CELEX: C1998/137/24
Language: en
Date: 1998-05-02 00:00:00
Title: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Wien) (Higher Administrative Court, Vienna) by order of that court of 18 December 1997 in the case of Safet Eyüp v. Landesgeschäftsstelle des Arbeitsmarktservice Vorarlberg (Regional office of the Vorarlberg employment service) (Case C-65/98)

C 137/12             EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                     2.5.98
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the                             reviewing the decision of that authority or before the
Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Wien) (Higher Administrative                    Court of Justice of the European Communities when a
Court, Vienna) by order of that court of 18 December                    question is referred for a preliminary ruling, until legal
1997 in the case of Safet Eyüp v. Landesgeschäftsstelle des             protection is finally granted, to prevent serious and
Arbeitsmarktservice Vorarlberg (Regional office of the                  irreparable damage, and does the fact that a binding
               Vorarlberg employment service)                           decision as to whether the objective requirements are
                       (Case C-65/98)                                   met for freedom of movement under the association
                                                                        agreement is not taken immediately, but at a later date
                        (98/C 137/24)                                   in certain cases, constitute such damage?
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European      Communities      by     an    order    of    the
Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Wien) of 18 December 1997,
which was received at the Court Registry on 5 March
1998, for a preliminary ruling in the case of Safet Eyüp v.
Landesgeschäftsstelle des Arbeitsmarktservice Vorarlberg            Action brought on 11 March 1998 by the Commission of
on the following questions.                                           the European Communities against the Italian Republic
                                                                                            (Case C-66/98)
1. Is the concept of members of the family in the first
                                                                                             (98/C 137/25)
    sentence of Article 7 of Decision No 1/80 of the
    Association Council of 19 September 1980 on the
    development of the Association between the European
    Economic Community and Turkey to be interpreted as              An action against the Italian Republic was brought before
    meaning that the partner (in a relationship resembling          the Court of Justice of the European Communities on
    marriage with no formal matrimonial bond) of a                  11 March 1998 by the Commission of the European
    Turkish worker also meets the relevant objective                Communities, represented by Paolo Stancanelli, of its
    requirements?                                                   Legal Service, acting as Agent, with an address for service
                                                                    in Luxembourg at the office of Carlos Gómez de la Cruz,
                                                                    Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.
2. If a partner is not to be regarded as a member of the
    family:
                                                                    The applicant claims that the Court should:
    is the second indent of the first sentence of Article 7 of
    Decision No 1/80 to be interpreted as meaning that, to
    meet the objective requirements, the formal                     1. declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations
    matrimonial bond between the Turkish worker and the                 or administrative provisions necessary to comply with:
    family member must have lasted for five years without
    interruption, or is it permissible for periods during               Ð Commission Directive 93/18/EEC of 5 April 1993
    which there is a formal matrimonial bond with a                          adapting for the third time to technical progress
    partner to be interrupted by many years of                               Council      Directive    88/379/EEC      on      the
    cohabitation with the same partner?                                      approximation of the laws, regulations and
                                                                             administrative provisions of the Member States
3. Is the second indent of the first sentence of Article 7 of                relating to the classification, packaging and
    Decision No 1/80 to be interpreted as meaning that                       labelling of dangerous preparations (1),
    the formal dissolution of the matrimonial bond (for
    instance by divorce) with the Turkish worker
                                                                        Ð European Parliament and Council Directive 94/60/
    invalidates all previous periods of compliance, as a
                                                                             EC of 20 December 1994 amending for the 14th
    member of the family, with the conditions as to time?
                                                                             time Directive 76/769/EEC on the approximation
                                                                             of the laws, regulations and administrative
4. Does Community law require that the (directly                             provisions of the Member States relating to
    effective) rights deriving from Articles 6 and 7 of                      restrictions on the marketing and use of certain
    Decision No 1/80 in a Member State for the group of                      dangerous substances and preparations (2),
    people designated therein be safeguarded by providing
    provisional legal protection in certain cases in the
    form of positive (prescriptive) interim measures?                   or by failing to inform the Commission thereof, the
                                                                        Italian Republic has failed to fultil its obligations
5. If question 4 is answered in the affirmative:                        within the meaning of the EC Treaty, and
    is there a need for positive (prescriptive) interim
    measures on the basis of Community law to the effect            2. order the Italian Republic to pay the costs.
    that in certain cases (where an applicant invokes rights
    within the meaning of Articles 6 and 7 of Decision              Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
    No 1/80) the freedom of movement sought on the
    basis of the association agreement is provisionally
    granted for the duration of the proceedings before the          Within the meaning of Article 189 of the EC Treaty,
    competent administrative authority, before the court            according to which a directive is to be binding, as to the