CELEX: C2000/302/20
Language: en
Date: 2000-10-21 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 6 July 2000 in Case C-407/98 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Överklagandenämnden för Högskolan, Sweden): Katarina Abrahamsson, Leif Anderson v Elisabet Fogelqvist (Concept of "national court or tribunal" — Equal treatment for men and women — Positive action in favour of women — Compatibility with Community law)

21.10.2000               EN                       Official Journal of the European Communities                                           C 302/11
                 JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                       —     Commission Regulation (EC) No 1067/95 of 12 May 1995
                                                                                   amending Regulation (EEC) No 3478/92 laying down detailed
                          (Sixth Chamber)                                          rules for the application of the premium system for raw tobacco.
                            of 6 July 2000
                                                                             (1) OJ C 1 of 4.1.1999.
in Case C-402/98 (reference for a preliminary ruling
from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale del Lazio):
Agricola Tabacchi Bonavicina Snc di Mercati Federica
(ATB) and Others v Ministero per le Politiche Agricole,
Azienda di Stato per gli Interventi nel Mercato Agricolo
                  (AIMA) and Mario Pittaro (1)
(Common organisation of the market — Raw tobacco —
Validity of Council Regulation (EC) No 711/95 and of
 Commission Regulations (EC) Nos 1066/95 and 1067/95)                                          JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                           (2000/C 302/19)
                                                                                                         (Fifth Chamber)
                     (Language of the case: Italian)                                                      of 6 July 2000
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published       in Case C-407/98 (reference for a preliminary ruling
                    in the European Court Reports)                           from the Överklagandenämnden för Högskolan, Sweden):
                                                                             Katarina Abrahamsson, Leif Anderson v Elisabet Fogel-
In Case C-402/98: reference to the Court under Article 177                                                    qvist (1)
of the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) by the Tribunale
Amministrativo Regionale del Lazio (Regional Administrative                  (Concept of ‘national court or tribunal’ — Equal treatment
Court, Lazio), Italy, for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings            for men and women — Positive action in favour of women
pending before that court between: Agricola Tabacchi Bonavic-                             — Compatibility with Community law)
ina Snc di Mercati Federica (ATB) and Others and Ministero
per le Politiche Agricole, Azienda di Stato per gli Interventi nel
Mercato Agricolo (AIMA) and Mario Pittaro, on the validity of                                            (2000/C 302/20)
Council Regulation (EC) No 711/95 of 27 March 1995
amending Regulation (EEC) No 2075/92 on the common
organisation of the market in raw tobacco (OJ 1995 L 73,
                                                                                                 (Language of the case: Swedish)
p. 13), Commission Regulation (EC) No 1066/95 of 12 May
1995 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council
Regulation (EEC) No 2075/92 as regards the raw tobacco
quota system for the 1995, 1996 and 1997 harvests (OJ 1995                   (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
L 108, p. 5) and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1067/95 of                                         in the European Court Reports)
12 May 1995 amending Regulation (EEC) No 3478/92 laying
down detailed rules for the application of the premium system
for raw tobacco (OJ 1995 L 108, p. 11) — the Court (Sixth                    In Case C-407/98: reference to the Court under Article 177 of
Chamber), composed of: J.C. Moitinho de Almeida (Rappor-                     the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) from the Överklagande-
teur), President of the Chamber, C. Gulmann, J.-P. Puissochet,               nämnden födr Högskolan (Sweden) for a preliminary ruling in
V. Skouris and F. Macken, Judges; D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer,                    the proceedings pending before that court between Katarina
Advocate General; H.A. Rühl, Principal Administrator, for the                Abrahamsson, Leif Anderson v Elisabet Fogelqvist — on the
Registrar, has given a judgment on 6 July 2000, in which it                  interpretation of Article 2(1) and (4) of Council Directive
held:                                                                        76/207/EEC of 9 February 1976 on the implementation of the
                                                                             principle of equal treatment for men and women as regards
                                                                             access to employment, vocational training and promotion,
Consideration of the question referred for a preliminary ruling has          and working conditions (OJ 1976 L 39, p. 40) — the Court
disclosed no factor of such a kind as to affect the validity of:             (Fifth Chamber) composed of: D.A.O. Edward, President of the
                                                                             Chamber, L. Sevón, P.J.G. Kapteyn (Rapporteur), P. Jann and
—     Council Regulation (EC) No 711/95 of 27 March 1995                     H. Ragnemalm, Judges; Advocate General: A. Saggio; Registrar:
      amending Regulation (EEC) No 2075/92 on the common                     R. Grass, has given a judgment on 6 July 2000, in which it has
      organisation of the market in raw tobacco;                             ruled:
—     Commission Regulation (EC) No 1066/95 of 12 May 1995
      laying down detailed rules for the application of Council              1.    Article 2(1) and (4) of Council Directive 76/207/EEC of
      Regulation (EEC) No 2075/92 as regards the raw tobacco                       9 February 1976 on the implementation of the principle of
      quota system for the 1995, 1996 and 1997 harvests; and                       equal treatment for men and women as regards access to
