CELEX: C1995/229/01
Language: en
Date: 1995-09-02 00:00:00
Title: JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Fifth Chamber) of 1 June 1995 in Case C-414/93 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the College van Beroep voor het Bedrijfsleven en Waterstaat (Structural improvements in inland waterway transport - Scrapping premiums - Available financial resources - Scrapping Fund - Separate accounts - Budget)

2 . 9. 95           EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                   No C 229/ 1
                                                                  I
                                                            (Information)
                                              COURT OF JUSTICE
                                                        COURT OF JUSTICE
               JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                  1 . Article 5 (1 ) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1101 /89
                       ( Fifth Chamber)                                   of 27 April 1989 on structural improvements in inland
                                                                          waterway transport is not to be interpreted as meaning
                        of 1 June 1995                                    that a valid application for a scrapping premium must be
in Case C-414/93 (reference for a preliminary ruling                      accepted if the aggregate financial resources available to
from the College van Beroep voor het Bedrijfsleven en                     the Funds ofthe Member States concerned are sufficient.
                         Waterstaat (M                                    Nor is that provision to be interpreted as meaning that
 (Structural improvements in inland waterway transport —                  an application for a scrapping premium for a pusher
 Scrapping premiums — Available financial resources —                     craft must be accepted ifthe financial resources available
       Scrapping Fund — Separate accounts — Budget)                       in the common account for dry*cargo vessels and pusher
                                                                          craft, referred to in Article 3 (3) of the abovementioned
                         ( 95/C 229/01                                    Regulation, are sufficient as a whole;
                (Language of the case: Dutch)                        2 . Article 1 (2) and Article 8 of Commission Regulation
                                                                          (EEC) No 1102/89 of 27 April 1989 laying down
                                                                          certain measures for implementing Council Regulation
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be              (EEC) No 1101 /89 on structural improvements in
          published in the European Court Reports)                        inland waterway transport must be interpreted as
                                                                          meaning that a valid application for a scrapping
In Case C-4 14/93 : reference to the Court under Article 177              premium for a pusher craft must be refused when the
of the EC Treaty by the College van Beroep voor het                       financial resources required to cover it exceed the
Bedrijfsleven, Netherlands, for a preliminary ruling in the               budget ofECU 5 million provided for in Article 1 (2) for
proceedings pending before that court between F. D.                       pusher craft, notwithstanding the fact that the other
Teirlinck and Minister van Verkeer en Waterstaat on the                   budgets mentioned in that provision for dry-cargo
interpretation of Article 5 ( 1 ) of Council Regulation ( EEC )           vessels and/or for tanker vessels are not used up after all
No 1101/89 of 27 April 1989 on structural improvements in                 the applications for scrapping premiums relating to
inland waterway transport (2 ), on the interpretation and                 those two types of vessel have been accepted;
validity of Articles 1 ( 2 ) and 8 of Commission Regulation
( EEC ) No 1102/89 of 27 April 1989 laying down certain              3 . examination of the points raised has disclosed no factor
measures for implementing Council Regulation ( EEC )                      of such a nature as to affect the validity of the
No 1101/89 ( 3 ) on the interpretation of Article 6 (4 ) of the           Commission Regulation;
latter Regulation, and on the validity of Letter No 56765 of
29 June 1990 addressed by the Commission to the Kingdom              4 . examination of the points raised has revealed no factor
of the Netherlands determining the applications for                       of such a nature as to affect the validity of the decision
scrapping premiums which may be accepted by the                           contained in Letter No 56765 addressed by the
Funds .                                                                   Commission      to   the Netherlands      Government on
                                                                          29 June 1990;
The Court ( Fifth Chamber), composed of: C. Gulmann
( Rapporteur), President of the Chamber, P. Jann, J. C.              5 . Article 6 (4) of the Commission Regulation is to be
Moitinho de Almeida, D. A. O. Edward and J.-P. Puissochet,                interpreted as meaning that an application for a
Judges, Advocate-General: F. C. Jacobs, Registrar: H. A.                  scrapping premium amounting to more than 70 % ofthe
Riihl, Principal Administrator, gave a judgment on 1 June                 rates laid down for each type or category of vessel is not
1995 whose operative part is as follows :                                 to be deemed to be accepted when the Fund authorities
 ---pagebreak--- No C 229/2               EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                      2 . 9 . 95
       did not inform the applicant in writing, before                                 JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
       1 September 1 990, of the result of his application.                                       of 6 June 1995
                                                                         in Case C-434/93 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
(') OJ No C 306 , 12 . 11 . 1993 .                                       the Raad van State, Netherlands ): Ahmet Bozkurt v.
( 2 ) OJ No L 116 , 28 . 4 . 1989 , p . 25 .
( 3 ) OJ No L 116 , 28 . 4 . 1989 , p . 30 .
                                                                                         Staatssecretaris van Justitie ( 1 )
                                                                         (Association Agreement between the EEC and Turkey —
                                                                         Decision of the Association Council — Freedom of
                                                                         movement for workers — International lorry-driver —
                                                                             Permanent incapacity for work — Right to remain)
                                                                                                    95/C 229/03
                 JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                           ( Fifth Chamber)                                              (Language of the case: Dutch)
                            of 1 June 1995
                                                                         (Provisional translation; the definitive text will be published
         in Case C-123/94 : Commission of the European                                  in the European Court Reports)
               Communities v. Hellenic Republic (^
 (Freedom of movement for workers — Equal treatment —                    In Case C-434/93 : reference to the Court under Article 177
    Recruitment of foreigners by private language schools)
                                                                         of the EC Treaty from the Raad van State ( Council of State,
                             ( 95/C 229/02 )                             Netherlands ) for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings
                                                                         pending before that court between Ahmet Bozkurt and the
                    (Language of the case: Greek)                        Staatssecretaris van Justitie on the interpretation of Article 2
                                                                         of Decision No 2/76 of 20 December 1976 and Article 6 of
                                                                         Decision No 1/80 of 19 September 1980 of the Association
 (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be
                                                                         Council established by the agreement establishing an
             published in the European Court Reports)
                                                                         Association between the European Economic Community
                                                                         and Turkey, signed on 12 September 1963 in Ankara and
 In Case C-123/94 : Commission of the European                           approved on behalf of the Community by Council Decision
 Communities ( Agent: Maria Patakia ) v. Hellenic Republic                64/732/EEC ( 2 ).
 (Agents: Aikaterini Samoni-Rantou and Evi Skandalou ) —
 application for a declaration that, by maintaining in force
 the provisions of Article 70 of Decree Law No 2545/1940                 The Court, composed of G. C. Rodriguez Iglesias, President,
 and Decision No 46508 of 10/ 17 May 1976 of the Minister                 F. A. Schockweiler ( Rapporteur ), P. J. G. Kapteyn and
                                                                          C. Gulmann, Presidents of Chambers, G. F. Mancini, C. N.
 for National Education and Religious Affairs ( as
                                                                          Kakouris, J. C. Moitinho de Almeida , J. L. Murray, D. A. O.
 subsequently amended ), the Hellenic Republic has failed to
 fulfil its obligations under the EC Treaty and Article 3 ( 1 ) of        Edward, J. -P. Puissochet and G. Hirsch, Judges; M. B.
 Council Regulation ( EEC ) No 1612/68 of 15 October 1968                 Elmer, Advocate-General; H. von Holstein, Deputy
 on       freedom    of movement         for workers    within  the       Registrar, has given a judgment on 6 June 1995 in which it
                                                                          ruled :
 Community ( 2 ) — the Court ( Fifth Chamber ), composed of:
 C. Gulmann, President of the Chamber, J. C. Moitinho de
 Almeida ( Rapporteur ), D. A. O. Edward, J. -P. Puissochet               1.  in order to ascertain whether a Turkish worker
 and L. Sevon, Judges; M. B. Elmer, Advocate-General;                         employed as an international lorry-driver belongs to the
 R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment on 1 June 1 995 , in               legitimate labour force of a Member State, for the
 which it :                                                                   purposes of Article 6 (1 ) of Decision No 1 /80 of
                                                                              19 September 1980 of the Association Council
  1 . declares that, by maintaining in force the provisions of                established by the agreement establishing and
        Article 70 of Decree Law No 2545/1940 and Decision                    Association between the European Economic
        No 46508 of 10/17 May 1976 of the Minister for                        Community and Turkey, signed on 12 September 1963
        National Education and Religious Affairs (as                          in Ankara and approved on behalfof the Community by
        subsequently amended), the Hellenic Republic has failed               Council Decision 64/732/EEC of 23 December 1963, it
        to fulfil its obligations under Community law, more                   is for the national court to determine whether the
        specifically Article 48 (2) of the EC Treaty and Article 3            applicant's employment relationship retained a
        (1 ) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 of                        sufficiently close link with the territory of the Member
        15 October 1968 on freedom of movement for workers                    State, and, in so doing, to take account, in particular, of
        within the Community;                                                 the place where he was hired, the territory on which the
                                                                              paid employment is based and the applicable national
                                                                              legislation in the field ofemployment and social security
  2 . orders the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.                          law;
  (•) OJ No C 174 , 25 . 6 . 1994 .                                       2 . the existence of legal employment in a Member State
  (2 ) OJ No L 257, 19 . 10 . 1968 , p . 2 .                                   within the meaning ofArticle 6 (1 ) of Decision No 1 /80,
                                                                               cited above, can be established in the case of a Turkish
                                                                               worker who was not required by the national legislation