CELEX: C1998/378/13
Language: en
Date: 1998-12-05 00:00:00
Title: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de Grande Instance de Lille by judgment of that court of 7 August 1998 in the case of Philippe Anssens v. Directeur des Services Fiscaux du Nord (Case C-325/98)

C 378/6               EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                      5.12.98
               JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                                  ORDER OF THE COURT
                        (Sixth Chamber)                                                    (Fourth Chamber)
                                                                                           of 8 October 1998
                     of 22 October 1998
                                                                           in Case C-228/97 P: Hedwig Kuchlenz-Winter v.
       in Case C-26/98: Commission of the European                           Commission of the European Communities (1)
                  Communities v. Ireland (1)
                                                                     (Officials Ð Cover under the joint sickness insurance
(Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations Ð               scheme Ð Divorced spouse of a former official Ð Appeal
Directive 94/26/EC Ð Failure to transpose within the                            manifestly inadmissible and unfounded)
                       prescribed period)                                                     (98/C 378/12)
                         (98/C 378/11)
                                                                                   (Language of the case: German)
                (Language of the case: English)                        (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be
                                                                              published in the European Court Reports)
In Case C-26/98: Commission of the European                          In Case C-228/97 P: Hedwig Kuchlenz-Winter, divorced
Communities (Agents: Hans Christian Stùvlbñk and                     spouse of a former official of the European Parliament,
Michael Schotter) v. Ireland (Agent: Michael A. Buckley)             residing in Kehlen (Luxembourg), represented by Dieter
Ð Application for a declaration that, by failing to adopt,           Rogalla, Rechtsanwalt, Sprockhövel, with an address for
or by failing to notify, within the prescribed period the            service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Decker, Braun
laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary            & Wagner, 16 Avenue Marie-TheÂreÁse Ð Appeal against
to comply with Commission Directive 94/26/EC of 15 June              the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the
1994 adapting to technical progress Council Directive 79/            European Communities (First Chamber) in Case T-66/95
196/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member               [1997] ECR II-637, seeking the annulment of that
States concerning electrical equipment for use in                    judgment, the other party to the proceedings being:
potentially explosive atmospheres employing certain types            Commission of the European Communities (Agent: Julian
of protection (OJ L 157, 24.6.1994, p. 33), Ireland has              Currall, and Bertrand Wägenbaur), the Court (Fourth
failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive Ð the          Chamber) composed of: P. J. G. Kapteyn, President of the
Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of: P. J. G. Kapteyn,                Chamber, H. Ragnemalm (Rapporteur) and K. M.
President of the Chamber, G. Hirsch, G. F. Mancini, H.               Ioannou, Judges; P. LeÂger, Advocate-General; R. Grass,
Ragnemalm (Rapporteur) and R. Schintgen, Judges; S.                  Registrar has made an order on 8 October 1998, the
Alber, Advocate-General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a            operative part of which is as follows:
judgment on 22 October 1998, in which it:
                                                                     1. The appeal is dismissed.
1. Declares that, by failing to adopt within the prescribed          2. The applicant is ordererd to pay the costs of the
     period the laws, regulations and administrative                      proceedings.
     provisions necessary to comply with Commission
     Directive 94/26/EC of 15 June 1994 adapting to
                                                                     (1) OJ C 252, 16.8.1997.
     technical progress Council Directive 79/196/EEC on
     the approximation of the laws of the Member States
     concerning electrical equipment for use in potentially
     explosive atmospheres employing certain types of
     protection, Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations
     under that directive;
                                                                     Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de
                                                                     Grande Instance de Lille by judgment of that court of
                                                                     7 August 1998 in the case of Philippe Anssens v. Directeur
2. Orders Ireland to pay the costs.                                                  des Services Fiscaux du Nord
                                                                                            (Case C-325/98)
(1) OJ C 72, 7.3.1998.                                                                        (98/C 378/13)
                                                                     Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
                                                                     European Communities by a judgment of the First Civil
 ---pagebreak--- 5.12.98              EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                  C 378/7
Chamber of the Tribunal de Grande Instance de Lille                 4. a mean cost per horsepower of:
(Regional Court, Lille) of 7 August 1998, which was
received at the Court Registry on 31 August 1998, for a
                                                                        295,00 French francs for the 19 and 20 fiscal CV
preliminary ruling in the case of Philippe Anssens v.
