CELEX: C1999/246/23
Language: en
Date: 1999-08-28 00:00:00
Title: Case C-222/99: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Corte d'Appello di Roma, First Civil Division, by order of that court of 12 May 1999 in the case of Ministero delle Finanze and C.A.S.E.R. SpA

28.8.1999               EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                       C 246/11
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tampereen                          (a) the final measure of the public authorities is essentially
Käräjäoikeus by order of that court of 1 June 1999 in the                           an act confirming the independently expressed will of
case of Neste Markkinointi Oy v Yötuuli Ky, Eija Ritamäki,                          the national councils of the associations concerned; or
             Anna-Kaisa Jukkola and Jari Jukkola
                          (Case C-214/99)                                      (b) the final measures of the public authorities essentially
                                                                                    delegate to the members of the associations concerned
                                                                                    the power to set the fee scale at their own discretion,
                          (1999/C 246/21)                                           even after the professional services requested of them
                                                                                    have been performed; or
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by an order of the Tampereen Kärä-
jäoikeus (Tampere District Court), Finland, of 1 June 1999,                    (c) the final measures of the public authorities do not
which was received at the Court Registry on 7 June 1999, for                        contain any indication of being in the public interest
a preliminary ruling in the case of Neste Markkinointi Oy v                         or any upper and longer limits with which the fee scale
Yötuuli Ky, Eija Ritamäki, Anna-Kaisa Jukkola and Jari Jukkola                      set at the practitioner’s discretion must comply; or
on the following question:
Is the prohibition referred to in Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty               (d) the final measures of the public authorities do not
applicable to an exclusive purchasing agreement concluded by                        require professionals to communicate in advance
a supplier of goods, which could be terminated by the retailer                      and/or publicise in any other way the fee scales which
at any time on one year’s notice, if all the exclusive purchasing                   they intend to apply for the services requested of them?
agreements concluded by that supplier have had a significant
influence on the partitioning of the market, either on their               3. Are the combined provisions of Articles 5 and 85 of the
own or together with the network of exclusive purchasing                       Treaty compatible with national legislation which, without
agreements concluded by all suppliers, but the agreements of                   requiring public interest considerations to be taken into
similar duration to the exclusive purchasing agreement in                      account, confers on a fee committee set up by the
question represent only a very small proportion of all the                     association council and composed solely of association
exclusive purchasing agreements of the same supplier, the                      members the power to adopt a discretionary measure
majority of which are fixed-term agreements which have been                    settling the fee, even where it confirms the fee set by the
concluded for a period of several years?                                       member at his own discretion, the force of which is such
                                                                               as to bind the court to make an order for payment in
                                                                               accordance with the measure adopted by the council itself
                                                                               settling the fee?
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Ufficio del
Giudice di Pace di Genova (Magistrate’s Court, Genoa) by
order of that court of 6 May 1999 in the case of Giuseppe                  Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Corte d’Appello
                  Conte against Stefania Rossi                             di Roma, First Civil Division, by order of that court of 12
                                                                           May 1999 in the case of Ministero delle Finanze and
                          (Case C-221/99)                                                            C.A.S.E.R. SpA
                          (1999/C 246/22)                                                           (Case C-222/99)
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                                              (1999/C 246/23)
European Communities by order of the Ufficio del Giudice di
Pace di Genova (Magistrate’s Court, Genoa) of 6 May 1999,
received at the Court Registry on 9 June 1999, for a preliminary           Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
ruling in the case of Giuseppe Conte v Stefania Rossi on the               European Communities by an order of the First Civil Division
following questions:                                                       of the Corte d’Appello di Roma (Rome Court of Appeal) of 12
                                                                           May 1999, which was received at the Court Registry on 10
1. Is the concept of an ‘undertaking’ set out in the decisions             June 1999, for a preliminary ruling in the case of Ministero
     of the Commission and the case-law of the Court of Justice            delle Finanze and C.A.S.E.R. SpA, on the following questions:
     applicable to those carrying on a professional activity as
     architects and, if so, are architects’ professional associations
     to be regarded as ‘associations of undertakings’ within the           For the purposes of an action brought by a company before
     meaning of Article 85(1) of the Treaty?                               the Italian courts for the reimbursement of the tassa di
                                                                           concessione governativa (administrative charge) paid from 1985
2. Are the combined provisions of Articles 5 and 85 of the                 to 1992 under laws conflicting with Article 10 of Council
