CELEX: C2001/245/02
Language: en
Date: 2001-09-01 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 3 July 2001 in Case C-297/00: Commission of the European Communities v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Directive 98/35/EC — Training of seafarers — Failure to implement within prescribed period)

1.9.2001                 EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                             C 245/1
                                                                         I
                                                                   (Information)
                                                      COURT OF JUSTICE
                                                               COURT OF JUSTICE
                 JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                       the taxable amount for the supply of a bonus in kind constituting
                                                                             consideration for the introduction of a new customer includes, besides
                          (Sixth Chamber)                                    the purchase price of that bonus, the costs of delivery, when they are
                                                                             paid by the supplier of the bonus.
                            of 3 July 2001
                                                                             (1) OJ C 6 of 8.1.2000.
in case C-380/99 (reference for a preliminary ruling
from the Bundesfinanzhof): Bertelsmann AG v Finanzamt
                          Wiedenbrück (1)
(Sixth VAT Directive — Article 11A(1)(a) — Taxable
         amoumt — Delivery costs of bonuses in kind)
                                                                                               JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                           (2001/C 245/01)
                                                                                                       (Third Chamber)
                   (Language of the case: German)                                                        of 3 July 2001
                                                                             in Case C-297/00: Commission of the European Communi-
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                                                                                          ties v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (1)
                    in the European Court Reports)
                                                                             (Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations —
In Case C-380/99: reference to the Court under Article 177 of
                                                                             Directive 98/35/EC — Training of seafarers — Failure to
the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) from the Bundesfinanzhof
                                                                                            implement within prescribed period)
(Federal Finance Court, Germany) for a preliminary ruling in
the proceedings pending before that court between
Bertelsmann AG v Finanzamt Wiedenbrück — on the                                                         (2001/C 245/02)
interpretation of article 11A(1)(a) of the Sixth Council Directive
(77/388/EEC) of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the
laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes —                                            (Language of the case: French)
Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assess-
ment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1) — the Court (Sixth Chamber),
composed of: C. Gulmann, President of the Chamber, V. Skou-                  (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
ris (Rapporteur), J.-P. Puissochet, R. Schintgen and N. Colneric,                                in the European Court Reports)
Judges; C. Stix-Hackl, Advocate General; H.A. Rühl, Principal
Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on                    In Case C-297/00: Commission of the European Communities
3 July 2001, in which it has ruled:                                          (Agent: B. Mongin) v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (Agents:
                                                                             initially P. Steinmetz, and subsequently J. Faltz) — application
Article 11A(1)(a) of the Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of               for a declaration that, by failing to bring into force within the
17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member                   prescribed period the laws, regulations and administrative
States relating to turnover taxes — common system of value added             provisions, including any penalties, necessary to comply with
tax: uniform basis of assessment, is to be interpreted as meaning that       Council Directive 98/35/EC of 25 May 1998 amending
 ---pagebreak--- C 245/2                 EN                        Official Journal of the European Communities                                              1.9.2001
Directive 94/58/EC on the minimum level of training of                       of Article 59 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment,
seafarers (OJ 1998 L 172, p. 1), the Grand Duchy of                          Article 49 EC), Articles 86 and 90(1) of the EC Treaty (now
Luxembourg has failed to fulfil its obligations under                        Articles 82 EC and 86(1) EC) — the Court (Fourth Chamber),
Article 249 EC and Article 2 of that directive — the Court                   composed of: A. La Pergola, President of the Chamber,
(Third Chamber), composed of: C. Gulmann, President of                       D.A.O. Edward and C.W.A. Timmermans (Rapporteur), Judges;
the Chamber, J.-P. Puissochet and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues                       D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar,
(Rapporteur), Judges; C. Stix-Hackl, Advocate General;                       has made an order on 19 June 2001, in which it rules:
R. Grass, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 3 July
2001, in which it:                                                           Public employment procurement offices are subject to the prohibition
                                                                             in Article 86 of the EC Treaty (now Article 82 EC), provided that
1.    Declares that, by failing to bring into force within the prescribed    the application of that provision does not frustrate the specific
      period the laws, regulations and administrative provisions,            function entrusted to them. A Member State which prohibits any
      including any penalties, necessary to comply with Council              activity of mediation and intervention between the seeking and
      Directive 98/35/EC of 25 May 1998 amending Directive                   offering of employment which is not carried on by those offices
      94/58/EC on the minimum level of training of seafarers, the            infringes Article 90(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 86(1) EC) if it
      Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to fulfil its obligations         creates a situation in which public employment procurement offices
      under Article 2 of that directive;                                     are necessarily put in a position where they contravene the provisions
                                                                             of Article 86 of the Treaty. That is the case in particular where the
2.    Orders the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to pay the costs.                 following conditions are met:
(1) OJ C 273 of 23.9.2000.                                                   —      the public employment procurement offices are manifestly
                                                                                    unable to satisfy demand on the labour market for the kind of
                                                                                    activities concerned;
                                                                             —      the actual carrying on of employment procurement activities by
                                                                                    private agencies is rendered impossible by the maintenance in
                                                                                    force of provisions of law which prohibit those activities on pain
                                                                                    of criminal and administrative penalties;
                    ORDER OF THE COURT
                                                                             —      the procurement activities in question are to extend to the
                         (Fourth Chamber)                                           nationals or the territory of other Member States.
                          of 19 June 2001
                                                                             (1) OJ C 61 of 24.2.2001.
in Joined Cases C-9/01 to C-12/01 (references for a
preliminary ruling from the Hof van Beroep te Gent):
Stéphane Monnier v Govan Sports NV, Edwin van Anke-
ren v Govan Sports NV, Govan Sports NV v Pascal Jacobs
         and Govan Sports NV v Dannie D’Hondt (1)
(Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure — Activity of
     procuring employment for professional sportsmen)                        Appeal brought on 23 May 2001 by T. Port GmbH &
                                                                             Co. KG against the judgment delivered on 20 March 2001
                                                                             by the Fifth Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the
                          (2001/C 245/03)                                    European Communities in Case T-52/99 between T. Port
                                                                             GmbH & Co. KG and the Commission of the European
                                                                                                          Communities
                    (Language of the case: Dutch)
                                                                                                       (Case C-213/01 P)
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                                                                                                         (2001/C 245/04)
                   in the European Court Reports)
In Joined Cases C-9/01 to C-12/01: references to the Court                   An appeal against the judgment delivered on 20 March 2001
under Article 234 EC from the Hof van Beroep te Gent (Court                  by the Fifth Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the
of Appeal, Ghent), Belgium, for a preliminary ruling in the                  European Communities in Case T-52/99 between T. Port
proceedings pending before that court between Stéphane                       GmbH & Co. KG and the Commission of the European
Monnier and Govan Sports NV, Edwin van Ankeren and                           Communities was brought before the Court of Justice of the
Govan Sports NV, Govan Sports NV and Pascal Jacobs, and                      European Communities on 23 May 2001 by T. Port GmbH &
Govan Sports NV and Dannie D’Hondt — on the interpretation                   Co. KG, represented by Gert Meier, Rechtsanwalt, Cologne.