CELEX: C2004/047/41
Language: en
Date: 2004-02-21 00:00:00
Title: Case C-554/03: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Ufficio del Giudice di Pace di Gorizia by order of that Court of 27 November 2003 in the case of Azienda Agricola Tomadin Silvano and AGEA

21.2.2004              EN                      Official Journal of the European Union                                          C 47/25
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Ufficio del                  2.    Which place should be considered as the place where or
Giudice di Pace di Gorizia by order of that Court of                         from which such an employee in fact performs most of
27 November 2003 in the case of Azienda Agricola                             his duties for his employer when the duties under the
                  Tomadin Silvano and AGEA                                   contract of employment are to be performed partly on
                                                                             the ground (airport) of a Contracting State and partly
                         (Case C-554/03)                                     on an aircraft which has the nationality of another
                                                                             Contracting State which also recruited the employee?
                          (2004/C 47/41)
                                                                       (1) OJ L 12, 16.1.2001, p. 1.
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by order of the Ufficio del Giudice di
Pace di Gorizia (Magistrate, Gorizia) of 27 November 2003,
received at the Court Registry on 29 December 2003, for a
preliminary ruling in the case of Azienda Agricola Tomadin
Silvano and AGEA on the following question:
Must Article 1 of Regulation (EEC) No 856/84 (1) of 31 March           Action brought on 8 January 2004 by the Commission
1984 and Articles 1 to 4 of Regulation No 3950/921 (2) of              of the European Communities against the Republic of
28 December 1992 be interpreted as meaning that the                                                  Austria
additional levy on milk and milk products is in the nature of
an administrative penalty with the result that producers are                                     (Case C-4/04)
liable to pay it only where quantities allocated have been
exceeded by them intentionally or as a result of negligence?
                                                                                                (2004/C 47/43)
(1) OJ L 90, 1.4.1984, p. 10.
(2) OJ L 405, 31.12.1992, p. 1.
                                                                       An action against the Republic of Austria was brought before
                                                                       the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 8 January
                                                                       2004 by the Commission of the European Communities,
                                                                       represented by Karen Banks and Dr Claudia Schmidt, Agents,
                                                                       with an address for service in Luxembourg.
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunal du
travail de Charleroi, Section de Charleroi, by order of that
Court of 15 December 2003 in the case of Magali Warbecq
against RYANAIR Ltd, a company incorporated under                      The Commission claims that the Court should:
                              Irish law
                                                                       1.    declare that, by failing to adopt, or to communicate to
                         (Case C-555/03)                                     the Commission, the laws, regulations and administrative
                                                                             provisions necessary to implement Directive 98/44/EC (1)
                                                                             of the European Parliament and the Council of 6 July
                          (2004/C 47/42)                                     1998 on the legal protection of biotechnological inven-
                                                                             tions, the Republic of Austria has failed to fulfil its
                                                                             obligations under that directive; and
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by order of the Tribunal du travail de            2.    order the Republic of Austria to pay the costs of the case.
Charleroi, Section de Charleroi, of 15 December 2003, received
at the Court Registry on 24 December 2003, for a preliminary
ruling in the case of Magali Warbecq against RYANAIR Ltd, a
company incorporated under Irish law on the following
questions:                                                             Pleas in law and main arguments
1.    For the purposes of Article 19(2) of Council Regulation
      No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and               The period within which the directive was to be implemented
      the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil            expired on 30 July 2000.
      and commercial matters (1), what are the relevant criteria
      for determining the Contracting State on the territory of
      which an employee habitually performs his work, when             (1) OJ 1998 L 213, p. 13.
      that employee is employed as a member of the air crew
      of an undertaking engaged in international air passenger
      transport?