CELEX: C1995/208/17
Language: en
Date: 1995-08-12 00:00:00
Title: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht by order of that court of 11 April 1995 in the case of Recep Tetik v. Land Berlin, intervener: Oberbundesanwalt beim Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Case C-171/95)

No C 208/8              EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                               12 . 8 . 95
      with the rules applying to such aid . Furthermore, by             20 December 1963 to claim that he has preserved his
      reason of the first decision, NN 12/91 , PYRSA was in             entitlement to unemployment benefits but where he
      receipt of aid which was considered compatible by the             demonstrates that, on the date of his application, he satisfied
      Commission when it reviewed it a posteriori. The action           the conditions regarding qualifying periods for acquisition
      for annulment brought in Case C- 198/91 Cook v.                   of entitlement to those benefits ?
      Commission had no suspensory effect. In these
      circumstances, it is perfectly logical that the recipient
                                                                        (') OJ No L 149 , 5 . 7 . 1971 , p . 2 . English Special Edition , 1971(11 ),
      undertaking should have based its legitimate                           p . 416 .
      expectations on the compatibility of that aid, bearing in
      mind , moreover, that the Court, in its judgment in Cook,
      did not even state directly that the aid was incompatible
      but rather that it was illegal by reason of the failure to
      initiate the procedure provided for in Article 93 ( 2 ) of
      the Treaty . Thus, it was not until March 1994 that
      PYRSA found itself in receipt of aid which the
      Commission itself had initially declared compatible and           Reference for a preliminary ruling from the
      which was now declared incompatible .                             Bundesverwaltungsgericht by order of that court of 1 1 April
                                                                        1995 in the case of Recep Tetik v. Land Berlin, intervener:
                                                                             Oberbundesanwalt beim Bundesverwaltungsgericht
— In any event, interest should be calculated solely from
      the date of the Commission's decision declaring the aid                                      ( Case C-171/95 )
      previously granted to PYRSA incompatible, that is, from                                        ( 95/C 208/17 )
      14 March 1995 .
                                                                        Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
(M OJ No C 251 , 27. 9 . 1988 , p . 4 .                                 European Communities by an order of the
( 2 ) OJ No C 326 , 11 . 11 . 1992 , p . 5 .                            Bundesverwaltungsgericht,                 Erster      Senat        ( Federal
                                                                        Administrative Court, First Senate ) of 11 April 1995 ,
                                                                        which was received at the Court Registry on 7 June 1995 ,
                                                                        for a preliminary ruling in the case of Recep Tetik
                                                                        v. Land Berlin, intervener : Oberbundesanwalt beim Bundes­
                                                                        verwaltungsgericht, on the following questions :
                                                                         1 . is a Turkish seaman, who was employed from 1980 to
                                                                              1988 on maritime vessels of a Member State, a member
                                                                              of the legitimate labour force of that Member State and
                                                                              legally employed there within the meaning of
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de                           Article 6 ( 1 ) of Decision No 1 /80 of the EEC/Turkey
Cassation, Belgium (Third Chamber), by judgment of that                       Association Council on the development of the
court of 15 May 1995 in the case of Office National de                        Association where his employment relationship was
                   l'Emploi v. Calogero Spataro                               governed by national law and he paid income tax and
                         ( Case C-l 70/95 )                                   was affiliated to the social security system in that
                                                                              Member State, but the work permit issued to him was
                           ( 95/C 208/16 )
                                                                              limited to working in shipping and did not authorize
                                                                              him to take up residence on shore ?
 Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                       Is it relevant in that connection that under German law
European Communities by a judgment of the Cour de                             that activity is not subject to the requirement of a work
 Cassation ( Court of Cassation ), Belgium ( Third Chamber )                  permit and that, to some extent, special statutory
 of 15 May 1995 , which was received at the Court Registry                    arrangements apply to seamen from the point of view of
 on 6 June 1995 , for a preliminary ruling in the case of Office              employment law and social security law ?
 National de l'Emploi v. Calogero Spataro on the following
 question:
                                                                         2 . If question 1 is answered in the affirmative :
 Must Article 69 (4 ) of Regulation ( EEC ) No 1408/71 of                     does a Turkish seaman lose his right to be granted a
 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes                   residence permit if he terminates his employment
 to employed persons, to self-employed persons and to                         relationship voluntarily, and not, for example, on health
 members of their families moving within the                                  grounds , and 11 days later, after the expiry of his
 Community ( ] ), in the version contained in Regulation                      residence permit, applies for a residence permit for work
 ( EEC ) No 2001 /83 of 2 June 1983 , be construed in the sense               on shore and after the refusal to grant the permit is
 that the requirement that an unemployed person should                         unemployed ?
 have been employed for at least three months since his
 return to Belgium is applicable where the unemployed
 person does not rely on Article 123 of the Royal Decree of