CELEX: C2007/283/25
Language: en
Date: 2007-11-24 00:00:00
Title: Case C-408/07: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Frankfurt am Main (Germany) lodged on 5 September 2007 — Brigitte Ruf and Gertrud Elsässer v European Central Bank (ECB), Coop Himmelblau Prix, Dreibholz & Partner ZT GmbH, Intervener in support of the first defendant: City of Frankfurt am Main

24.11.2007   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 283/14
            
         Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Frankfurt am Main (Germany) lodged on 5 September 2007 — Brigitte Ruf and Gertrud Elsässer v European Central Bank (ECB), Coop Himmelblau Prix, Dreibholz & Partner ZT GmbH, Intervener in support of the first defendant: City of Frankfurt am Main
   (Case C-408/07)
   (2007/C 283/25)
   Language of the case: German
   Referring court
   Landgericht Frankfurt am Main
   Parties to the main proceedings
   
      Applicants: Brigitte Ruf, née Elsässer, and Gertrud Elsässer, née Sommer
   
      Defendants: European Central Bank (ECB), Coop Himmelblau Prix, Dreibholz & Partner ZT GmbH
   
      Intervener in support of the first defendant: City of Frankfurt am Main
   Questions referred
   
               1.
            
            
               Is the second paragraph of Article 288 EC to be interpreted as meaning that it is an action ‘in the performance of its duties’ where a Community institution plans a specific building measure for the construction of its new business premises?
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Is the second paragraph of Article 288 EC to be interpreted as meaning that the forms of compensation for damage which the Community judicature is authorised to order also include an order to desist from a potential but not yet actual infringement of a right (breach of moral rights)?
            
         
               3.
            
            
               Is the second paragraph of Article 288 EC to be interpreted as meaning that the Court of Justice has exclusive jurisdiction also in cases where the applicant bases the compensation obligation of the Community institution on an infringement of national law?