CELEX: C1997/357/33
Language: en
Date: 1997-11-22 00:00:00
Title: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bayerische Verwaltungsgericht Ansbach by order of that court of 7 July 1997 in the case of 1. Ömer Nazli, 2. Caglar Nazli and 3. Melike Nazli v. Stadt Nürnberg (Case C-340/97)

22 . 11 . 97          EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                      C 357/ 19
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Verwaltungsge­            Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bayerische
richtshof (Vienna) by order of that court of 12 August              Verwaltungsgericht Ansbach by order of that court of
1997 in the case of Erna Pelzl, Johannes Kovac, Harald              7 July 1997 in the case of 1 . Omer Nazli, 2. Caglar Nazli
Hohenberg, Kovac Schrott GmbH NFG KG, Wiener Stad­                               and 3 . Melike Nazli v. Stadt Nürnberg
tische Allgemeine Versicherungs AG, Ulf Zmölnig, Kovac                                       ( Case C-340/97)
Management GmbH P. Kovac & Co. GmbH and Kovac
Eisen Maschinen Metalle GmbH NFG KG against the                                                ( 97/C 357/33 )
               Steiermärkische Landesregierung
                       ( Case C-338/97 )                            Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
                                                                    European Communities by an order of the Bayerische Ver­
                         ( 97/C 357/32 )
                                                                    waltungsgericht ( Bavarian Administrative Court ) Ansbach
                                                                    ( Fifth Chamber) of 7 July 1997, which was received at the
                                                                    Court Registry on 1 October 1997, for a preliminary
                                                                    ruling in the case of 1 . Omer Nazli, 2 . Caglar Nazli and
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by order of the Verwaltungsge­
                                                                    3 . Melike Nazli against Stadt Nürnberg on the following
                                                                    questions:
richtshof ( Administrative Court), Vienna, of 12 August
1997, received at the Court Registry on 29 September
1997, for a preliminary ruling in the case of Erna Pelzl,           1 . Does a Turkish worker who has achieved the legal
Johannes Kovac, Harald Hohenberg, Kovac Schrott                           status conferred by the third indent of Article 6 ( 1 ) of
GmbH NFG KG, Wiener Stadtische Allgemeine Versiche­                       Decision No 1 /80 of 19 September 1980 of the
rungs AG, Ulf Zmölnig, Kovac Management GmbH, P.                         Association Council ( set up by the Association
Kovac & Co . GmbH and Kovac Eisen Maschinen Metalle                      Agreement between the European Economic
GmbH NFG KG v. Steiermärkische Landesregierung                            Community and Turkey ) on the development of the
( Government of Steiermark) on the following questions:                  Association forfeit that status subsequently if he is
                                                                          taken into custody on strong suspicion of having
                                                                         committed a crime for which he is ultimately
                                                                         convicted and given a suspended prison sentence ?
Does Article 33 ( 1 ) of the sixth Council Directive 77/388/
EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonization of the laws of
the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common               2.   If not:
system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (')
preclude, on the ground that it is in the nature of a                     Is the expulsion of a Turkish worker in such
turnover tax, the maintenance in force of a tax which is
                                                                         circumstances solely on general preventive grounds,
payable in a Bundesland ( Regional State ) of a Member                   that is to say, as a deterrent to other aliens, compatible
State of the European Communities:                                       with Article 14 ( 1 ) of Decision No 1 /80 ?
— in respect of each calender year by all undertakings
     directly or indirectly involved in tourism which have
     their registered office or a place of business within
     certain closely defined areas, where the sum of those
     areas comprises almost the whole area of the                   Action brought on 30 September 1997 by the Commission
     Bundesland, and
                                                                    of the European Communities against the Kingdom of the
                                                                                                 Netherlands
                                                                                             ( Case C-341/97)
— the amount of which is essentially proportional to the                                       ( 97/C 357/34 )
     turnover achieved by the undertaking primarily in that
     Regional State within a calendar year, but where the
     rate of contribution varies according to the intensity of      An action against the Kingdom of the Netherlands was
     tourism in that area and according to the degree of            brought before the Court of Justice of the European
     benefit which the legislature deems the commercial             Communities on 30 September 1997 by the Commission
     sector in question ( occupational group ) to derive from       of the European Communities, represented by H. van
     tourism, and                                                   Vliet, acting as Agent, with an address for service in
                                                                    Luxembourg at the office of C. Gomez de la Cruz,
                                                                    Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.
— where no provision is made for the deduction of input
     tax ?                                                          The applicant claims that the Court should :
                                                                    — declare that, by adopting on 16 December 1992 the
C ) OJ L 145 , p. 1 .
                                                                          Regulation for the prevention of the introduction of
                                                                          foreign toxic dinoflagellata, the Kingdom of the
                                                                          Netherlands has failed to fulfil its obligations pursuant
                                                                          to Articles 30 and 36 of the EC Treaty,