CELEX: C1999/048/16
Language: en
Date: 1999-02-20 00:00:00
Title: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Netherlands Raad van State by order of that court of 19 November 1998 in the case of W. N. against Staatssecretaris van Financiën (Case C-420/98)

C 48/8               EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                  20.2.1999
coordinating procedures for the award of public supply                 which she had acquired and also for the inappropriate
contracts (OJ L 13, 15.1.1977, p. 1), as amended by                    development of her career and the delay in her career
Directive 88/295/EEC, (OJ L 127, 20.5.1988, p. 1), and of              advancement;
Article 1 of Council Directive 93/36/EEC of 14 June 1993
coordinating procedures for the award of public supply             Ð declare unlawful Article 45(2), (3) and (4) of the Staff
contracts (OJ L 199, 9.8.1993, p. 1) Ð the Court (Fifth                Regulations having regard to the principles of equal
Chamber), composed of: J.-P. Puissochet, President of the              treatment and entitlement to freedom;
Chamber, P. Jann (Rapporteur), J. C. Moitinho de
Almeida, C. Gulmann and M. Wathelet, Judges; S. Alber,
                                                                   Ð order the Commission to pay all the costs of both
Advocate-General; H. von Holstein, Deputy Registrar, has
                                                                       actions at first instance and of the present proceedings.
given a judgment on 17 December 1998, in which it held:
                                                                   In the alternative, in the event that the Court of Justice
A body such as Coillte Teoranta is a contracting authority         considers that the case is not ready for judgment, the
within the meaning of Article 1(b) of Council Directive            appellant claims that the Court of Justice should:
77/62/EEC of 21 December 1976 coordinating procedures
for the award of public supply contracts, as amended by
                                                                   Ð set aside in part the judgment of the Court of First
Council Directive 88/295/EEC.
                                                                       Instance of 15 September 1998 in Case T-23/96;
(1) OJ C 318, 18.10.1997.
                                                                   Ð refer the case back to the Court of First Instance for it
                                                                       to give judgment, on the basis of the principles to be
                                                                       specified by the Court of Justice;
                                                                   Ð order the Commission to pay the costs of these
                                                                       proceedings.
Appeal brought on 23 October 1998 by Elsa De Persio,
an employee of the Commission of the European
                                                                   Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
Communities, against the judgment delivered on
15 September 1998 by the Second Chamber of the Court
of First Instance of the European Communities in Case              1. Infringement of the obligation to respond to all
T-23/96 Elsa De Persio v. Commission of the European                   requests made by the appellant;
 Communities, intervener: Council of the European Union
                     (Case C-418/98 P)                             2. Incorrect appraisal of the plea alleging lack of equal
                                                                       treatment and encroachment upon the freedom of
                       (1999/C 48/15)                                  officials covered by the derogation relating to officials
                                                                       in Grades B, C and D;
An appeal against the judgment delivered on 15 September
1998 by the Second Chamber of the Court of First                   3. Errors in law, infringement of the rules of procedure
Instance of the European Communities in Case T-23/96                   concerning the burden of proof borne by the
Elsa De Persio v. Commission of the European                           defendant and manifest error of assessment regarding
Communities, intervener: Council of the European Union,                the provisions relating to the appointing authority;
was brought before the Court of Justice of the European
Communities on 23 October 1998 by Elsa De Persio, an               4. Error in law regarding the applicable procedure and
employee of the Commission of the European                             powers concerning changes to the staff organisation of
Communities, represented by Franco Giampietro, of the                  the Publications Office and the Commission;
Rome Bar, with an address for service at 114 Via
Sacchetti, Rome.                                                   5. Errores in iudicando and infringement of the
                                                                       requirements       relating   to    burden    of   proof
The appellant claims that the Court of Justice should:                 (paragraphs 123 to 149 of the contested judgment).
Ð declare void or non-existent, or annul, the decison
    transferring the appellant, adopted by the Director
    General for Personnel of the Commission and the
    preparatory measures on which it is based;
                                                                   Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Netherlands
                                                                   Raad van State by order of that court of 19 November
Ð declare unlawful the conduct of the administration               1998 in the case of W. N. against Staatssecretaris van
    from 13 January 1995 to 10 June 1996;                                                      FinancieÈn
                                                                                           (Case C-420/98)
Ð consequently, order the Commission to pay                                                 (1999/C 48/16)
    compensation, on an equitable basis, for the
    non-material damage suffered by the appellant and the
    adverse effect on her peace of mind and physical               Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
    health, and for loss of the specific professional status       European Communities by order of the Netherlands Raad
 ---pagebreak--- 20.2.1999             EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                   C 48/9
van State (Council of State) of 19 November 1998,                   The applicant claims that the Court should:
received at the Court Registry on 23 November 1998, for
a preliminary ruling in the case of W. N. against
Staatssecretaris van FinancieÈn on the following questions:         (a) declare that the Italian Republic
1. Must the words a loss of tax' in Article 4(1)(a) of
                                                                        Ð by requiring family members of beneficiaries of
     Council Directive 77/799/EEC (1) be interpreted as
                                                                            Directive 90/364/EEC (1) to have resources
     meaning that the loss of tax in question necessarily
                                                                            one-third higher in amount than the minimum
     arises from an express act on the part of the
                                                                            which family members of beneficiaries of Directive
     competent authority of another Member State?
                                                                            90/365/EEC (2) must have;
2. How should the word abnormaal' in the Dutch
     version of that provision be interpreted in that                   Ð by limiting the methods of proof which may be
     connection?                                                            submitted and, in particular, by providing that
                                                                            certain documents must be issued or certified by
                                                                            the authorities of another Member State; and
3. If Article 4(1)(a) is not applicable, can Article 4(3) of
     the directive give rise to an obligation to exchange
     information spontaneously?                                         Ð by requiring students, who are citizens of other
                                                                            Member States, requesting recognition of their
                                                                            right of residence in Italy within the meaning of
(1) OJ L 336, 27.12.1977, p. 15.                                            Directive 93/96/EEC (3) and members of their
                                                                            family to guarantee to the Italian authorities that
                                                                            they have resources of a certain amount and, as
                                                                            regards the means to be used for that purpose, not
                                                                            clearly leaving the student a choice between
                                                                            making a declaration or such alternative means as
                                                                            are at least equivalent, and by not allowing the
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Corte di Appello
                                                                            declaration to be used where the student is
di Napoli by order of that court of 29 October 1998 in
                                                                            accompanied by members of his family
             the case brought by Alfredo Albore
                       (Case C-423/98)
                        (1999/C 48/17)                                  has failed to fulfil its obligations under the
                                                                        above-mentioned Council Directives 90/364/EEC (1),
                                                                        90/365/EEC (2) and 93/96/EEC (3);
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by order of the Corte di Appello
di Napoli (Appeal Court, Naples) of 29 October 1998,                (b) order the Italian Republic to pay the costs.
which was received at the Court Registry on 25 November
1998, for a preliminary ruling in the case brought by
Alfredo Albore on a question as to the compatibility of
                                                                    Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support
Article 18 of Law No 898/1976, as amended by Article 9
of Law No 104/1990, with Articles 6, 52 and 67 of the
Treaty.
                                                                    Ð The amount of family members' income
                                                                        The Commission considers that by requiring family
                                                                        members of beneficiaries of Directive 90/364/EEC to
                                                                        have resources one-third higher in amount than the
Action brought on 25 November 1998 by the Commission                    minimum which family members of beneficiaries of
 of the European Communities against the Italian Republic               Directive 90/365/EEC must have, the Italian Republic
                       (Case C-424/98)                                  has failed to fulfil its obligations under Directive
                                                                        90/364/EEC.
                        (1999/C 48/18)
An action against the Italian Republic was brought before           Ð The documents which beneficiaries of
the Court of Justice of the European Communities on                     Directives 90/364/EEC and 90/365/EEC
25 November 1998 by the Commission of the European                      must submit
Communities, represented by Antonio Aresu, of its Legal
Service, acting as Agent, with an address for service in
Luxembourg at the Office of Carlos Gómez de la Cruz,                    The Commission considers that, by limiting the
Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.                                               methods of proof which may be submitted, and by