CELEX: C2000/176/22
Language: en
Date: 2000-06-24 00:00:00
Title: Case C-144/00: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Bundesgerichtshof by order of that court of 5 April 2000 in the criminal proceedings against Matthias Hoffmann

24.6.2000              EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                       C 176/13
3. Do the abovementioned services fall within the scope of             represented by J.F. Pasquier, Legal Adviser, and G. Valero
    Article 13(A)(1)(g) of Regulation 77/388/EEC and can a             Jordana, of its Legal Service, acting as Agents, with an address
    taxable person rely on that provision?                             for service in Luxembourg at the office of Carlos Gómez de la
                                                                       Cruz, of its Legal Service, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.
(1) OJ L 145 of 13.6.1977, p. 1.
                                                                       The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                       1. Declare that:
                                                                           — by failing to take all necessary measures to ensure that,
                                                                                within 10 years following the notification of this
                                                                                Directive, the quality of bathing water conforms to the
                                                                                limit values set in accordance with the directive,
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Bundesgerichts-                       contrary to Article 4(1) of the directive;
hof by order of that court of 5 April 2000 in the criminal
           proceedings against Matthias Hoffmann                           — by failing to carry out sampling operations, the mini-
                                                                                mum frequency of which is laid down in the Annex in
                                                                                respect of all parameters and all bathing waters,
                        (Case C-144/00)                                         contrary to Article 6(1) of the directive; and
                        (2000/C 176/22)                                    — by failing to carry out the sampling operations for
                                                                                ‘total coliform’, the French Republic has failed to take
                                                                                all the measures necessary to comply with Directive
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                          76/160/EEC (1) its obligations under Articles 3, 4, 5
European Communities by order of the Bundesgerichtshof                          and 6 of the directive;
5 April 2000, received at the Court Registry on 17 April 2000,
for a preliminary ruling in the criminal proceedings against
                                                                           the French Republic has failed to take all the measures
Matthias Hoffmann on the following questions:
                                                                           necessary to comply with its obligations under Directive
                                                                           76/160/EEC and has failed to fulfil its obligations under
1. Is Article 13(A)(1)(n) of the Sixth Council Directive                   Articles 3, 4, 5 and 6 of that directive.
    77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the
    laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes —             2. Order the French Republic to pay the costs.
    common system of value added tax: uniform basis of
    assessment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1) to be interpreted as
    meaning that the term ‘other [recognised] cultural bodies’
    used therein also covers a soloist who supplies cultural           Pleas in law and main arguments
    services?
                                                                       — The Commission finds that a substantial number of
2. If the first question is answered in the affirmative:                   bathing areas in 1995 did not conform to the obligations
                                                                           concerning water quality more than 10 years after those
                                                                           obligations entered into force. Moreover, the results avail-
    Do restrictions arise from the heading ‘... activities in the          able for the subsequent years, like those for 1995, do not
    public interest’ chosen in Article 13(A), for example where            conform to water quality standards. Since the directive
    performances by soloists serve primarily commercial pur-               imposes on the Member States a clear and unconditional
    poses?                                                                 obligation as to the result to be achieved, namely as regards
                                                                           ensuring that the value limits are complied with, the
                                                                           Commission finds that the French Republic has failed to
                                                                           fulfil its obligations under the directive.
                                                                       — Despite the fact that sampling is clearly and uncon-
                                                                           ditionally required to be carried out by the competent
                                                                           authorities of the Member States under Community law,
Action brought on 17 April 2000 by the Commission of                       no steps have yet been taken to remedy the complaint that
 the European Communities against the French Republic                      sampling has been carried out insufficiently frequently in
                                                                           respect of all French parameters and bathing waters.
                        (Case C-147/00)                                    Finally, the Commission considers that it is unjustified to
                                                                           calculate and present to the public a figure relating to
                        (2000/C 176/23)                                    conformity arrived at by taking account only of the such
                                                                           parameters as have been correctly measured. The method
                                                                           used by the French authorities amounts to ignoring the
An action against the French Republic was brought before the               fact that certain areas which have been incorrectly sampled
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 17 April                   could well not be in conformity with the absolute value
2000 by the Commission of the European Communities,                        limits laid down by the directive.