CELEX: C1999/001/07
Language: en
Date: 1999-01-04 00:00:00
Title: JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Fifth Chamber) of 19 November 1998 in Case C-162/97 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Helsingborgs Tingsrätt): Criminal proceedings before that court against Gunnar Nilsson, Per Olov Hagelgren, Solweig Arrborn (Free movement of goods - Prohibition of quantitative restrictions and measures having equivalent effect between Member States - Derogations - Protection of the life and health of animals - Improvement of livestock - Breeding of pure-bred breeding animals of the bovine species - Artificial insemination) (1999/C 1/07)

C 1/4                 EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                     4.1.1999
2. Annuls the decision adopted by the Commission                     1. Articles 4 and 10 of the Sixth Council Directive
     following the favourable opinion of the Textile                      77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of
     Committee, which met on 6 March 1996, concerning                     the laws of the Member States relating to turnover
     the importation of textile products and clothing                     taxes do not preclude a national practice which, in the
     originating in the People's Republic of China;                       case of transactions subject to VAT effected by a
                                                                          company before it was registered for VAT, consists in
                                                                          fixing the starting-point of the limitation period for
                                                                          the recovery of that tax at the 20th of the month
3. Declares that the effects of the annulled decision are                 following the quarter in which that registration took
     to be maintained in force;                                           place.
4. Orders the Commission to pay the costs.                           2. The First Council Directive 67/227/EEC of 11 April
                                                                          1967 and the Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of
                                                                          17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the
(1) OJ C 233, 10.8.1996.                                                  Member States relating to turnover taxes preclude the
                                                                          VAT on a benefit granted by an employer to his
                                                                          employee in the form of the placing of a vehicle at his
                                                                          disposal for private use from being calculated by
                                                                          including in the taxable amount the VAT paid by the
                                                                          employer in another Member State on the renting of
                                                                          that vehicle, whereas, if the vehicle had been rented in
                                                                          the Member State in question, the taxable amount
               JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                      would not have included the VAT paid.
                      (Fourth Chamber)
                                                                     (1) OJ C 131, 26.4.1997.
                    of 19 November 1998
in Case C-85/97 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Tribunal de PremieÁre Instance de LieÁge (Belgium)):
SocieÂteÂ FinancieÁre d'Investissements SPRL (SFI) and
                        Belgian State (1)
(VAT Ð Limitation period Ð Starting-point Ð Method of
                          calculation)                                              JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                                                                                            (Fifth Chamber)
                         (1999/C 1/06)
                                                                                         of 19 November 1998
                                                                     in Case C-162/97 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
                (Language of the case: French)                       the Helsingborgs Tingsrätt): Criminal proceedings before
                                                                     that court against Gunnar Nilsson, Per Olov Hagelgren,
                                                                                           Solweig Arrborn (1)
                                                                     (Free movement of goods Ð Prohibition of quantitative
  (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be       restrictions and measures having equivalent effect between
          published in the European Court Reports)                   Member States Ð Derogations Ð Protection of the life
                                                                     and health of animals Ð Improvement of livestock Ð
                                                                     Breeding of pure-bred breeding animals of the bovine
                                                                                   species Ð Artificial insemination)
In Case C-85/97: reference to the Court under Article 177
of the EC Treaty by the Tribunal de PremieÁre Instance de                                     (1999/C 1/07)
LieÁge (Belgium) for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings
pending before that court between SocieÂteÂ FinancieÁre
d'Investissements SPRL (SFI) and Belgian State on the
interpretation of the Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC                            (Language of the case: Swedish)
of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the
Member States relating to turnover taxes Ð Common
system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment
(OJ L 145, 13.6.1977, p. 1) and Article 95 of the EC                   (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be
Treaty Ð the Court (Fourth Chamber), composed of: J. L.                        published in the European Court Reports)
Murray (Rapporteur), acting for the President of the
Chamber, H. Ragnemalm and K. M. Ioannou, Judges;
J. Mischo, Advocate-General; D. Louterman-Hubeau,
Principal Administrator, has given a judgment on                     In Case C-162/97: reference to the Court under Article 177
19 November 1998, in which it has ruled:                             of the EC Treaty by the Helsingborgs Tingsrätt (Sweden)
 ---pagebreak--- 4.1.1999              EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                       C 1/5
for a preliminary ruling in the criminal proceedings before                        JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
that court against Gunnar Nilsson, Per Olov Hagelgren,
                                                                                           (Sixth Chamber)
Solweig Arrborn Ð on the interpretation of Article 30 of
the EC Treaty and Article 2 of Council Directive                                        of 19 November 1998
87/328/EEC of 18 June 1987 on the acceptance for
breeding purposes of pure-bred breeding animals of the              in Case C-210/97 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
bovine species (OJ L 167, 26.6.1987, p. 54) Ð the Court             the Verwaltungsgericht Köln): Haydar Akman v.
