CELEX: C2002/247/04
Language: en
Date: 2002-10-12 00:00:00
Title: Cases C-242/02 and C-243/02: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Unabhängiger Verwaltungssenat Salzburg by order of that Court of 11 February 2002 in the appeal by Dr Manfred Hückel

C 247/2                 EN                       Official Journal of the European Communities                                   12.10.2002
                    ORDER OF THE COURT                                      The applicant claims that the Court should:
                         (Sixth Chamber)                                    —    lift the immunity enjoyed by the Commission since the
                                                                                 requested attachment does not in any way interfere with
                         of 21 March 2002                                        the independence and functioning of the Communities;
in Case C-430/01 (reference for a preliminary ruling from                   —    declare that the Commission’s accounting officer incor-
the Landesgericht für Zivilrechtssachen Wien): Monika                            rectly declared that the Commission has no existing or
              Herbstrith v Republic of Austria (1)                               contingent debts towards the Democratic Republic of the
                                                                                 Congo or the Banque Nationale du Congo.
     (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Inadmissibility)
                          (2002/C 247/02)
                   (Language of the case: German)
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                   in the European Court Reports)
                                                                            Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Unabhängiger
                                                                            Verwaltungssenat Salzburg by order of that Court of
In Case C-430/01: reference to the Court under Article 234                    11 February 2002 in the appeal by Dr Manfred Hückel
EC from the Landesgericht für Zivilrechtssachen Wien (Vienna
Higher Civil Court) (Austria), for a preliminary ruling in
proceedings pending before that court between Monika                                        (Cases C-242/02 and C-243/02)
Herbstrith and the Republic of Austria on whether the failure
to appoint to a post a candidate with the required professional
qualifications infringes a provision of Community law, and on                                       (2002/C 247/04)
the conditions under which a Member State may incur liability
for damage suffered by individuals as a result of infringements
of Community law — the Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of:
F. Macken, President of the Chamber, N. Colneric, R. Schintgen
(Rapporteur), V. Skouris and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, Judges;                  Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
S. Alber, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, made an order              European Communities by order of the Unabhängiger Verwal-
on 21 March 2002, in which it ruled:                                        tungssenat Salzburg (Independent Administrative Chamber for
                                                                            Salzburg) of 11 February 2002, received at the Court Registry
The request for a preliminary ruling submitted to the Court of              on 3 July 2002, for a preliminary ruling in the appeal by
Justice of the European Communities by the Landesgericht für                Dr Manfred Hückel on the following questions:
Zivilrechtssachen Wien, by decision of 12 October 2001, is
inadmissible.                                                               1.   Does Article 2(1)(b) of Council Directive 79/112/EEC of
                                                                                 18 December 1978 (1) on the approximation of the
( 1) OJ C 109 of 4.5.2002.                                                       laws of the Member States relating to the labelling,
                                                                                 presentation and advertising of foodstuffs for sale to
                                                                                 the ultimate consumer (now consolidated in European
                                                                                 Parliament and Council Directive 2000/13/EC of
                                                                                 20 March 2000 — OJ 2000 L 109, p. 29), under which
                                                                                 — subject to Community provisions applicable to natural
                                                                                 mineral waters and to foodstuffs for particular nutritional
Application brought on 22 August 2002 by Antippas for                            uses — the labelling and methods used may not attribute
leave to attach assets held by the Commission of the                             to any foodstuff the property of preventing, treating or
                     European Communities                                        curing a human disease, or suggest that it possesses such
                                                                                 properties, preclude national legislation which makes it
                         (Case C-1/02 SA)                                        an offence when marketing foodstuffs:
                          (2002/C 247/03)                                        (a)   to refer to physiological or pharmacological effects,
                                                                                       in particular those which preserve youthfulness,
                                                                                       inhibit signs of ageing, promote slimming or main-
                                                                                       tain health, or to create the impression of any such
An application for leave to attach assets held by the Com-
                                                                                       effect;
mission of the European Communities was brought before the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on on
22 August 2002 by Antippas, represented by Mario Spandre,                        (b) to refer to case-histories, recommendations made by
lawyer.                                                                                doctors or medical experts’ reports;
 ---pagebreak--- 12.10.2002              EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                         C 247/3
      (c)   to use health-related, pictorial or stylised represen-       3.     If the answers to questions 1 and 2 are in the affirmative:
            tations of organs of the human body, pictures
                                                                                How, and by reference to what parameters, is the
            of members of the health-care professions or of
            sanatoria or other pictures or illustrations referring              authorised toll for a single journey along the whole
            to health-care activities?                                          motorway to be calculated in each individual case?
