CELEX: C1998/234/13
Language: en
Date: 1998-07-25 00:00:00
Title: JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Fifth Chamber) of 14 May 1998 in Case C-364/96 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bezirksgericht für Handelssachen Wien): Verein für Konsumenteninformation v Österreichische Kreditversicherungs AG (Directive 90/314/EEC on package travel, package holidays and package tours - Extent of protection against the risk of the organiser's insolvency)

25.7.98               EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                      C 234/7
established at Groothusen-Krummhörn (Germany),                       President of the Chamber, R. Schintgen, G. F. Mancini and
represented by Professor Detlef Schumacher, Bremen, and              G. Hirsch (Rapporteur) Judges, M. B. Elmer, Advocate
Benno Grunewald, Rechtsanwalt, Bremen Ð appeal                       General; H. von Holstein, Deputy Registrar, has given a
against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (First           judgment on 14 May 1998, in which it:
Chamber) of 13 December 1995 in Case T-109/94
Windpark Groothusen v Commission [1995] ECR II-3007,                 1. Sets aside points 1, 2 and 4 of the operative part of
seeking to have that judgment set aside, the other party to               the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the
the proceedings being Commission of the European                          European Communities of 26 June 1996 in Case T-91/
Communities, represented by Jürgen Grunwald Ð the                         95 De Nil and Impens v Council;
Court (Third Chamber), composed of: C. Gulmann,
President of Chamber, J. C. Moitinho de Almeida,
(Rapporteur) and J.-P. Puissochet, Judges; G. Cosmas,                2. Dismisses the applicants' claim for compensation for
Advocate General; H. A. Rühl, Principal Administrator,                    non-material damage;
for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 14 May 1998,
in which it:                                                         3. Refers the case back to the Court of First Instance for
                                                                          judgment on the applicants' claim for compensation
                                                                          for material damage;
1. Dismisses the appeal;
                                                                     4. Reserves the costs.
2. Orders the appellant to pay the costs.
                                                                     (1) OJ C 269 of 14.9.1996.
( ) OJ C 108 of 13.4.1996.
 1
                                                                                   JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
              JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                                         (Fifth Chamber)
                       (Sixth Chamber)                                                      of 14 May 1998
                       of 14 May 1998                                in Case C-364/96 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
                                                                     the Bezirksgericht für Handelssachen Wien): Verein für
in Case C-259/96 P: Council of the European Union v                  Konsumenteninformation v Österreichische Kreditversiche-
           Lieve de Nil and Christiane Impens (1)                                              rungs AG (1)
(Appeal Ð Officials Ð Internal competition Ð Measures                (Directive 90/314/EEC on package travel, package
implementing a judgment annulling a decision Ð                       holidays and package tours Ð Extent of protection against
Promotion to a higher category following a competition                           the risk of the organiser's insolvency)
with no retroactive effect Ð Material and non-material
                                                                                              (98/C 234/13)
                           damage)
                        (98/C 234/12)                                               (Language of the case: German)
               (Language of the case: French)                          (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be
                                                                              published in the European Court Reports)
  (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be       In Case C-364/97: reference to the Court under Article 177
         published in the European Court Reports)                    of the EC Treaty from the Bezirksgericht für
                                                                     Handelssachen Wien for a preliminary ruling in the
In Case C-259/96 P: appeal by the Council of the                     proceedings pending before that court between Verein für
European Union (Agents: Jean-Paul JacqueÂ, Diego Canga               Konsumenteninformation und Österreichische Kreditversi-
Fano and TheÂreÁse Blanchet) against the judgment of the             cherungs AG Ð on the interpretation of Council Directive
Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) of 26 June 1996             90/314/EEC of 13 June 1990 on package travel, package
in Case T-91/95 De Nil and Impens v Council [1996]                   holidays and package tours (OJ L 158 of 23.6.1990,
ECR-SC II-959, seeking to have that judgment set aside,              p. 59), the Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of: C.
the other parties to the proceedings being Lieve de Nil, an          Gulmann, (Rapporteur), President of the Chamber, M.
