CELEX: C2003/226/11
Language: en
Date: 2003-09-20 00:00:00
Title: Case C-305/03: Action brought on 16 July 2003 by the Commission of the European Communities against the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

20.9.2003               EN                          Official Journal of the European Union                                           C 226/7
Action brought on 2 July 2003 by the Italian Republic                      B. Infringement of Article 30 of Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999
  against the Commission of the European Communities
                                                                           According to the applicant, the final date for eligibility of
                          (Case C-301/03)                                  expenditure relating to programming complements is fixed,
                                                                           with no possibility of derogation, by the general regulation.
                          (2003/C 226/10)                                  The specific provisions of that regulation imply normal
                                                                           retroactivity from the moment of contribution from the
                                                                           Funds (the date on which the Commission receives an applica-
An action against the Commission of the European                           tion for assistance) unless there are changes affecting the
Communities was brought before the Court of Justice of the                 facts set out in the decision to grant a contribution from the
European Communities on 2 July 2003 by the Italian Republic,               Funds.
represented by I. M. Braguglia, acting as Agent, and G. Aiello,
avvocato dello Stato.                                                      The Commission, on the other hand, has determined that,
                                                                           where modifications are made to a programming complement,
The applicant claims that the Court should:                                the starting date for the eligibility of expenditure is established
                                                                           by the Surveillance Committee and may not precede the
                                                                           decision of the Committee approving the amendment in
—     annul the act of the Commission reference CDRR-03-                   question. The modified programming complement must
      0013-00-it (document 4), referred to in the notes of the             specify the starting date for the eligibility of new expenditure
      Commission described below as an act ‘communicated                   occasioned by the modification.
      officially to the Member States on the occasion of the
      meeting of the Advisory Committee for the                            If the Commission's view were to be applied, Article 30(2) of
      Development and Conversion of Regions of 23 April                    the regulation would loose all preceptive force because any
      2003’ (note of 2 June 2003, No 107135) and the note                  programming complement that implements the assistance
      of 14 May 2003 no 106387 (document 6), received on                   approved by decision of the Commission would postpone
      15 May 2003, whereby the Directorate for Regional                    the date for the eligibility of expenditure and the starting date
      Operations in France, Greece and Italy within the                    for the eligibility of expenditure fixed by the regulation would
      Directorate-General for Regional Policy of the European              never be used.
      Commission gave notice of its decision on the final date
      for the eligibility of expenditure relating to modifications
      to the programming complements for POR Sardegna                      C. The applicant claims that the acts complained of are unlaw-
      2000-2006; the note of 28 May 2003 No 107051                         ful because they lack any proper legal base and constitute
      (document 7), received on 2 June 2003, whereby the                   an abuse of power involving the perversion of proceedings,
      Directorate for Regional Operations in France, Greece                lack of jurisdiction, and infringement of the regulation by the
      and Italy within the Directorate-General for Regional                Commission.
      Policy of the European Commission gave notice of its
      decision on the final date for the eligibility of expenditure
      relating to modifications to the programming comple-
      ments for POR Sicilia 2000-2006; the note of 2 June
                                                                           (1) Received probably on 30 June 2003.
      2003 No 107135 (document 8), received in 2003 (1),
                                                                           (2) OJ L 161 of 26.6.1999, p. 1.
      whereby the Directorate for Regional Operations in
      France, Greece and Italy within the Directorate-General
      for Regional Policy of the European Commission gave
      notice of its decision on the final date for the eligibility
      of expenditure relating to modifications to the program-
      ming complements for DOCUP Lazio 2000-2006, toge-
      ther with all connected acts and decisions;                          Action brought on 16 July 2003 by the Commission of the
                                                                           European Communities against the United Kingdom of
                                                                                        Great Britain and Northern Ireland
—     order the Commission to pay the costs.
                                                                                                    (Case C-305/03)
Pleas in law and main arguments                                                                     (2003/C 226/11)
A. Infringement of Articles 15 and 34 of Regulation (EC)                   An action against the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
No 1260/1999 (2)                                                           Northern Ireland was brought before the Court of Justice of the
                                                                           European Communities on 16 July 2003 by the Commission of
                                                                           the European Communities, represented by Richard Lyal, acting
By the acts in issue the Commission actively intervened in the             as agent, with an address for service in Luxembourg.
process of modifying programming complements, or in other
words, the actual management of programming. That is not                   The Applicant claims that the Court should:
within its remit, as defined by the regulation cited and the
Commission had no powers and transgressed into a sphere of                 1)   declare that by applying a reduced rate of value added tax
competence not its own.                                                         to the commission paid to auctioneers on the sale by
 ---pagebreak--- C 226/8               EN                       Official Journal of the European Union                                              20.9.2003
     auction of works of art, antiques and collectors" items            Social and Tesoreria General de la Seguridad Social on the
     imported under temporary importation arrangements,                 following questions:
     the United Kingdom has failed to comply with its obliga-
     tions under Articles 2(1), 5(4)(c), 12(3) and 16(1) of
     the Sixth Council Directive of 17 May 1977 (1) on the
     harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to
     turnover taxes;
                                                                        1.    Do Article 12 and Articles 39 to 42 of the Treaty
                                                                              Establishing the European Community and Article 45 of
2)   order the United Kingdom to pay the costs.                               Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of 14 June 1971 (1),
                                                                              preclude a national provision under which retirement con-
                                                                              tributions which the unemployment benefit agency pays
                                                                              on behalf of a worker during the period in which he
Pleas in law and main arguments
                                                                              receives certain unemployment benefits are not to be
                                                                              taken into account for the purposes of completing the
                                                                              various qualifying periods established in the national legis-
The Commission takes the view, that by not taxing the auction-                lation and of conferring entitlement to the old-age pen-
eer's profit margin on imported works of art, collectors"                     sion, when, because of a long period of unemployment,
items and antiques at the standard rate, the United Kingdom                   supposedly protected, it is absolutely impossible for that
has failed to comply with its obligations under the above                     worker to obtain credit for retirement contributions other
mentioned articles of the Sixth VAT Directive.                                than those which are invalidated by law, with the result
                                                                              that only workers who have exercised the right to freedom
                                                                              of movement are affected by that provision of national law
In the Commission's view, there are two taxable events for                    and are unable to qualify for the national retirement pen-
VAT purposes in cases of importation and sale by auction: an                  sion, despite the fact that, under Article 45 of the afore-
importation of goods within the meaning of Article 7(1) and                   mentioned EEC Regulation, those qualifying periods would
a supply of goods within the meaning of Article 26(a).                        have to be regarded as completed?
Contrary to the view held by the United Kingdom, the VAT
system does not imply double taxation, because it is not
required that VAT at the import rate should first be charged            2.    Do Article 12 and Articles 39 to 42 of the Treaty
on the total value of the goods after the sale, and then be                   Establishing the Community and Article 48(1) of Council
charged again at the standard rate on the auctioneer's profit                 Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of 14 June 1971 preclude
margin.                                                                       national provisions under which retirement contributions
                                                                              which the unemployment benefit agency pays on behalf of
                                                                              a worker during the period in which he receives certain
                                                                              unemployment benefits are not to be taken into account
(1) Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the                  for the purposes of determining whether the total duration
    harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turn-          of insurance periods or periods of residence covered by the
    over taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of           legislation of that Member State amounts to one year,
    assessment, OJ L 145, 13.6.1977, p. 1.                                    when, because of a long period of unemployment, suppos-
                                                                              edly protected, it is absolutely impossible for that worker
                                                                              to obtain credit for retirement contributions other than
                                                                              those which fall due and are paid during unemployment,
                                                                              so that only workers who have exercised the right to free-
                                                                              dom of movement are affected by that provision of
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Juzgado de lo                       national law and are unable to qualify for the national
Social No 3 de Orense by order of that Court of 24 June                       retirement pension, despite the fact that, under Article 48
2003 in the case of Cristalina Salgado Alonso against                         (1) of the aforementioned EEC Regulation, the national
Instituto Nacional de la Seguridad Social and Tesoreria                       benefit agency could not be alleviated of the obligation
                General de la Seguridad Social                                to award national benefits?
                        (Case C-306/03)
                        (2003/C 226/12)
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of
the European Communities by order of the Juzgado de lo                  (1) Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of the Council of 14 June 1971 on
Social No 3 de Orense (Social Court No 3, Orense) of                        the application of social security schemes to employed persons and
24 June 2003, received at the Court Registry on 17 July                     their families moving within the Community (English special edi-
2003, for a preliminary ruling in the case of Cristalina                    tion: Series II Chapter 1971(II), p. 416).
Salgado Alonso against Instituto Nacional de la Seguridad