                                                                         4.     Only if the answers to questions 1 and 2 are in
2.    Do Directive 79/112/EEC or Articles 28 and 30 EC                          the affirmative and are accompanied, as requested in
      preclude a national provision which, on the placing into                  question 3, by an explanation of the method of calcu-
      circulation of foodstuffs, permits health-related infor-                  lation to be employed:
      mation such as that described in Question (1) to be
      affixed thereto only after prior authorisation by the                     Is the Judgment of the Court of Justice in Case C-21/94
      competent federal minister, whereby a condition of                        Parliament v Council (3), in which it was held that the
      authorisation is that the health-related information is                   effects of Directive 93/89/EEC, which was annulled by
      consistent with protecting the consumer from being                        that judgment, were to be preserved until the Council had
      misled?                                                                   adopted a new directive, to be interpreted as meaning
                                                                                that the effects are to be preserved until the Member
                                                                                States have transposed the new directive or, as the case
( 1) OJ L 33, p. 1.                                                             may be, until the time-limit for transposition has expired?
                                                                         5.     Only if the answer to question 4 is in the negative:
                                                                                In respect of the period from 17 June 1999 to 1 July
                                                                                2000, are the Member States under an obligation to have
                                                                                regard to the new directive, that is to say, does it have
                                                                                advance effects which must be observed?
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Oberster
Gerichtshof of the Republic of Austria by order of that                  (1 ) OJ L 279 [1993], p. 32.
Court of 25 June 2002 in the case of Stuij en de Man B. V.               (2 ) OJ L 187 [1999], p. 42.
                                                                         (3 ) ECR I-1827 [1995].
                    against Republic of Austria
                         (Case C-257/02)
                         (2002/C 247/05)
                                                                         Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Rheinland-Pfalz
                                                                         Oberverwaltungsgericht by order of that Court of 3 July
                                                                         2002 in the case of EU-WOOD-Trading GmbH against
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                   Sonderabfall-Management-Gesellschaft Rheinland-Pfalz
European Communities by order of the Oberster Gerichtshof                                               mbH
(Supreme Court) of the Republic of Austria of 25 June 2002,
received at the Court Registry on 15 July 2002, for a                                              (Case C-277/02)
preliminary ruling in the case of Stuij en de Man B. V. against
Republic of Austria on the following questions:                                                    (2002/C 247/06)
1.    Are Article 7(b) and (h) of Directive 93/89/EEC ( 1) and
      Article 7(4) and (9) of Directive 1999/62/EC ( 2) intended         Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
      to confer on all transport undertakings the right, in return       European Communities by order of the Rheinland-Pfalz Ober-
      for payment of a road user charge which complies with              verwaltungsgericht (Rhineland-Palatinate Higher Administrat-
      those directives and is thus reasonable, to conduct                ive Court) of 3 July 2002, received at the Court Registry on
      journeys on stretches of motorway for which a toll is              29 July 2002, for a preliminary ruling in the case of
      levied on vehicles with more than three axles used for the         EU-WOOD-Trading GmbH against Sonderabfall-Management-
      commercial carriage of goods?                                      Gesellschaft Rheinland-Pfalz mbH on the following questions:
2.    If the answer to question 1 is in the affirmative:                 1.     Under the first indent of Article 7(4)(a) of Council
                                                                                Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 of 1 February 1993 on the
      Do Article 7(b) and (h) of Directive 93/89/EEC and                        supervision and control of shipments of waste within,
      Article 7(4) and (9) of Directive 1999/62/EC have direct                  into and out of the European Community (OJ 1993 L 30,
      effect according to the case-law of the Court of Justice,                 p. 1), can an objection to the shipment of waste for
      such that, if the directives have not been transposed, or                 recovery be raised on the ground that the planned
      have been transposed incorrectly, into Austrian law they                  recovery contravenes the requirement arising from the
      may be relied on in calculating a toll that complies with                 first paragraph of Article 4 of Council Directive 75/442/
      the directives for vehicles with more than three axles used               EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste (OJ 1975 L 194, p. 74) for
      for the commercial carriage of goods along the whole of                   waste to be recovered in a manner which is compatible
      the Austrian Brenner motorway?                                            with health and environmental imperatives?