CELEX: C2000/122/16
Language: en
Date: 2000-04-29 00:00:00
Title: Case C-37/00: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden by judgment of 4 February 2000 in the case of Herbert Weber v Universal Ogden Services Ltd, a company incorporated under Scots law

29.4.2000               EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                            C 122/11
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Hoge Raad der                  of 2 February 2000, which was received at the Court Registry
Nederlanden by judgment of 4 February 2000 in the case                   on 11 February 2000, for a preliminary ruling in the public
of Herbert Weber v Universal Ogden Services Ltd, a                       inquiry concerning Aaron Theophilus Joseph (trading as
            company incorporated under Scots law                         Woodcroft Haulage), on the following question:
                           (Case C-37/00)
                                                                         Since all serious offences are dealt with under paragraph 2 (a)
                                                                         of Schedule 3, to the 1995 Act, was the removal of the word
                          (2000/C 122/16)                                ‘repeatedly’ in relation to road transport offences (paragraph 2
                                                                         (b) of Schedule 3) necessary in order to implement Council
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                   Directive 98/76/EC (1) of 1 October 1998 and, if so, is the
European Communities by a judgment of the Hoge Raad der                  correct interpretation of 98/76/EC of 1 October 1998 that
Nederlanden (Supreme Court of the Netherlands), which was                mandatory loss of repute must occur if an individual is
received at the Court Registry on 10 February 2000, for a                convicted of 2 or more road transport offences in the course
preliminary ruling in the case of Herbert Weber v Universal              of a single court appearance?
Ogden Services Ltd, a company incorporated under Scots law,
on the following questions:
                                                                         (1) amending Directive 96/2/EC on admission to the occupation of
(a) Must work carried out on the Netherlands section of the                  road haulage operator and road passenger transport operator and
     continental shelf under the North Sea by an employee as                 mutual recognition of diplomas, certificates and other evidence of
                                                                             formal qualifications intended to facilitate for these operators the
     defined in the Wet Arbeid Mijnbouw Noordzee (1) (Law on                 right to freedom of establishment in national and international
     Mining Work in the North Sea) (‘WAMN’) be regarded as                   transport operation (OJ L 277 of 14.10.1998, p. 17).
     or treated as equivalent to work carried out in the
     Netherlands for purposes of the application of Article 5(1)
     of the Brussels Convention? (2)
(b) If so, in order to answer the question whether the employee
     must be regarded as having carried out his work ‘habitually’
     in the Netherlands, must account be taken of the entire
     period of his employment or is only his most recent period
     of employment relevant?
(c) In answering Question (b) must a distinction be drawn                Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Vestre Landsret
     between the period before the WAMN entered into force               by order of 9 February 2000 in the case of Andersen og
     — when Netherlands law had not yet designated a court                                Jensen ApS v Skatteministeriet
     with territorial jurisdiction to deal with a case such as the
     present — and the period after the WAMN entered into
     force?                                                                                         (Case C-43/00)
(1) Law of 2 November 1992, Staatsblad 592.                                                        (2000/C 122/18)
(2) Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and the
    Enforcement of Judgements in Civil and Commercial Matters.
                                                                         Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
                                                                         European Communities by order of 9 February 2000 by the
                                                                         Vestre Landsret (Western Regional Court), which was received
                                                                         at the Court Registry on 14 February 2000, for a preliminary
                                                                         ruling in the case of Andersen og Jensen ApS v Skatteminis-
                                                                         teriet (Finance Ministry) on the following questions:
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Deputy Traffic
Commissioner, North Western Traffic Area (United                         Question 1
Kingdom), by order of 2 February 2000, in the public
inquiry concerning Aaron Theophilus Joseph (trading as
                       Woodcroft Haulage)                                Must the provisions of Directive 90/434/EEC (1) (the merger
                                                                         directive) be understood as meaning that it is contrary to the
                           (Case C-38/00)                                provisions of that directive, in particular Article 2(c) and (i),
                                                                         for the authorities of a Member State to refuse to treat an
                                                                         arrangement as being covered by the directive’s provisions on
                          (2000/C 122/17)                                the transfer of assets where the effect of the arrangement in
                                                                         question is that all of the transferring company’s assets and
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                   liabilities are transferred to a second company (the receiving
European Communities by an order of the Deputy Traffic                   company), with the exception of a minor block of shares and
Commissioner, North Western Traffic Area (United Kingdom),               the proceeds of a loan taken out by the transferring company?