(Fifth Chamber), composed of: P. Jann, acting as President          Oberkreisdirektor des Rheinisch-Bergischen Kreises, joined
of the Chamber, J. C. Moitinho de Almeida, C. Gulmann,              party: Vertreter des öffentlichen Interesses beim
L. Sevón (Rapporteur) and M. Wathelet, Judges; J.                                     Verwaltungsgericht Köln (1)
Mischo, Advocate-General; H. von Holstein, Deputy
Registrar, has given a judgment on 19 November 1998, in             (EEC-Turkey Association Agreement Ð Freedom of
which it has ruled:                                                 movement for workers Ð Article 7, second paragraph, of
                                                                    Decision No 1/80 of the Association Council Ð Right of
                                                                    a child of a Turkish worker to respond to any offer of
                                                                    employment in the host Member State in which he has
1. Article 30 of the EC Treaty and Article 2(1) of                  completed vocational training Ð Situation of a child
     Council Directive 87/328/EEC of 18 June 1987 on the            whose father, having been legally employed in the host
     acceptance for breeding purposes of pure-bred                  Member State for more than three years, has returned to
     breeding animals of the bovine species do not preclude          Turkey at the time when the child's training is completed)
     national rules under which authorisation is required
     for the distribution of and insemination with semen of                                 (1999/C 1/08)
     pure-bred breeding animals of the bovine species from
     another Member State, provided that the sole purpose
     of that authorisation is to ensure that the person                            (Language of the case: German)
     authorised possesses the necessary qualifications for
     the operation intended.
                                                                     (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be
2. The second indent of Article 2(1) of Directive                            published in the European Court Reports)
     87/328/EEC precludes national rules which prohibit or
     subject to authorisation the use in the territory of that
     Member State of semen from bulls of the Belgian Blue
                                                                    In Case C-210/97: reference to the Court under Article 177
     breed, where they have been accepted for artificial
                                                                    of the EC Treaty from the Verwaltungsgericht Köln
     insemination in another Member State on the basis of
                                                                    (Administrative Court, Cologne) for a preliminary ruling
     tests carried out in accordance with Commission
                                                                    in the proceedings pending before that court between
     Decision 86/130/EEC of 11 March 1986 laying down
                                                                    Haydar        Akman        and    Oberkreisdirektor        des
     performance monitoring methods and methods for
                                                                    Rheinisch-Bergischen Kreises, joined party: Vertreter des
     assessing cattle's genetic value for pure-bred breeding
                                                                    öffentlichen Interesses beim Verwaltungsgericht Köln Ð
     animals of the bovine species. The national authorities
                                                                    on the interpretation of the second paragraph of Article 7
     of the Member State of import are not entitled to
                                                                    of Decision No 1/80 of 19 September 1980 on the
     reject the use of semen of that breed on the ground
                                                                    development of the Association, adopted by the
     that it carries the muscular hypertrophy gene, or that
                                                                    Association Council established by the Association
     use of the semen would be likely to entail suffering for
                                                                    Agreement between the European Economic Community
     the animals or affect their natural behaviour, or that
                                                                    and Turkey Ð the Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of:
     the breed is regarded by those national authorities as
                                                                    P. J. G. Kapteyn, President of the Chamber, G. F. Mancini,
     carrying genetic defects.
                                                                    H. Ragnemalm, R. Schintgen (Rapporteur) and K. M.
                                                                    Ioannou, Judges; P. LeÂger, Advocate-General; H. Rühl,
                                                                    Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, gave a judgment
3. The preamble to Directive 87/328/EEC does not                    on 19 November 1998, the operative part of which is as
     authorise a Member State to prohibit or subject to             follows:
     authorisation the use in its territory of semen from
     pure-bred bulls which have been accepted for artificial
     insemination in another Member State on the basis of           The second paragraph of Article 7 of Decision No 1/80
     tests carried out in accordance with Decision                  of 19 September 1980, on the development of
     86/130/EEC but are regarded by the national                    the Association, adopted by the Association Council
     authorities of the Member State of import as having            established by the Agreement creating an Association
     an undesirable pedigree.                                       between the European Economic Community and Turkey
                                                                    must be interpreted as follows: a Turkish national such as
                                                                    the plaintiff in the main proceedings is entitled to respond
(1) OJ C 181, 14.6.1997.
                                                                    to any offer of employment in the host Member State after
                                                                    having completed a course of vocational training there,
                                                                    and consequently to be issued with a residence permit,
                                                                    when one of his parents has in the past been legally