                                                                        band,
Directeur des Services Fiscaux du Nord on the following
                                                                        401,80 French francs for the 21 and 22 CV band,
question:
                                                                        541,10 French francs for the 23 CV and over band,
Considering that, as Community law stands at present, the
Member States remain free to subject products such as                   whereas the highest cost per fiscal horsepower is
cars to a system of road tax the amount of which                        202,20 French francs for the 15Ð16 CV band;
increases progressively according to an objective criterion
such as cylinder capacity, provided that that system of             5. successive differentials expressed as percentages of the
taxation is free from any discriminatory or protective                  tax compared to the basic tax (260 French francs):
effect, may the tax system established by the French
legislature be regarded as corresponding to the above
criteria of objectivity and non-discrimination, that tax                735 % for the 19 and 20 CV band compared to the 17
system including:                                                       and 18 CV band,
                                                                        1 111 % for the 21 and 22 CV band compared to the
                                                                        19 and 20 CV band,
1. successive differentials between one band and the next,              1 666 % for the 23 CV and over band compared to
    taking as the basis the first band covering 2-3-4 CV                the 21 and 22 CV band,
    fiscal power value, 95-96 tax disc for the deÂpartement
    of Charente, whose amount is 206 French francs,
    namely:                                                             whereas the maximum percentage increase amounts to
                                                                        430 % and relates to the 12 to 14 CV band compared
                                                                        to the 10 and 11 CV band;
    for the 19 and 20 CV band 1 910 French francs,
    for the 21 and 22 CV band 2 888 French francs,
    for the 23 CV and over band 4 332 French francs,                6. a multiplying coefficient for each band in relation to
                                                                        the basic tax, which is 260 French francs, amounting
                                                                        to:
    whereas the maximum successive differential for the
     preceding bands covering lower fiscal power values is
     1 118 French francs;                                               22,12 for 19 and 20 CV,
                                                                        33,23 for 21 and 22 CV,
                                                                        49,89 for 23 CV and over,
2. differentials weighted by band and fiscal power value
     of:
                                                                        whereas the highest coefficient is only 14,78 and
     955 French francs for the 19 and 20 CV band,                       relates to the 17 and 18 CV band, that of the
     1 444 French francs for the 21 and 22 CV band,                     proceeding band (15Ð16 CV) being 12,05;
     4 332 French francs for the 23 CV and over band,
                                                                    it being observed that in any event French production does
     whereas the maximum weighted differential for the              not include vehicles with a fiscal horsepower greater than
    preceding bands is 373 French francs (12, 13 and 14             17 CV?
    CV fiscal values band);
3. a cost of the tax disc per fiscal horsepower of:
    302,70 French francs           corresponding     to   the
    administrative fiscal power  rating of 19 CV,                   Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Supreme Court,
    287,60 French francs           corresponding     to   the       Ireland, by order of that Court of 16 June 1998, in the
    administrative fiscal power  rating of 20 CV,                   case of Masterfoods Ltd against HB Ice Cream Ltd, and
    411,40 French francs           corresponding     to   the       HB Ice Cream Ltd against Masterfoods Ltd trading as
    administrative fiscal power  rating of 21 CV,                                           Mars Ireland
    392,70 French francs           corresponding     to   the                            (Case C-344/98)
    administrative fiscal power  rating of 22 CV,
                                                                                           (98/C 378/14)
    564,00 French francs           corresponding     to   the
    administrative fiscal power  rating of 23 CV,
    540,30 French francs           corresponding     to   the       Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
    administrative fiscal power  rating of 24 CV,                   European Communities by an order of the Supreme Court,
    518,90 French francs           corresponding     to   the       Ireland, of 16 June 1998, which was received at the Court
    administrative fiscal power  rating of 25 CV,                   Registry on 21 September 1998, for a preliminary ruling
                                                                    in the case of Masterfoods Ltd against HB Ice Cream Ltd,
    whereas the highest cost per fiscal horsepower is 226           and HB Ice Cream Ltd against Masterfoods Ltd trading as
    French francs for a vehicle of 17 CV power rating;              Mars Ireland, on the following questions: