CELEX: C2000/355/16
Language: en
Date: 2000-12-09 00:00:00
Title: Case C-356/00: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per la Toscana by order of that court of 18 January 2000 in the case of Antonio Testa and Lido Lazzeri against Commissione Nazionale per le Società e la Borsa (CONSOB) with the intervention ad adjuvandum of Banca Fideuram SpA

9.12.2000                EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                        C 355/9
2.    If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, is      Infringement of Article 190                        of  the    EC
      the proper construction of Article 46(2)(b) [of that               Treaty (now Article 253 EC)
      regulation] that ‘the duration of the periods of insurance
      or of residence completed before the materialisation of            Regulation No 1364/00 provides no reason for fixing the
      the risk under the legislation which [the competent                derived intervention price for another five Member States but
      institution of a Member State] administers’ also includes          not for Italy. Neither does Regulation No 1363/00 provide
      those periods of notional contribution corresponding to            any reason for fixing the intervention price. This prevents the
      periods prior to materialisation of the risk which, under          Italian Government from exercising its rights of the defence
      the legislation of the Member State concerned, are to be           and also hinders judicial review of the contested measures.
      taken into account as periods of contribution for the
      purpose of determining the amount of old-age pension?
                                                                         Breach of the principle of equality
                                                                         Article 1 of Regulation No 1364/00 fails to fix the derived
                                                                         intervention price for white sugar in respect of Italy while
                                                                         confirming it for five other Member States.
                                                                         Even though the Italian Government does not know why the
                                                                         Council has refused to fix a derived intervention price for Italy
                                                                         while confirming it for the other Member States, it nevertheless
                                                                         denounces a breach of the principle of equality and complains
Action brought on 22 September 2000 by Council of the                    that it has been treated differently.
         European Union against the Italian Republic
                                                                         (1) OJ L 156, p. 3.
                                                                         (2) L 156, p. 1.
                          (Case C-352/00)
                          (2000/C 355/15)
An action against the Council of the European Union was                  Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunale
brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communi-             Amministrativo Regionale per la Toscana by order of that
ties on 22 September 2000 by the Italian Republic, represented           court of 18 January 2000 in the case of Antonio Testa
by Umberto Leanza, assisted by Danilo del Gaizo, acting as               and Lido Lazzeri against Commissione Nazionale per le
Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the                 Società e la Borsa (CONSOB) with the intervention ad
Italian Embassy, 5 Rue Marie-Adélaïde.                                                adjuvandum of Banca Fideuram SpA
The applicant claims that the Court should:                                                       (Case C-356/00)
                                                                                                  (2000/C 355/16)
—     annul Article 1 of Council Regulation No 1364/00 (1) in
      so far as it fails to fix the derived intervention price for       Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
      white sugar in respect of all the Italian areas for the            European Communities by order of the Tribunale Amministra-
      2000/2001 marketing year; in so far as necessary, also             tivo Regionale per la Toscana (Regional Administrative Court,
      annul Article 1(2) of Council Regulation No 1363/00 (2)            Tuscany) of 18 January 2000, received at the Court Registry
      in so far as it fixes the intervention price for Italy;            on 25 September 2000, for a preliminary ruling in the case of
                                                                         Antonio Testa and Lido Lazzeri against Commissione Naziona-
—     order the Council of the European Union to pay the costs.          le per le Società e la Borsa (CONSOB) with the intervention
                                                                         ad adjuvandum of Banca Fideuram SpA on the following
                                                                         questions:
Pleas in law and main arguments                                          1.    Must Point 3 of Section A of the Annex to Council
                                                                               Directive 93/22/EEC (1) of 10 May 1993 (on investment
                                                                               services in the securities field), which contains the defi-
                                                                               nition ‘[m]anaging portfolios of investments in accord-
Infringement of Article 3(4) and (5) of Basic                                  ance with mandates given by investors on a discriminat-
Regulation No 2038/99                                                          ory, client-by-client basis’ be interpreted as meaning that
                                                                               that Community provision is infringed by a national
                                                                               provision which departs from it and which, in this case,
The Council infringed Article 3(4) and (5) of the basic                        does not require that the management of portfolios of
regulation by fixing intervention prices (including the derived                investments should be on ‘a discriminatory, client-by-
intervention prices) in June or July 2000 when it should have                  client basis’ and ‘in accordance with mandates given by
fixed them earlier in August 1999.                                             investors’?
