CELEX: C2000/149/03
Language: en
Date: 2000-05-27 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court of 14 March 2000 in Joined Cases C-102/98 and C-211/98 (references for a preliminary ruling from the Bundessozialgericht): Ibrahim Kocak v Landesversicherungsanstalt Oberfranken und Mittelfranken (C-102/98) and Ramazan Örs v Bundesknappschaft (C-211/98) (EEC-Turkey Association Agreement — Decisions of the Association Council — Social Security — Principle of non-discrimination on grounds of nationality — Direct effect — Scope — Legislation of a Member State on determination of dates of birth for the purposes of allocating a social security number and awarding a retirement pension)

C 149/2                 EN                        Official Journal of the European Communities                                          27.5.2000
                 JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                                        JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                        (Second Chamber)                                                             of 14 March 2000
                          of 9 March 2000                                    in Joined Cases C-102/98 and C-211/98 (references for a
                                                                             preliminary ruling from the Bundessozialgericht): Ibrahim
                                                                             Kocak v Landesversicherungsanstalt Oberfranken und
in Case C-386/98: Commission of the European Communi-                        Mittelfranken (C-102/98) and Ramazan Örs v Bundes-
                     ties v Italian Republic (1)                                                 knappschaft (C-211/98) (1)
(Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations —                       (EEC-Turkey Association Agreement — Decisions of the
Directive 93/104/EC — Organisation of working time —                         Association Council — Social Security — Principle of non-
             Failure to transpose into national law)                         discrimination on grounds of nationality — Direct effect —
                                                                             Scope — Legislation of a Member State on determination of
                                                                             dates of birth for the purposes of allocating a social security
                          (2000/C 149/02)                                             number and awarding a retirement pension)
                                                                                                       (2000/C 149/03)
                    (Language of the case: Italian)
                                                                                                (Language of the case: German)
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                   in the European Court Reports)
In Case C-386/98: Commission of the European Communities                     (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
(Agents: P.J. Kuijper and A. Aresu) v Italian Republic (Agents:                                 in the European Court Reports)
Professor U. Leanza, assisted by D. Del Gaizo) — application
for a declaration that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations
or administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council                In Joined Cases C-102/98 and C-211/98: Reference to the
Directive 93/104/EC of 23 November 1993 concerning certain                   Court under Article 177 of the EC Treaty (now Article 234
aspects of the organisation of working time (OJ 1993 L 307,                  EC) by the Bundessozialgericht, Germany, for a preliminary
p. 18), and/or by failing to inform the Commission thereof,                  ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between
the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under the          Ibrahim Kocak v Landesversicherungsanstalt Oberfranken und
EC Treaty — the Court (Second Chamber), composed of: R.                      Mittelfranken (C-102/98) and Ramazan Örs v Bundes-
Schintgen, President of the Chamber, G. Hirsch and V. Skouris                knappschaft (C-211/98), on the interpretation of Article 9
(Rapporteur), Judges; F.G. Jacobs, Advocate General; R. Grass,               of the Agreement establishing an Association between the
Registrar, has given a judgment on 9 March 2000, in which it:                European Economic Community and Turkey signed at Ankara
                                                                             on 12 September 1963 and concluded, approved and con-
                                                                             firmed on behalf of the Community by Council Decision
1. Declares that, by failing to adopt within the prescribed period the       64/732/EEC of 23 December 1963 (OJ 1977 L 361, p. 29), of
    laws, regulations or administrative provisions necessary to comply       Article 37 of the Additional Protocol signed in Brussels on
    with Council Directive 93/104/EC of 23 November 1993                     23 November 1970 and concluded, approved and confirmed
    concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time,          on behalf of the Community by Council Regulation (EEC)
    the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that     No 2760/72 of 19 December 1972 (OJ 1977 L 361, p. 61), of
    directive;                                                               Article 10(1) of Decision No 1/80 of the Association Council
                                                                             of 19 September 1980 on the development of the Association
                                                                             (not published), and of Article 3(1) of Decision No 3/80 of the
2. Orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs.                             Association Council of the same date on the application of the
                                                                             social security schemes of the Member States of the European
                                                                             Communities to Turkish workers and members of their
                                                                             families (OJ 1983 C 110, p. 60) — the Court, composed of:
(1) OJ C 397 of 19.12.1998.                                                  G.C. Rodrı́guez Iglesias, President, D.A.O. Edward, L. Sevón,
                                                                             R. Schintgen (Rapporteur) (Presidents of Chambers), P.J.G.
                                                                             Kapteyn, C. Gulmann, J.-P. Puissochet, G. Hirsch, H. Ragne-
                                                                             malm, M. Wathelet and V. Skouris, Judges; D. Ruiz-Jarabo
                                                                             Colomer, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a
                                                                             judgment on 14 March 2000, in which it held:
 ---pagebreak--- 27.5.2000                EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                             C 149/3
Article 3(1) of Decision No 3/80 of the Association Council of             Article 73d(1)(b) of the EC Treaty (now Article 58(1)(b) EC) must
19 September 1998 on the application of the social security schemes        be interpreted as precluding a system of prior authorisation for direct
of the Member States of the European Communities to Turkish                foreign investments which confines itself to defining in general terms
workers and members of their families must be interpreted as not           the affected investments as being investments that are such as to
precluding a Member State from applying to Turkish workers                 represent a threat to public policy and public security, with the result
legislation which, for the purposes of awarding a retirement pension       that the persons concerned are unable to ascertain the specific
and determining the social security number allocated for that purpose,     circumstances in which prior authorisation is required.
takes as the conclusive date of birth the one given in the first
declaration made by the person concerned to a social security authority
in that Member State and allows another date of birth to be taken
                                                                           (1) OJ C 100 of 10.4.1999.
into account only if a document is produced the original of which was
issued before that declaration was made.
(1) OJ C 209 of 4.7.1998 and OJ C 258 of 15.8.1998.
                                                                                            JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                 JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                                               (Fifth Chamber)
                          of 14 March 2000
                                                                                                    of 16 March 2000
in Case C-54/99 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Conseil d’État, France): Association Église de Scientol-             in Joined Cases C-395/96 P and C-396/96 P: Compagnie
ogie de Paris and Scientology International Reserves                       Maritime Belge Transports SA (C-395/96 P), Compagnie
                 Trust v The Prime Minister (1)                            Maritime Belge SA (C-395/96 P) and Dafra-Lines A/S
                                                                           (C-396/96 P) v Commission of the European Communi-
                                                                                                           ties (1)
(Free movement of capital — Direct foreign investments —
   Prior authorisation — Public policy and public security)
                                                                           (Competition — International maritime transport — Liner
                                                                           conferences — Regulation (EEC) No 4056/86 — Article 86
                           (2000/C 149/04)
                                                                           of the EC Treaty (now Article 82 EC) — Collective dominant
                                                                           position — Exclusivity agreement between national auth-
                                                                           orities and liner conferences — Liner conference insisting on
                     (Language of the case: French)                        application of the agreement — Fighting ships — Loyalty
                                                                           rebates — Rights of defence — Fines — Assessment criteria)
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published                               (2000/C 149/05)
                    in the European Court Reports)
In Case C-54/99: reference to the Court under Article 177 of
the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) from the Conseil d’État,                                   (Language of the case: English)
France, for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending
before that court between Association Église de Scientologie
de Paris, Scientology International Reserves Trust and The
Prime Minister — on the interpretation of Article 73d(1)(b) of
the EC Treaty (now Article 58(1)(b) EC) — the Court,
composed of: G.C. Rodrı́guez Iglesias, President, J.C. Moitinho            In Joined Cases C-395/96 P and C-396/96 P: Compagnie
de Almeida, D.A.O. Edward, R. Schintgen (Presidents of                     Maritime Belge Transports SA (C-395/96 P), established in
Chambers), P.J.G. Kapteyn, C. Gulmann (Rapporteur), J.-P.                  Antwerp, Belgium, Compagnie Maritime Belge SA (C-395/96
Puissochet, G. Hirsch, H. Ragnemalm, M. Wathelet and V.                    P), established in Antwerp, and Dafra-Lines A/S (C-396/96 P),
Skouris, Judges; A. Saggio, Advocate General; R. Grass, Regis-             established in Copenhagen, Denmark, represented by M. and
trar, has given a judgment on 14 March 2000, in which it has               D. Waelbroeck, of the Brussels Bar, with an address for service
ruled:                                                                     in Luxembourg at the Chambers of E. Arendt, 34 Rue