CELEX: C2003/289/29
Language: en
Date: 2003-11-29 00:00:00
Title: Case C-425/03: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Giudice di Pace di Milazzo by order of that Court of 18 April 2003 in the case of Provvidenza Regio against AXA Assicurazioni

29.11.2003            EN                         Official Journal of the European Union                                         C 289/15
Furthermore, in the present instance there are no grounds for                  ments with Romania, Poland and the Ukraine on trans-
allowing an exemption from the obligation to recover the aid.                  port by inland waterway, and refusing to revoke them;
                                                                         —     declare that the Federal Republic of Germany has
                                                                               breached its obligations under Regulation (EC) No 1356/
                                                                               96 (2), as the individual bilateral agreements on transport
                                                                               by inland waterway with Romania, Poland, the Ukraine,
                                                                               the Republic of Czechoslovakia and Hungary are incom-
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Giudice di Pace                      patible with Regulation (EC) No 1356/96 and it has
di Milazzo by order of that Court of 18 April 2003 in the                      refused to revoke them;
   case of Provvidenza Regio against AXA Assicurazioni
                                                                         —     order the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs.
                        (Case C-425/03)
                        (2003/C 289/29)
                                                                         Pleas in law and main arguments
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                   —     The Federal Republic of Germany has usurped the
European Communities by order of the Giudice di Pace di                        exclusive competence of the Community to conclude
Milazzo (Milazzo Magistrates’ Court) of 18 April 2003,                         international agreements within the meaning of the
received at the Court Registry on 6 October 2003, for a                        ‘AETR’ case-law by negotiating, concluding, ratifying and
preliminary ruling in the case of Provvidenza Regio against                    bringing into force individual bilateral agreements with
AXA Assicurazioni on the following question:                                   Romania, Poland and the Ukraine on transport by inland
                                                                               waterway which have an impact on the Community
                                                                               provisions which the Community adopted in Regulation
The questions of unconstitutionality raised in the present                     (EEC) No 3921/91. That regulation lays down the con-
proceedings concern Article 1 of Decree Law No 18/03, which                    ditions under which non-resident carriers may transport
removes from equitable assessment cases falling within the                     goods or passengers by inland waterway within a Member
jurisdiction of the Giudice di Pace concerning standard form                   State. Those conditions were widened in stages. The
contracts the value of which does not exceed EUR 1 100.                        balance thereby created is disturbed by Article 6 of the
                                                                               agreements concluded with Poland, Romania and the
                                                                               Ukraine whereby operators resident in third countries
                                                                               have access to cabotage in Germany.
                                                                         —     The Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil
                                                                               its obligations under Article 10 EC by negotiating,
Action brought on 10 October 2003 by the Commission                            concluding, ratifying and bringing into force the con-
of the European Communities against the Federal Repub-                         tested bilateral agreements after the Council had granted
                         lic of Germany                                        the Commission authority to negotiate and the German
                                                                               Government could not have been unaware that nego-
                                                                               tiations for a multilateral agreement were in progress.
                        (Case C-433/03)
                                                                         —     The bilateral agreements concluded by the Federal Repub-
                        (2003/C 289/30)
                                                                               lic of Germany are incompatible with Council Regulation
                                                                               (EC) No 1356/96 on common rules applicable to the
                                                                               transport of goods or passengers by inland waterway
An action against the Federal Republic of Germany was                          between Member States with a view to establishing
brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communi-                   freedom to provide such transport services. The Polish,
ties on 10 October 2003 by the Commission of the European                      Ukrainian, Romanian, Czech, Slovak and Hungarian
Communities, represented by Claudia Schmidt and Wils                           barge owners and inland waterway transport undertak-
Wouter of its Legal Service, and Andreas Manville, Assistant in                ings, which may be allowed to carry out transport
its Legal Service, with an address for service in Luxembourg.                  between Germany and the other Member States under
                                                                               the contested agreements, do not satisfy the conditions
                                                                               laid down in that Regulation.
The Commission of the European Communities claims that
the Court should:
                                                                         (1) OJ 1991 L 373, p. 1.
—     declare that the Federal Republic of Germany has                   (2) OJ 1996 L 175, p. 7.
      breached its obligations under Article 10 EC and Regu-
      lation (EEC) No 3921/91 (1) by negotiating, concluding,
      ratifying and implementing individual bilateral agree-