     Treaty compatible with a national rule which simply gives             Directive 69/335/EEC(1) of 17 July 1969 concerning indirect
     a fee scale drawn up and determined by the national                   taxes on the raising of capital (see the judgment of 20 April
     associations of engineers and architects the force of law             1993 in Joined Cases C-71/91 and C-178/91)(2),
     where:                                                                may Article 11(1) of Law No 448 of 23 December 1998 which
 ---pagebreak--- C 246/12                EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                    28.8.1999
retroactively lays down the single charge of ITL 500 000 for               Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunale
registration of the instrument constituting a company and                  Amministrativo Regionale per la Lombardia — 3rd Sec-
various flat-rate charges for the registration of other company            tion — by order of that court of 26 November 1998 in
documents (varying from ITL 750 000 to ITL 90 000                          the case of Agorà s.r.l against Ente Autonomo Fiera
depending on the kind of company) be considered compatible                                    Internazionale di Milano
with the principles of Community law and with the interpret-
ation of the said directive given by the Court of Justice in its
judgment in Joined Cases C-71/91 and C-178/91?                                                      (Case C-223/99)
                                                                                                   (1999/C 246/24)
The foregoing question is asked in the light of the fact that the          Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
abovementioned provision (Article 11 of Law No 448 of                      European Communities by order of the Tribunale Amministra-
1998), although, because the amounts concerned are objec-                  tivo Regionale per la Lombardia (Lombardy Regional Adminis-
tively modest and the reference ex novo to the registration of             trative Court) — 3rd Section — of 26 November 1998,
company documents was, it seems, intended to refer to flat-rate            received at the Court Registry on 10 June 1999, for a
figures apparently commensurate with the cost of the service               preliminary ruling in the case of Agorà s.r.l v Ente Autonomo
(being duties paid by way of fees or dues: Article 12(1)(e) of             Fiera Internazionale di Milano on the following question:
Directive 335/69), was in fact adopted without any previous
determination or calculation of the costs of the service rendered
to the companies (costs which are easily determinable, because             May the definition of a body governed by public law contained
they relate to past years, on the basis of the number and                  in Article 1(b) of Council Directive 92/50/EEC (1) of 18 June
qualification of the officials, the time they take and the various         1992 relating to the coordination of procedures for the award
material costs necessary for carrying out the transaction),                of public service contracts be deemed applicable to the Ente
without there being any significant link between the amounts               Autonomo Fiera Internazionale di Milano?
levied and the service actually received by the companies
which had in fact paid a charge for registration and for annual
renewal thereof and not for the registration of company                    (1) OJ L 209, 24.7.1992, p. 1.
documents on a flat-rate basis).
Regardless of whether the amounts levied by the Italian State
under Article 11(1) of Law No 448 of 1998 rank as duties
paid by way of fees or dues, is the legally prescribed interest
payable by the State — in addition to the reimbursements to                Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Centrale Raad
the companies — with effect, as specifically indicated in Article          van Beroep by order of 24 March 1999 in the case of
11(3), from the date of submission of the application for                             Soziale Verzekeringsbank v Y. Moughit
reimbursement and at an annual rate of 2.5%, which is lower
than the annual rates laid down generally for tax paid but not
                                                                                                    (Case C-225/99)
due by Articles 1 and 5 of Law No 29 of 19 January 1961
(and successive provisions) or, for other sums paid but not
due, by Article 2033 of the Civil Code, compatible with the                                        (1999/C 246/25)
principle of equivalence between the two systems (domestic
and Community) of law as regards the protection of individ-
uals’ rights and/or with the principle of effective exercise of            Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
the rights conferred by Community law — both principles                    European Communities by order of 24 March 1999 from the
having been upheld repeatedly by the Court of Justice in its               Centrale Raad van Beroep (Higher Social Security Court),
judgments of 15 September 1998 in Case C-260/96 Spac,                      which was received at the Court Registry on 11 June 1999, for
Case C-231/96 Edis and Joined Cases C-279/96, C-280/96                     a preliminary ruling in the case of Soziale Verzekeringsbank v
and C-281/96(3) Ansaldo?                                                   Y. Moughit on the following question:
                                                                           Must ‘members of [Moroccan workers’] families’ within the
                                                                           meaning of Article 41(1) of the Cooperation Agreement of 27
                                                                           April 1976 between the EC and Morocco (1) be understood as
(1) OJ, English special edition 1969(II), p. 412.                          including the single mother of a Moroccan worker who joined
(2) (1993) ECR I-1915.                                                     him for the purpose of residing with him after he had, as an
(3) (1998) ECR I-5025.                                                     adult, established himself in the territory of a Community
                                                                           Member State?
                                                                           (1) Council Regulation (EEC) No 2211/78 of 26.9.1978, OJ 1978 L
                                                                               264, p. 1.