 ---pagebreak--- C 355/10              EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                     9.12.2000
2.   Conversely, does a national provision which, in                   Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Oberlandesge-
     implementing a ‘harmonising’ directive, omits the above-          richt Düsseldorf by order of that court of 2 August 2000
     mentioned requirements, conform with Community law?               in the case of Buchhändler-Vereinigung GmbH against
                                                                       Saur Verlag GmbH & Co. KG and Die Deutsche Bibliothek
                                                                                                (Case C-358/00)
(1) OJ L 141 of 11.6.1993, p. 27.
                                                                                                (2000/C 355/18)
                                                                       Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
                                                                       European Communities by order of the Oberlandesgericht
                                                                       Düsseldorf (Higher Regional Court, Düsseldorf) of 2 August
                                                                       2000, received at the Court Registry on 27 September 2000,
                                                                       for a preliminary ruling in the case of Buchhändler-Vereinigung
                                                                       GmbH against Saur Verlag GmbH & Co. KG and Die Deutsche
                                                                       Bibliothek on the following question concerning the interpret-
                                                                       ation of Articles 1 and 8 of Council Directive 97/52/EEC (1) of
                                                                       18 June 1992 concerning the coordination of procedures for
                                                                       the award of public service contracts, amended by Directive
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Verwaltungsge-               97/52/EC (2) of 13 October 1997 (hereinafter ‘the Service
richt Bremen by order of 22 May 2000 in the case of Fikri              Directive’):
              Akdenk v Stadtgemeinde Bremen
                                                                       Does the Service Directive also apply to a contract
                        (Case C-357/00)                                (a)   by which the contracting authority confers on the
                                                                             contractor the exclusive publishing rights (right of repro-
                                                                             duction and distribution) in a bibliography compiled by
                                                                             it — in this case the German National Bibliography,
                        (2000/C 355/17)
                                                                       (b) which requires the contractor to reproduce and market
                                                                             the bibliography on his own account and to pay the
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                       contracting authority a reasonable fee on the basis of the
European Communities by order of 22 May 2000 by the                          publishing proceeds for each copy sold, and
Verwaltungsgericht (Administrative Court) Bremen, which was
received at the Court Registry on 27 September 2000, for a             (c)   in which the contracting authority reserves rights of
preliminary ruling in the case of Fikri Akdenk v Stadtgemeinde               supervision and codetermination with regard to the
Bremen on the following questions:                                           reproduction and distribution of the bibliography?
1.   Is a family member within the meaning of Article 7, first         (1) OJ L 209 of 24.7.1992, p. 1.
     paragraph, first indent, of Decision No 1/80 of the EEC-          (2) OJ L 328 of 28.11.1997, p. 1.
     Turkey Association Council on the development of the
     Association (Decision No 1/80) entitled to have access to
     the labour market even in the case where, after satisfying
     the conditions set out in the first paragraph of Article 7
     of Decision No 1/80, he has been given a custodial
     sentence of seven years and six months, of which he shall
     have to serve at least one half or two thirds?
                                                                       Reference for a preliminary ruling by order of the
                                                                       Bundesgerichtshof of 30 March 2000 in the case of Land
                                                                       Hessen against G. Ricordi & Co. Bühnen- und Musikverlag
2.   Does a right of access to the labour market also exist                                          GmbH
     under the first paragraph of Article 7 of Decision No 1/80,
     notwithstanding a long-term custodial sentence, in the
     case where the member of the family of the Turkish                                         (Case C-360/00)
     worker is entitled only to respond to any offer of
     employment subject to the priority to be given to workers                                  (2000/C 355/19)
     from the Member States (Article 7, first paragraph, first
     indent)?                                                          Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
                                                                       European Communities by the Bundesgerichtshof (Federal
                                                                       Court of Justice) by order of 30 March 2000, received at the
                                                                       Court Registry on 28 September 2000, for a preliminary ruling
                                                                       in the case of Land Hessen against G. Ricordi & Co. Bühnen-
                                                                       und Musikverlag GmbH on the following question: