CELEX: C2000/102/06
Language: en
Date: 2000-04-08 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 3 February 2000 in Case C-293/98 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia e Instrucción de Oviedo): Entidad de Gestión de Derechos de los Productores Audiovisuales (Egeda) v Hostelería Asturiana SA (Hoasa) (Copyright — Satellite broadcasting and cable retransmission)

C 102/4                 EN                       Official Journal of the European Communities                                           8.4.2000
Graf and Filzmoser Maschinenbau GmbH — on the interpret-                    President of the Sixth Chamber, G. Hirsch and H. Ragnemalm,
ation of Article 48 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment,                 Judges, Advocate General; A. Saggio, Registrar; H. von Hol-
Article 39 EC) — the Court, composed of G.C. Rodrı́guez                     stein, Deputy Registrar, has given a judgment on 3 February
Iglesias, President, J.C. Moitinho de Almeida, L. Sevón,                   2000, in which it has ruled:
R. Schintgen (Rapporteur), Presidents of Chambers, P.J.G. Kap-
teyn, C. Gulmann, J.-P. Puissochet, G. Hirsch, P. Jann,                     Article 2(1) and (3) of Council Directive 76/207/EEC of 9 February
H. Ragnemalm and M. Wathelet, Judges, Advocate General:                     1976 on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for
N. Fennelly; D. Louterman-Hubeau, Principal Administrator,                  men and women as regards access to employment, vocational training
for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 27 January 2000,                 and promotion, and working conditions precludes a refusal to appoint
in which it has ruled:                                                      a pregnant woman to a post for an indefinite period on the ground
                                                                            that a statutory prohibition on employment attaching to the condition
Article 48 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 39 EC)           of pregnancy prevents her from being employed in that post from the
does not preclude national provisions which deny a worker entitlement       outset and for the duration of the pregnancy.
to compensation on termination of employment if he terminates his
contract of employment himself in order to take up employment in
another Member State, when those provisions grant him entitlement           (1) OJ C 234 of 25.7.1998.
to such compensation if the contract ends without the termination
being at his own initiative or attributable to him.
(1) OJ C 234 of 25.7.1998.
                                                                                              JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                                                                                                      (Sixth Chamber)
                                                                                                     of 3 February 2000
                 JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                                                                            in Case C-293/98 (reference for a preliminary ruling
                         (Sixth Chamber)                                    from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia e Instrucción
                                                                            de Oviedo): Entidad de Gestión de Derechos de los
                        of 3 February 2000                                  Productores Audiovisuales (Egeda) v Hostelerı́a Asturiana
                                                                                                        SA (Hoasa) (1)
in Case C-207/98 (reference for a preliminary ruling
from Landesarbeitsgericht Mecklenburg-Vorpommern):                          (Copyright — Satellite broadcasting and cable retrans-
Silke-Karin Mahlburg v land Mecklenburg-Vorpom-                                                            mission)
                               mern (1)
                                                                                                       (2000/C 102/06)
(Equal treatment for men and women — Access to employ-
        ment — Refusal to employ a pregnant woman)
                                                                                                (Language of the case: Spanish)
                          (2000/C 102/05)
                                                                            (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                                                                                                in the European Court Reports)
                   (Language of the case: German)
                                                                            In Case C-293/98: reference to the Court under Article 177 of
                                                                            the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) by the Juzgado de Primera
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published      Instancia e Instrucción de Oviedo, Spain, for a preliminary
                   in the European Court Reports)                           ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between
                                                                            Entidad de Gestión de Derechos de los Productores Audiovisu-
In Case C-207/98, reference to the Court under Article 177 of               ales (Egeda) and Hosteleria Asturiana SA (Hoasa) — on the
the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) by the Landesarbeitsgericht              interpretation of Article 1 of Council Directive 93/83/EEC of
Mecklenburg-Vorpommern (Germany) for a preliminary ruling                   27 September 1993 on the coordination of certain rules
in the proceedings pending before that court between Silke-Ka-              concerning copyright and rights related to copyright applicable
rin Mahlburg and land Mecklenburg-Vorpommern — on the                       to satellite broadcasting and cable retransmission (OJ 1993
interpretation of Article 2(1) of Council Directive 76/207/EEC              L 248, p. 15) the Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of:
of 9 February 1976 on the implementation of the principle of                P.J.G. Kapteyn (Rapporteur), acting for the President of the
equal treatment for men and women as regards access to                      Sixth Chamber, G. Hirsch and H. Ragnemalm, Judges; A. La
employment, vocational training and promotion, and working                  Pergola, Advocate General ; H. von Holstein, Deputy Registrar,
conditions (OJ 1976 L 39, p. 40) — the Court (Sixth Chamber),               has given a judgment on 3 February 2000, in which it has