official of the European Union, residing in Wolvertem                Wathelet, J. C. Moitinho de Almeida, J.-P. Puissochet and
(Belgium) and Christiane Impens, an official of the                  L. Sevón, Judges; G. Tesauro, Advocate General;
Council of the European Union, residing in Brussels,                 L. Hewlett, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, has
represented by Jean-NoeÈl Louis, Thierry Demaseure,                  given a judgment on 14 May 1998, in which it has ruled:
VeÂronique Leclercq and Ariane Tornel, of the Brussels Bar,
with an address for service in Luxembourg at the offices             Article 7 of Council Directive 90/314/EEC of 13 June
of Fiduciaire Myson SARL, 30 Rue de Cessange, the                    1990 on package travel, package holidays and package
Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of: H. Ragnemalm,                    tours is to be interpreted as covering, as security for the
 ---pagebreak--- C 234/8               EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                      25.7.98
refund of money paid over, a situation in which the                       markets. In that regard, the capacity in which the
purchaser of a package holiday who has paid the travel                    Member State grants aid under Council Regulation
organiser for the costs of his accommodation before                       (EEC) No 1765/92 of 30 June 1992 establishing a
travelling on his holiday is compelled, following the travel              support system for producers of certain arable crops,
organiser's insolvency, to pay the hotelier for his                       the fact that the rules of that Member State on set-off
accommodation again in order to be able to leave the                      require, for set-off to be available, reciprocity of debts
hotel and return home.                                                    as between debtor and creditor, the practice generally
                                                                          followed by the Member State regarding set-off and
(1) OJ C 9 of 11.1.1997.                                                  the legal basis of the debt to the State involved in the
                                                                          set-off are of no importance, provided that the
                                                                          national authorities ensure that the effectiveness of
                                                                          Community law is not in any way undermined and
                                                                          that economic operators enjoy equal treatment. It is
                                                                          for the national court to determine whether that is the
                                                                          case.
               JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                       of 19 May 1998                                2. On a proper construction of Article 15(3) of
                                                                          Regulation No 1765/92, Member States are not
in Case C-132/95 (reference for a preliminary ruling from                 precluded from requiring a national intervention
the éstre Landsret): Bent Jensen and Korn- og                             agency to effect set-off with debts payable to the State
Foderstofkompagniet A/S v Landbrugsministeriet, EF-                       in the case of a beneficiary of compensatory payments.
                        Direktoratet (1)
(Community law Ð Principles Ð Set-off of amounts paid                3. On a proper construction of Article 10(1) of
under Community law against debts payable to a Member                     Regulation No 1765/92, payment of the compensatory
State Ð Common agricultural policy Ð Regulation (EEC)                     payments to which it refers may be deferred until it
No 1765/92 Ð Support system for producers of certain                      has been verified whether the State has any claim
                          arable crops)                                   against the beneficiary thereof for which set-off may
                         (98/C 234/14)                                    be available, provided that the payment is made no
                                                                          later than 31 December in the year in question.
                (Language of the case: Danish)                       (1) OJ C 189 of 22.7.1995.
  (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be
          published in the European Court Reports)
In Case C-132/95: reference to the Court under Article 177                          JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
of the EC Treaty from the éstre Landsret (Eastern                                            of 19 May 1998
Regional Court) (Denmark), for a preliminary ruling in
the proceedings pending before that court between Bent               in Case C-3/96: Commission of the European
Jensen and Korn- og Foderstofkompagniet A/S and                      Communities v Kingdom of the Netherlands, supported by
Landbrugsministeriet, EF-Direktoratet           Ð on the                          the Federal Republic of Germany (1)
interpretation of Community law with regard to set-off                  (Conservation of wild birds Ð Special protection areas)
between amounts paid under Community law and debts
payable to a Member State and of Articles 10(1) and                                           (98/C 234/15)
15(3) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1765/92 of 30 June
1992 establishing a support system for producers of                                  (Language of the case: Dutch)
certain arable crops (OJ L 181 of 1.7.1992, p. 12) Ð the
Court, composed of: G. C. Rodríguez Iglesias, President,
C. Gulmann, M. Wathelet (Presidents of Chambers),                      (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be
G. F. Mancini (Rapporteur), J. C. Moitinho de Almeida,                         published in the European Court Reports)
J. L. Murray, J.-P. Puissochet, G. Hirsch and L. Sevón,
Judges; N. Fennelly, Advocate General; H. von Holstein,
Deputy Registrar, for the Registrar, has given a judgment            In Case C-3/96: Commission of the European
on 19 May 1998, in which it has ruled:                               Communities, represented by W. Wils, v Kingdom of the
                                                                     Netherlands, represented by M. A. Fierstra and J. S. van
                                                                     den Oosterkamp, supported by the Federal Republic of
1. Community law does not preclude a Member State                    Germany, represented by E. Röder and S. Maaû Ð
     from effecting set-off between an amount due to a               application for a declaration that, by failing sufficiently to
     beneficiary of aid payable under Community                      designate special protection areas within the meaning of
     legislation and an outstanding debt to that Member              Article 4(1) of Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April
     State. The position would be different only if that             1979 on the conservation of wild birds (OJ L 103 of
     practice were to interfere with the proper functioning          25.4.1979, p. 1), the Kingdom of the Netherlands has
     of the common organisation of the agricultural                  failed to comply with its obligations under that directive