 ---pagebreak--- C 302/12                 EN                       Official Journal of the European Communities                                           21.10.2000
      employment, vocational training and promotion, and working             Siegen (Germany) for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings
      conditions and Article 141(4) EC preclude national legislation         pending before that court between Margrit Dietrich and
      under which a candidate for a public post who belongs to the           Westdeutscher Rundfunk — on the interpretation of
      under-represented sex and possesses sufficient qualifications for      Article 2(a) and 1(3)(a) of Council Directive 90/270/EEC of
      that post must be chosen in preference to a candidate of the           29 May 1990 on the minimum safety and health requirements
      opposite sex who would otherwise have been appointed, where            for work with display screen equipment (fifth individual
      this is necessary to secure the appointment of a candidate of the      Directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive
      under-represented sex and the difference between the respective        89/391/EEC) (OJ 1990 L 156, p. 14) — the Court (Sixth
      merits of the candidates is not so great as to give rise to a          Chamber), composed of: J.C. Moitinho de Almeida (Rappor-
      breach of the requirement of objectivity in making appointments.       teur), President of the Chamber, R. Schintgen, C. Gulmann,
                                                                             J.-P. Puissochet and V. Skouris, Judges; A. Saggio, Advocate
2.    Article 2(1) and (4) of Directive 76/207 and Article 141(4)            General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment on 6 July
      EC also preclude national legislation of that kind where it            2000, in which it has ruled:
      applies only to procedures for filling a predetermined number of
      posts or to posts created as part of a specific programme of a         1.     The term ‘graphic display screen’, for the purposes of Article 2(a)
      particular higher educational institution allowing the appli-                 of Council Directive 90/270/EEC of 29 May 1990 on the
      cation of positive discrimination measures.                                   minimum safety and health requirements for work with display
                                                                                    screen equipment (fifth individual Directive within the meaning
3.    Article 2(1) and (4) of Directive 76/207 does not preclude a                  of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC), must be interpreted
      rule of national case-law under which a candidate belonging to                as including screens that display film recordings in analogue or
      the under-represented sex may be granted preference over a                    digital form.
      competitor of the opposite sex, provided that the candidates
      possess equivalent or substantially equivalent merits, where the       2.     Article 1(3)(a) of Directive 90/270 is to be interpreted as
      candidatures are subjected to an objective assessment which                   meaning that the term ‘control cabs for ... machinery’ does not
      takes account of the specific personal situations of all the                  extend to a job such as that at issue in the main proceedings, in
      candidates.                                                                   which analogue or digital images are processed with the aid of
                                                                                    technical devices and/or computer programmes in order to
4.    The question whether national rules providing for positive                    produce television broadcasts.
      discrimination in the making of appointments in higher
      education are lawful cannot depend on the level of the post to
      be filled.                                                             (1) OJ C 71 of 13.3.1999.
(1) OJ C 1 of 4.1.1999.
                                                                                                JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                  JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                                                                                                        (Sixth Chamber)
                           (Sixth Chamber)
                                                                                                          of 6 July 2000
                            of 6 July 2000
                                                                             in Case C-73/99 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
in Case C-11/99 (reference for a preliminary ruling from                     the Sozialgericht Münster): Viktor Movrin v Landesver-
the Arbeitsgericht Siegen): Margrit Dietrich v                                                 sicherungsanstalt Westfalen (1)
                   Westdeutscher Rundfunk (1)
                                                                             (Social security — EC Treaty — Council Regulation (EEC)
(Directive 90/270/EEC on the minimum safety and health                       No 1408/71 — Recipient of retirement pensions — Compul-
requirements for work with display screen equipment —                        sory sickness insurance scheme in Member State of residence
Scope — Meaning of display screen equipment for the                          — Contribution — Grant under the legislation of another
purposes of Article 2 — Meaning of ‘drivers’ cabs or control                                              Member State)
cabs for vehicles or machinery’ for the purposes of Article 1)
                                                                                                         (2000/C 302/22)
                           (2000/C 302/21)
                                                                                                  (Language of the case: German)
                    (Language of the case: German)
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published       (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                    in the European Court Reports)                                                in the European Court Reports)
In Case C-11/99: reference to the Court under Article 177 of                 In Case C-73/99: reference to the Court under Article 177 of
the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) from the Arbeitsgericht                   the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) by the Sozialgericht (Social