CELEX: C2003/112/02
Language: en
Date: 2003-05-10 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 13 March 2003 in Case C-156/00: Kingdom of the Netherlands v Commission of the European Communities (Action for annulment of Commission Decision C(2000) 485 final — Remission of import duties — Inward processing — Lack of equivalence between Community products and imported products)

10.5.2003               EN                           Official Journal of the European Union                                                  C 112/1
                                                                          I
                                                                   (Information)
                                                      COURT OF JUSTICE
                                                               COURT OF JUSTICE
                 JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                             Denmark concerning the use of sulphites, nitrites and nitrates
                                                                                   in foodstuffs in so far as it rejects those national provisions
                                                                                   relating to the use of nitrites and nitrates in foodstuffs;
                         of 20 March 2003
                                                                             2.    Dismisses the remainder of the application;
in Case C-3/00: Kingdom of Denmark v Commission of                           3.    Orders the parties to pay their own costs;
                the European Communities (1)
                                                                             4.    Orders the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway to
(Approximation of laws — Directive 95/2/EC — Use of                                pay their own costs.
sulphites, nitrites and nitrates as food additives — Protection
of health — Stricter national provisions — Conditions of                     (1 ) OJ C 122 of 29.4.2000.
application of Article 95(4) EC — Principle of the right to
                              be heard)
                          (2003/C 112/01)
                   (Language of the case: Danish)                                              JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published                                  (Fifth Chamber)
                   in the European Court Reports)
                                                                                                      of 13 March 2003
                                                                             in Case C-156/00: Kingdom of the Netherlands v Com-
In Case C-3/00, Kingdom of Denmark (Agent: J. Molde)                                    mission of the European Communities (1)
supported by Republic of Iceland (Agent: H. S. Kristjánsson)
and Kingdom of Norway (Agent: B. B. Ekeberg) v Commission                    (Action for annulment of Commission Decision C(2000)
of the European Communities (Agents: M. Shotter and                          485 final — Remission of import duties — Inward pro-
H. C. Støvlbæk): Application for the annulment of Commission                 cessing — Lack of equivalence between Community products
Decision 1999/830/EC of 26 October 1999 on the national                                             and imported products)
provisions notified by the Kingdom of Denmark concerning
the use of sulphites, nitrites and nitrates in foodstuffs (OJ 1999                                      (2003/C 112/02)
L 329, p. 1), the Court, composed of: G. C. Rodríguez Iglesias,
President, J.-P. Puissochet, M. Wathelet and R. Schintgen
(Presidents of Chambers), C. Gulmann, D. A. O. Edward, A. La                                      (Language of the case: Dutch)
Pergola, P. Jann, V. Skouris, F. Macken, N. Colneric, S. von Bahr
and J. N. Cunha Rodrigues (Rapporteur), Judges; A. Tizzano,                  (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
Advocate General; H. von Holstein, Deputy Registrar, has                                         in the European Court Reports)
given a judgment on 20 March 2003, in which it:
1.    Annuls Commission Decision 1999/830/EC of 26 October                   In Case C-156/00, Kingdom of the Netherlands (Agent: initially
      1999 on the national provisions notified by the Kingdom of             M. A. Fierstra, and, subsequently, the former together with
 ---pagebreak--- C 112/2                  EN                           Official Journal of the European Union                                               10.5.2003
J. van Bakel) v Commission of the European Communities                        ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between
(Agents: C. van der Hauwaert and R. Tricot): Application for                  Helga Kutz-Bauer and Freie und Hansestadt Hamburg, on the
annulment of Commission Decision C(2000) 485 final of                         interpretation of Articles 2(1) and 5(1) of Council Directive
23 February 2000 determining in a particular case that an                     76/207/EEC of 9 February 1976 on the implementation of the
application for remission of import duties is inadmissible in a               principle of equal treatment for men and women as regards
specified amount and that there is no justification for remission             access to employment, vocational training and promotion,
of import duties in a separate amount, the Court (Fifth                       and working conditions (OJ 1976 L 39, p. 40), the Court
Chamber), composed of: C.W.A. Timmermans, President of                        (Sixth Chamber), composed of: R. Schintgen, President of the
the Fourth Chamber, acting for the President of the Fifth                     Second Chamber, acting for the President of the Sixth Chamb-
Chamber, D. A. O. Edward, P. Jann, S. von Bahr (Rapporteur)                   er, C. Gulmann, V. Skouris, F. Macken (Rapporteur) and
and A. Rosas, Judges; P. Léger, Advocate General; M.-F. Contet,               J. N. Cunha Rodrigues, Judges; A. Tizzano, Advocate General;
Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment              L. Hewlett, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, has given
on 13 March 2003, in which it:                                                a judgment on 20 March 2003, in which it has ruled:
1.    Annuls Commission Decision C(2000) 485 final of 23 Febru-
      ary 2000 determining in a particular case that an application
      for remission of import duties is inadmissible in a specified
      amount and that there is no justification for remission of import
      duties in a separate amount in so far as it declares inadmissible       1.    Articles 2(1) and 5(1) of Council Directive 76/207/EEC on
      the amount of NLG 15 679 301,49 of the application for                        the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men
      remission of import duties submitted by Cargill BV and referred               and women as regards access to employment, vocational
      to the Commission of the European Communities on 22 April                     training and promotion, and working conditions, must be
      1999 by the Kingdom of the Netherlands;                                       interpreted as meaning that they preclude a provision of a
                                                                                    collective agreement applicable to the public service which allows
2.    Dismisses the remainder of the action;                                        male and female employees to take advantage of a scheme of
                                                                                    part-time work for older employees where under that provision
3.    Orders the Kingdom of the Netherlands to pay the costs.                       the right to participate in the scheme of part-time work applies
                                                                                    only until the date on which the person concerned first becomes
                                                                                    eligible for a retirement pension at the full rate under the
( 1) OJ C 211 of 22.7.2000.
                                                                                    statutory old-age insurance scheme and where the class of
                                                                                    persons eligible for such a pension at the age of 60 consists
                                                                                    almost exclusively of women whereas the class of persons
                                                                                    entitled to receive such a pension only from the age of
                                                                                    65 consists almost exclusively of men, unless that provision is
                                                                                    justified by objective criteria unrelated to any discrimination on
                                                                                    grounds of sex.
                  JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                          (Sixth Chamber)
                          of 20 March 2003                                    2.    In the case of a breach of Directive 76/207 by legislative
                                                                                    provisions or by provisions of collective agreements introducing
                                                                                    discrimination contrary to that directive, the national courts are
in Case C-187/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
                                                                                    required to set aside that discrimination, using all the means at
the Arbeitsgericht Hamburg): Helga Kutz-Bauer v Freie
                                                                                    their disposal, and in particular by applying those provisions
                   und Hansestadt Hamburg ( 1)
                                                                                    for the benefit of the class placed at a disadvantage, and are not
                                                                                    required to request or await the setting aside of the provisions
(Social policy — Equal treatment for men and women —                                by the legislature, by collective negotiation or otherwise.
Scheme of part-time work for older employees — Directive
76/207/EEC — Indirect discrimination — Objective justifi-
                                cation)
                           (2003/C 112/03)
                                                                              (1 ) OJ C 211 of 22.7.2000.
                    (Language of the case: German)
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                    in the European Court Reports)
In Case C-187/00: Reference to the Court under Article 234
EC by the Arbeitsgericht Hamburg (Germany) for a preliminary