CELEX: C1995/333/24
Language: en
Date: 1995-12-09 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 30 October 1995 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Kingdom of Belgium (Case C-344/95)

No C 333/ 12            EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                    9 . 12 . 95
     person a VAT credit in relation to a specific period or                   of Member States but, instead, two successive
     periods during which that credit arose or to carry it over                registration certificates, and by demanding payment
     to a subsequent tax period, and instead withholding it                    for those certificates,
     by means of the Belgian withholding procedure, which
     has the effect of a preventive attachment within the                  — by issuing to employed persons and to seasonal
     meaning of Article 1445 of the Belgian Judicial Code, as                  workers whose anticipated period of work does not
     long as no definitive entitlement has arisen in that regard               exceed three months a document relating to their
     and only up to the amount of the demand relating to that                  residence, and by demanding payment for that
     tax period or earlier periods, where the demand is                        document,
     disputed by the taxable person ?
                                                                      2 . order the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs .
3 . Is Article 18 ( 4 ) of the Directive applicable, given that,
     according to the Belgian State , such withholding is a           Pleas in law and main arguments:
     debt-recovery procedure ?
                                                                      — ( As regards the situation of persons seeking work )
    — If so, is Article 27 of the Directive applicable if such
         withholding were to form part of the conditions                  As Community law now stands, and in accordance with
         (modalites)?                                                     the judgment of the Court of Justice of 26 February 1991
                                                                          in Case C-292/89 , nationals of Member States have the
    — If not, is Article 27 applicable, on the assumption                 right to stay in the territory of other Member States in
         that such withholding is a debt-recovery                         order to seek employment there; a Member State may
         procedure ?                                                      limit that right of residence by making it subject to a
                                                                          ' reasonable time-limit', the expiry of which does not
4 . If Article 18 ( 4 ) of the Directive is applicable to the             automatically bring that right to an end, however,
    Belgian withholding procedure, does that procedure                    provided that the person concerned is continuing to seek
    infringe the principle of proportionality as defined by               employment and has genuine chances of being engaged.
    the Court of Justice ?                                                The Belgian rules in force ( 2 ) require such persons
                                                                          seeking employment to leave the territory after a period
(') OJ No L 145 , 1977, p . 1 .                                           of three months and, since no provision is made for the
                                                                          production by the person concerned to produce evidence
                                                                          that he is continuing to seek employment and has
                                                                          genuine chances of being engaged, those rules are
                                                                          contrary to Article 48 of the EC Treaty.
                                                                     — ( As regards the system of registration certificates )
Action brought on 30 October 1995 by the Commission
of the European Communities against the Kingdom of                        Although Article 4 of Directive 68/360/EEC provides
                              Belgium                                     that the Member State must issue a residence permit, the
                         Case C-344/95 )                                  residence of workers in Belgium is covered initially , over
                                                                          a period of six months, by two registration certificates .
                          ( 95/C 333/24 )
                                                                          The issue of a provisional residence document
                                                                          constitutes an additional difficulty over and above the
An action against the Kingdom of Belgium was brought                      difficulties facing a migrant worker when he instals
before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on                himself in another Member State . The Belgian rules in
30 October 1995 by the Commission of the European                         question thus constitute a genuine obstacle to the free
Communities, represented by Pieter van Nuffel, acting as                  movement of workers, and are therefore contrary, in
Agent, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the                   principle, to Article 48 of the EC Treaty.
office of Mr Gomez de la Cruz, Wagner Centre 254,
                                                                          The Commission does not contend that the residence
Kirchberg.
                                                                          permit has to be issued immediately, that is to say, on
                                                                          the same day as the submission of an application
The applicant claims that the Court should :                              accompanied by the supporting documentation, but
                                                                          maintains that the practical effect of Article 4 requires
1 . declare that the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil              that such an application be dealt with in any event within
    its obligations under Article 48 of the EC Treaty and                 a short period of time, and that a period of three months
     Council Directive 68/360/EEC of 15 October 1968 on
    the abolition of restrictions on movement and residence
                                                                          ( and a fortiori six months ) for dealing with a simple
                                                                          administrative formality is excessive .
    within the Community for workers of Member States
    and their families ( ! )                                              Article 9 ( 1 ) of Directive 68/360/EEC provides that
                                                                          residence permits are to be issued and renewed free of
    — by requiring nationals of other Member States who                   charge or on payment of an amount not exceeding the
         seek employment in Belgium to leave the territory                dues and taxes charged for the issue of identity cards to
         after a period of three months,                                  nationals . The fact that a payment may be demanded by
                                                                          Belgian communes on the issue of the registration
    — by issuing to workers employed for a period of at                   certificate can hardly be said to afford equality of
         least one year, during the first six months of their             treatment between Belgians and nationals of other
         residence, not a residence permit for nationals                  Member States .
 ---pagebreak--- 9 . 12 . 95             EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                      No C 333/ 13
— ( As regards workers residing for less than three                          a simple attestation of the fact that the worker
      months )                                                               concerned has reported his presence on Belgian territory
      Although Article 8 ( 1 ) ( a ) and ( c ) of Directive                  (Article 8 ( 2 ) of Directive 68/360/EEC ).
      68/360/EEC provides that Member States are, without
                                                                      (') OJ , English Special Edition 1968 ( II ), p. 485 .
      issuing a residence permit, to recognize the right of           ( 2 ) Law of 15 December 1980 on access to the territory, residence,
      residence , the Belgian legislation in force requires the             establishment and the departure of aliens ( as amended by the
      persons concerned to apply for a document ( the issue of              Law of 6 May 1993 ); Royal Decree of 8 October 1981 on access
      which may, depending on the commune involved, give                    to the territory, residence , establishment and the departure of
      rise to the payment of a charge ) amounting to more than              aliens ( as amended several times ).
                                                     COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE                               3 . orders the Council to pay the costs;
                       of 19 October 1995
in Case T-194/94 : John Carvel and Guardian Newspapers                4 . orders the Kingdom of Denmark, the Kingdom of the
            Ltd v. Council of the European Union ( 1 )                       Netherlands and the European Parliament to bear their
                                                                             own costs .
(Transparency — Access to information — Council
Decision refusing access to documents relating to its
deliberations — Interpretation of Article 4 (2) of Decision           (•) OJ No C 202 , 23 . 7 . 1994 .
                             93/731/EC)
                           ( 95/C 333/25 )
                  (Language of the case: English)
In Case T-194/94 : John Carvel, residing in Brussels, and              JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
Guardian Newspapers Ltd, whose registered office is in                                          of 26 October 1995
Manchester, United Kingdom, represented by Onno
                                                                      in Case T-l 85 /94 : Geotronics SA v. Commission of the
W. Brouwer and Frederic P. Louis, of the Brussels Bar,
assisted by Deirdre Curtin, of the University of Utrecht, with                              European Communities ( L )
an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of                (Phare programme — Restricted invitation to tender —
Marc Loesch, 11 Rue Goethe, supported by Kingdom of                   Action for annulment — Admissibility — EEA Agree­
Denmark, ( Agent: Peter Biering ), Kingdom of the                                         ment — Action for damages)
Netherlands ( Agents : A. Bos and J. W. de Zwaan ) and                                              ( 95/C 333/26 )
European Parliament ( Agents : Gregorio Garzon Clariana
and Francois Vainker ) against Council of the European
Union ( Agents : Jill Aussant and Giorgio Maganza ) —                                    (Language of the case: English)
application for annulment of decisions of the Council
adopted pursuant to Council Decision 93/731 /EC of
20 December 1993 on public access to Council documents                In Case T-l 85/94 : Geotronics SA, a company with its
( OJ 1993 L 340, p. 43 ) — the Court of First Instance                registered office at Lognes ( France ), represented by Tommy
 ( Second Chamber, Extended Composition ), composed of                Pettersson, of the Swedish Bar, with an address for service in
B. Vesterdorf, President, D. P. M. Barrington, A. Saggio,              Luxembourg at the Chambers of Arendt and Medernach,
H. Kirschner and A. Kalogeropoulos, Judges; H. Jung,                   8-10 Rue Mathias Hardt, against the Commission of the
Registrar, gave a judgment on 19 October 1995 , in which               European Communities ( Agents : Karen Banks and, at the
 it :                                                                  hearing, John Forman ) — application for, first, the
                                                                       annulment of the Commission 's decision of 10 March 1994
                                                                       rejecting the applicant's tender for the supply of electronic
 I . annuls the implied decision of the Council refusing the           tacheometers under the Phare Programme, and, second,
       applicants access to the preparatory reports, the               compensation under Articles 178 and 215 of the EC Treaty
       minutes, attendance and voting records of the Justice           for the damage which the applicant claims to have suffered
       Council of 29 and 30 November 1993 and the decision             as a result of the contested decision — the Court of First
       contained in the letter of the Council of 17 May 1994           Instance ( Fourth Chamber ), composed of K. Lenaerts
       refusing access to the minutes of the Agriculture Council       ( President of the Chamber ), R. Schintgen and
       of 24 and 25 January 1 994;                                     R. García-Valdecasas, Judges; B. Pastor, Administrator, for
                                                                       the Registrar, has given a judgment on 26 October 1995 in
 2 . dismisses the remainder of the application;                       which it: