CELEX: C1999/265/08
Language: en
Date: 1999-09-18 00:00:00
Title: Case C-278/99: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden, by judgment of 6 July 1999 in the criminal proceedings against G.A.P. van der Burg

18.9.1999            EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                        C 265/5
       — the operator must (also) attend to the management            Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Hoge Raad der
           of the business and not (exclusively) to the execu-        Nederlanden, by judgment of 6 July 1999 in the criminal
           tive (production) activities;                                         proceedings against G.A.P. van der Burg
                                                                                               (Case C-278/99)
       — the operator must strive to ensure continuity of
           the undertaking, which means inter alla that the                                    (1999/C 265/08)
           must have this principal place of residence in the
           Netherlands;                                               Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
                                                                      European Communities by judgment of 6 July 1999 from
                                                                      the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Supreme Court of the
       — there must be investment, and long-term commit-              Netherlands), which was received at the Court Registry on
           ments must be entered into?                                26 July 1999, for a preliminary ruling in the criminal proceed-
                                                                      ings against G.A.P. van der Burg on the following questions:
                                                                      1. Must Article 1 of Directive 83/189 (1) be interpreted as
   b) Does Article 44 of the Agreement with Poland/                       meaning that Article C.11.1(1) of the Besluit radio-elektrische
                                                                          inrichtingen (Decree on Radio-Electrical Equipment), which
       Article 45 of the Agreement with the Czech Republic
                                                                          provides that ‘It is prohibited to make commercial adver-
       provide justification for not regarding as self-employed           tisements, or cause commercial advertisements to be made,
       any person who is dependent on and indebted to the                 for transmitting equipment which is not of an approved
       person who recruited her and/or placed her in work,                type’, should be treated as a technical regulation within the
       even though it is established that, as between the                 meaning of Directive 83/189, regard being had to the
       person concerned and that third party, there is no                 statutory rules set out above [...] and in light of the issues
       question of an employment relationship, against which              considered in that context [...]?
       the term ‘self-employed’ in paragraph 4 of Articles 44
       and 45 of the Agreements seeks to establish a barrier?         2. If the answer to Question 1 is in the affirmative: does this
                                                                          have the result that such a provision cannot be applied
                                                                          only if it constitutes a barrier to trace of to the free
                                                                          movement of goods in a specific case, or should it be held
                                                                          that such a provision must be set aside if the provision
                                                                          generally, and thus irrespective of the specific case, has or
                                                                          may have the effect of a barrier to trade?
                                                                      (1) OJ 1983 L 109, p. 8.