composed of: P.J.G. Kapteyn (Rapporteur), acting for the                    ruled:
 ---pagebreak--- 8.4.2000                   EN                       Official Journal of the European Communities                                             C 102/5
The question whether the reception by a hotel establishment of                 2. Interim measures vis-à-vis a non-Community authority can be
satellite or terrestrial television signals and their distribution by cable        ordered by a national court in the event of an infringement of
to the various rooms of that hotel is an ‘act of communication to the              Community law being imminent only:
public’ or ‘reception by the public’ is not governed by Council
Directive 93/83/EEC of 27 September 1993 on the coordination of                    — if that court entertains serious doubts as to the validity of the
certain rules concerning copyright and rights related to copyright                      Community measure implemented by that authority and,
applicable to satellite broadcasting and cable retransmission, and                      should the question of the validity of the contested measure
must consequently be decided in accordance with national law.                           not already have been brought before the Court of Justice,
                                                                                        itself refers that question to the Court of Justice;
(1) OJ C 299 of 26.9.1998.                                                         — if there is urgency and a threat of serious and irreparable
                                                                                        damage to the applicant;
                                                                                   — and if the national court takes due account of the Com-
                                                                                        munity’s interests.
                                                                                   The fact that such interim measures would be ordered vis-à-vis
                                                                                   an authority of an overseas country or territory (OCT) by a court
                   JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                           of a Member State, in accordance with its domestic law, is not
                                                                                   such as to affect the conditions under which the temporary
                           of 8 February 2000                                      protection of individuals must be ensured in proceedings before
                                                                                   the national courts when the dispute concerns a matter of
                                                                                   Community law.
in Case C-17/98 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Arrondissementsrechtbank te ’s-Gravenhage): Emesa
                 Sugar (Free Zone) NV v Amba (1)                               (1) OJ C 94 of 28.3.1998.
(Conditions governing association of overseas countries and
territories — Decision 97/803/EC — Sugar imports —
ACP/OCT cumulation of origin — Assessment of validity
              — National court — Interim measures)
                                                                                                  JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                             (2000/C 102/07)
                                                                                                           (Sixth Chamber)
                       (Language of the case: Dutch)
                                                                                                         of 10 February 2000
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published         in Case C-50/96 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
                      in the European Court Reports)                           the Landesarbeitsgericht Hamburg): Deutsche Telekom
                                                                                                        AG v Lilli Schröder (1)
In Case C-17/98: reference to the Court under Article 177 of
the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) from the Arrondissements-                   (Equal pay for men and women — Article 119 of the EC
rechtbank te ’s-Gravenhage (Netherlands) for a preliminary                     Treaty (Articles 117 to 120 of the EC Treaty have been
ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between                    replaced by Articles 136 EC to 143 EC) — Protocol
Emesa Sugar (Free Zone) NV and Aruba — on the validity of                      concerning Article 119 of the EC Treaty — Occupational
Council Decision 97/803/EC of 24 November 1997 amending                        social security schemes — Exclusion of part-time workers
at mid-term Decision 91/482/EEC on the association of the                      from a supplementary occupational retirement pension
overseas countries and territories with the European Economic                  scheme — Retroactive membership — Entitlement to a
Community (OJ 1997 L 329, p. 50) — the Court, composed                         pension — Relationship between national law and Com-
of: G.C. Rodrı́guez Iglesias, President, J.C. Moitinho de Almeida                                             munity law)
and D.A.O. Edward (Presidents of Chambers), P.J.G. Kapteyn,
J.-P. Puissochet, G. Hirsch, P. Jann, H. Ragnemalm and                                                      (2000/C 102/08)
M. Wathelet (Rapporteur), Judges; D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer,
Advocate General; H.A. Rühl, Principal Administrator, for the
Registrar, has given a judgment on 8 February 2000, in which                                        (Language of the case: German)
it has ruled:
1. Examination of the first ten questions submitted has disclosed no           (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
     factor of such a kind as to affect the validity of Council Decision                             in the European Court Reports)
     97/803/EC of 24 November 1997 amending at mid-term
     Decision 91/482/EEC on the association of the overseas                    In Case C-50/96: reference to the Court under Article 177 of
     countries and territories with the European Economic Com-                 the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) from the Landesarbeitsge-
     munity.                                                                   richt Hamburg (Germany) for a preliminary ruling in the