges; J. Mischo,
of: D.A.O. Edward, acting as President of the Fifth Chamber,                 Advocate General; M.-F. Contet, Principal Administrator, for
A. La Pergola and P. Jann (Rapporteur), Judges; J. Mischo,                   the Registrar, has given a judgment on 23 October 2003, in
Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment                  which it has ruled:
on 23 October 2003, in which it:
                                                                             Article 28 EC is to be interpreted as precluding the implementation,
1.    Declares that, by applying a reduced rate of value added tax to        pursuant to a legislative measure of a Member State concerning
      services provided directly to the public by musical ensembles or       intellectual property, of procedures for detention by the customs
      for a concert organiser and to services provided directly to the       authorities of goods lawfully manufactured in another Member State
      public by soloists, but applying the standard rate of that tax to      and intended, following their transit through the territory of the first
      the services of soloists working for an organiser, the Federal         Member State, to be placed on the market in a non-member country.
      Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its obligations under
      the third subparagraph of Article 12(3)(a) of the Sixth Council
      Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation               (1) OJ C 131 of 1.6.2002.
      of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes —
      Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assess-
      ment, as amended by Council Directive 1999/49/EC of
      25 May 1999 amending, with regard to the level of the
      standard rate, Directive 77/388;
2.    Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs.
(1) OJ C 131 of 1.6.2002.
                                                                                              JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                                                                                                      (Sixth Chamber)
                                                                                                    of 23 October 2003
                  JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                      in Case C-154/02 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
                                                                                        the Hässleholms tingsrätt): Jan Nilsson (1)
                          (Sixth Chamber)
                                                                             (International trade in endangered species of wild fauna
                        of 23 October 2003                                   and flora — CITES — Regulation (EC) No 338/97 —
                                                                             Articles 2(w) and 8(3) — Notion of ‘worked specimen’ —
in Case C-115/02 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from                    Stuffed animal — Concept of ‘specimen acquired more than
the Cour de cassation): Administration des douanes et                        50 years previously’ — Manner of acquisition — Exemption
      droits indirects v Rioglass SA, Transremar SL (1)                        — Regulation (EC) No 1808/2001 — Articles 29 and 32)
(Free movement of goods — Measures having equivalent                                                   (2003/C 304/12)
effect — Procedures for detention under customs control —
Goods in transit intended for the market of a non-member
              country — Spare parts for motor cars)                                             (Language of the case: Swedish)
                           (2003/C 304/11)                                   (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                                                                                                in the European Court Reports)
                     (Language of the case: French)
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                    in the European Court Reports)                           In Case C-154/02: Reference to the Court under Article 234
                                                                             EC by Hässleholms tingsrätt (Sweden) for a preliminary ruling
                                                                             in the criminal proceedings pending before that court against
                                                                             Jan Nilsson, on the interpretation of Council Regulation (EC)
In Case C-115/02: Reference to the Court under Article 234                   No 338/97 of 9 December 1996 on the protection of species
EC by the Cour de cassation (France) for a preliminary                       of wild fauna and flora by regulating trade therein (OJ 1997
ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between                  L 61, p. 1), as amended by Commission Regulation (EC)
 ---pagebreak--- 13.12.2003              EN                          Official Journal of the European Union                                           C 304/9
No 2307/97 of 18 November 1997 (OJ 1997 L 325,                              for a preliminary ruling in the administrative law case of
p. 1), and of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1808/2001 of                    Gaye Gürol against Landesamt für Ausbildungsförderung
30 August 2001 laying down detailed rules concerning the                    Nordrhein-Westfalen on the following questions:
implementation of Regulation No 338/97 (OJ 2001 L 250,
p. 1), the Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of: J.-P. Puissochet,            1.    Does the first sentence of Article 9 of Decision No 1/80
President of the Chamber, C. Gulmann, F. Macken, N. Colneric                      of the EEC/Turkey Association Council have direct effect
(Rapporteur) and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, Judges; C. Stix-Hackl,                     in the domestic legal systems of Member States of the
Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment                       European Community, so that Turkish children residing
on 23 October 2003, in which it has ruled:                                        legally in a Member State of the Community with their
                                                                                  parents who are or have been legally employed in that
1.    Articles 2(w) and 8(3)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 338/                Member State, and who have the same qualifications as
      97 of 9 December 1996 on the protection of species of wild                  the children of nationals of that Member State, are entitled
      fauna and flora by regulating trade therein, as amended by                  to equal access to general education, apprenticeship and
      Commission Regulation (EC) No 2307/97 of 18 November                        vocational training?
      1997 are to be interpreted as meaning that the animals referred
      to in Annex A to that regulation but which have been stuffed          2.    If Question 1 is answered in the affirmative:
      fall within the definition of ‘worked specimens’ for the purposes
      of those provisions.                                                        Do Turkish children still qualify as ‘residing legally with
                                                                                  their parents’ if they establish and maintain their own
                                                                                  principal residence at the place of their university edu-
2.    Article 8(3)(b) of Regulation No 338/97, as amended by
                                                                                  cation and are registered with only a subsidiary residence
      Regulation No 2307/97, is to be interpreted as meaning that
                                                                                  at their parents’ address?
      receiving specimens as a gift or inheriting them, and killing
      animals and then taking them into one’s possession, makes
      them ‘acquired’ within the meaning of that provision. It is not       3.    If Question 2 is answered in the affirmative:
      necessary that the person who acquired the specimen more than
                                                                                  Does the first sentence of Article 9 of Decision No 1/80
      50 years previously be the present owner.
                                                                                  of the EEC/Turkey Association Council confer on the
                                                                                  beneficiaries of that provision entitlement not only to
3.    Notwithstanding the provision in the second paragraph of                    equal access to educational facilities but also to equal
      Article 32 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1808/2001 of                    access to State benefits granted by the Member State with
      30 August 2001 laying down detailed rules concerning the                    the aim of facilitating participation in education or
      implementation of Regulation No 338/97, Article 8(3)(b) of                  training, or is Article 9 of Decision No 1/80 of the EEC/
      the latter regulation must be interpreted as meaning that the               Turkey Association Council to be interpreted as reserving
      management authority of the Member State concerned must                     to Member States the possibility of making the grant of
      have been able to ascertain that the specimen in question was               social benefits in the area of education subject to other
      acquired in accordance with the conditions laid down in                     conditions or of limiting those benefits?
      Article 2(w) of Regulation No 338/97, as amended by
      Regulation No 2307/97.
                                                                            4.    If Questions 2 and 3 are answered in the affirmative:
                                                                                  Does that also apply to a university education in the
(1) OJ C 144 of 15.6.2002.
                                                                                  Turkish homeland for the beneficiaries?
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Verwaltungsger-
icht Sigmaringen by order of that Court of 31 July                          Action brought on 25 September 2003 by the Italian
2003 in the administrative law case of Gaye Gürol                           Republic against the Commission of the European Com-
against Landesamt für Ausbildungsförderung Nordrhein-                                                    munities
                               Westfalen
                                                                                                     (Case C-401/03)
                           (Case C-374/03)
                                                                                                     (2003/C 304/14)
                           (2003/C 304/13)
                                                                            An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                      ties was brought before the Court of Justice of the European
European Communities by order of the Verwaltungsgericht                     Communities on 25 September 2003 by the Italian Republic
Sigmaringen (Administrative Court, Sigmaringen) of 31 July                  represented by Ivo Maria Braguglia, acting as Agent and
2003, received at the Court Registry on 8 September 2003,                   Antonio Cingolo, Avvocato dello Stato.