CELEX: C2001/212/29
Language: en
Date: 2001-07-28 00:00:00
Title: Case C-215/01: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Amtsgericht Augsburg by order of that court of 26 February 2001 in the matter of a fine imposed on Bruno Schnitzer

28.7.2001             EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                         C 212/17
—      Failure to implement Article 9 of the directive: Until          professionnelle (CEDEFOP) was brought before the Court of
       Germany has adopted provisions for the implementation           Justice of the European Communities on 25 May 2001 by
       of Article 6 and Article 7, there are inevitably no             Michel Hendrickx, represented by J.N. Louis and V. Peere, with
       provisions regarding the procedures for circulating the         an address for service in Luxembourg.
       information and those to whom the information is to be
       addressed.
                                                                       The appellant claims that the Court should:
(1) OJ L 357, 7.12.1989, p. 31.                                        set aside the order of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber)
                                                                       of 12 March 2001 in Case T-298/00 (Michel Hendrickx v
                                                                       CEDEFOP) (1);
                                                                       then, itself giving judgment on the basis of new provisions:
                                                                       —     grant the appellant leave to amend his pleas in law and
                                                                             submissions;
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Amtsgericht
Augsburg by order of that court of 26 February 2001 in                 in the alternative,
      the matter of a fine imposed on Bruno Schnitzer
                                                                       —     hold that the decision of the Director of CEDEFOP of
                                                                             14 November 2000 was taken by an incompetent
                        (Case C-215/01)                                      authority;
                        (2001/C 212/29)                                —     consequently, annul that decision and also CEDEFOP’s
                                                                             implied decision rejecting the appellant’s claim for pay-
                                                                             ment of a (re-)installation allowance corresponding to
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                       two months’ basic salary;
European Communities by order of the Amtsgericht Augsburg
of 26 February 2001, received at the Court Registry on 23 May          —     order the defendant to pay the appellant the sum of
2001, for a preliminary ruling in the matter of a fine on Bruno              FEB 316 292, plus default interest at 7 % per annum
Schnitzer on the following question:                                         from 22 July 1999, and to pay the costs of both sets of
                                                                             proceedings.
Is it compatible with EC law on the free movement of services
for a Portuguese undertaking, which in its country of origin
fulfils the conditions for carrying on a commercial activity, to
have to satisfy further — albeit purely formal — conditions (in        Pleas in law and main arguments
this case registration on the Skilled Trades Register), in order
to carry on that activity in Germany not just on a short-term
                                                                       —     The Court of First Instance erred in law in deciding that
basis but for a longer period?
                                                                             CEDEFOP had granted the appellant’s claim, whereas the
                                                                             decision of 14 November 2000 is a non-existent decision
                                                                             adopted by an incompetent authority: the Director of
                                                                             CEDEFOP could not lawfully determine the appellant’s
                                                                             claim, since the matter had been referred to the Appeals
                                                                             Board;
                                                                       —     (In the alternative) The Court of First Instance erred in
Appeal brought on 25 May 2001 by Michel Hendrickx                            law since, by not granting the appellant leave to amend
against the order made on 12 March 2001 by the Fifth                         his submissions and pleas in law, it did not allow him to
Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European                       bring before the Community judicature the dispute
Communities in Case T-298/00 between Michel Hend-                            between himself and CEDEFOP over, first, the fixing of
rickx and the Centre européen pour le développement de                       the (re-)installation allowance to which he was entitled as
           la formation professionnelle (CEDEFOP)                            a result of being reassigned to the Council in Brussels
                                                                             and, second, the reimbursement of a sum allegedly paid
                                                                             in error in connection with the installation allowance
                       (Case C-217/01 P)                                     paid to him when he took up his post in Thessalonika.
                        (2001/C 212/30)
                                                                       (1) OJ C 161 of 2.6.2001, p. 18.
An appeal against the order made on 12 March 2001 by the
Fifth Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European
Communities in Case T-298/00 between Michel Hendrickx and
the Centre européen pour le développement de la formation