CELEX: C1998/258/36
Language: en
Date: 1998-08-15 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 2 June 1998 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Kingdom of Belgium (Case C-206/98)

15.8.98               EN                Official Journal of the European Communities                                  C 258/23
The agreements concluded after the entry into force of             declare that, by adopting and maintaining in force
Regulation No 4055/86 (UEBL Ð Mali, UEBL Ð Togo)                   Article 2 of the Law of 9 July 1975 on the control of
                                                                   insurance undertakings, as amended by the Royal Decree
                                                                   of 12 August 1994, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to
The prohibition on cargo-sharing arrangements in any              fulfil its obligations under Council Directive 92/49/EEC of
future agreements' (Article 5 of the regulation) is intended       12 June 1992 on the coordination of laws, regulations and
to preclude the substantive legal effects of such                  administrative provisions relating to direct insurance other
arrangements which undermine the principle of freedom              than life assurance and amending Directives 73/239/EEC
to provide services which applies to maritime transport by         and 88/357/EEC (third non-life insurance Directive) (1) and
virtue of Regulation No 4055/86. In order to ensure the            under the EC Treaty.
effectiveness of the prohibition, Member States are
required not to include cargo-sharing arrangements when
negotiating new agreements with third countries.
                                                                   Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
The agreements with Mali and Togo contain cargo-sharing
arrangements which, in respect of future agreements, are
prohibited other than in the exceptional circumstances             In that it excludes from the scope of the national
specified in Article 5(1) of Regulation No 4055/86,                transposing legislation any insurance fund or undertaking
namely where, without such arrangements, Community                 covering the risk of accidents at work, even where such
liner shipping companies would not have an effective               undertakings carry on business at their own risk with a
opportunity to ply for trade to and from the country               view to profit, Article 2 of the Belgian Law of 9 July
concerned and in accordance with Article 6 of the                  1975, as amended by the Royal Decree of 12 August
regulation which requires a proposal from the                      1994, is inconsistent with Directive 92/49/EEC. The
Commission to the Council. Those circumstances do not              Commission does not contest the fact that the Belgian
exist, nor have the procedures been followed in the                system in respect of accidents at work falls within the
present case. The agreement in question reserves carriage          exception relating to social security. However, where,
between the parties to vessels flying their flag or operated       under the legislation of a Member State, operations
by national shipping companies'. It follows that vessels          forming part of the compulsory social security system may
operated by nationals of other Member States are                   be effected by insurance undertakings carrying on business
excluded from carriage.                                            at their own risk with a view to profit, as is the case in
                                                                   Belgium, they fall within the scope of Directive 92/49/
                                                                   EEC.
The Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has not provided the
necessary proof of the termination of those agreements.
                                                                   The only interpretation of Directive 92/49/EEC which
(1) OJ L 378 of 31.12.1986, p. 1.                                  enables Article 2(2) to be reconciled with Article 55 is that
                                                                   which includes within the scope of the directive the
                                                                   provision of insurance cover against the risk of accidents
                                                                   at work where that activity is carried on by an insurance
                                                                   undertaking at its own risk with a view to profit.
Action brought on 2 June 1998 by the Commission of the
  European Communities against the Kingdom of Belgium              The joint declaration of the Council and the Commission
                                                                   annexed to the Council minutes at the time of adoption of
                       (Case C-206/98)
                                                                   Directive 88/357/EEC relates to Article 12(2) of that
                        (98/C 258/36)                              directive, which was repealed by Article 37 of Directive
                                                                   92/49/EEC with effect from 1 July 1994; it cannot prevail
                                                                   over the clear provisions of a subsequent directive
                                                                   amending the directive forming the subject-matter of the
An action against the Kingdom of Belgium was brought               declaration.
before the Court of Justice of the European Communities
on 2 June 1998 by the Commission of the European
Communities, represented by Christina Tufvesson, Legal
Adviser, and Bernard Mongin, of its Legal Service, acting          Lastly, the Belgian Government wrongly relies on
as Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg at            Article 55 of the EC Treaty. The legal basis of Directive
the Office of Carlos Gómez de la Cruz, Wagner Centre,              92/49 is Articles 57(2) and 66 of the EEC Treaty, and its
Kirchberg.                                                         object is the completion of the internal market in direct
                                                                   insurance other than life assurance from the point of view
                                                                   both of the right of establishment and of the freedom to
The Commission of the European Communities claims                  provide services. It follows that, as regards the areas
that the Court should:                                             harmonised by that directive (in particular, prudential and
 ---pagebreak--- C 258/24              EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                  15.8.98
financial controls of insurance companies), the exceptions          The applicant claims that the Court should:
to the freedom to provide services and the right of
establishment are those provided for by that directive and
not those which result from the application of Article 55           Ð find that Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations
of the EC Treaty.                                                       under the EC Treaty by failing to adopt the laws,
                                                                        regulations or administrative provisions necessary to
(1) OJ L 228 of 11.8.1992, p. 1.                                        comply with Council Directive 92/100/EEC of
                                                                        19 November 1992 on rental and lending rights
                                                                        related to copyright in the field of intellectual
                                                                        property (1), and/or by failing to inform the
                                                                        Commission thereof,
Reference      for    a    preliminary    ruling    by    the
                                                                        and
Bundessozialgericht by order of that court of 31 March
 1998 in case of Ramazan Örs against Bundesknappschaft
                       (Case C-211/98)
                                                                    Ð order Ireland to bear the costs of this procedure.
                        (98/C 258/37)
                                                                    Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by order of the Bundessozial-
gericht (Federal Social Court) of 31 March 1998, received
                                                                    Article 189 of the EC Treaty, under which a directive shall
at the Court Registry on 8 June 1998, for a preliminary
                                                                    be binding, as to the result to be achieved, upon each
ruling in the case of Ramazan Örs against Bundesknapp-
                                                                    Member State, carries by implication an obligation on the
schaft (Federal Insurance Fund for Miners) on the
                                                                    Member States to observe the period for compliance laid
following questions:
                                                                    down in the directive. That period expired on 1 July 1994
                                                                    without Ireland having enacted the provisions necessary to
1. Is there, on the basis of the law relating to the                comply with the directive referred to in the conclusions of
    Association between the European Economic                       the Commission and/or informing the Commission
    Community        and     Turkey,   a    prohibition    of       thereof.
    discrimination in the field of social security which is
    directly applicable to a Turkish worker in the Federal          (1) OJ L 346 of 27.11.1992, p. 61.
    Republic of Germany?
2. If Question 1 is answered in the affirmative, is that
    prohibition to be interpreted as precluding a national
    provision under which the applicable date of birth for
    statutory pension insurance benefits and for the
    insurance number assigned in that regard is the date            Action brought on 10 June 1998 by the Commission of
    which was documented when the Turkish worker was                 the European Communities against the Hellenic Republic
    first registered with a national social benefit
    institution?                                                                           (Case C-214/98)
                                                                                            (98/C 258/39)
                                                                    An action against the Hellenic Republic was brought
                                                                    before the Court of Justice on 10 June 1998 by the
Action brought on 9 June 1998 by the Commission of the              Commission of the European Communities, represented
           European Communities against Ireland                     by Maria Kondou-Durande, of its Legal Service, with an
                       (Case C-213/98)                              address for service in Luxembourg at the office of Carlos
                                                                    Gómez de la Cruz, also of the Commission's Legal
                        (98/C 258/38)                               Service, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.
An action against Ireland was brought before the Court of
Justice of the European Communities on 9 June 1998 by               The applicant claims that the Court should declare that:
the Commission of the European Communities,
represented by Karen Banks, a member of its Legal
Service, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the           Ð by failing to refer to the category of solipeds/equidae
office of Mr Carlos Gómez de la Cruz, a member of its                   in the list of meat to which the fees laid down by
Legal Service, Centre Wagner, Kirchberg, Luxembourg.                    Council Directive 93/118/EC (1) apply,