CELEX: C1998/397/13
Language: en
Date: 1998-12-19 00:00:00
Title: JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Sixth Chamber) of 27 October 1998 in Case C-152/97 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Commissione Tributaria Provinciale di Milano): Abruzzi Gas SpA (Agas) v. Amministrazione Tributaria di Milano (Directive 69/335/EEC - Indirect taxes on the raising of capital - Merger of companies - Acquisition by a company which already holds all the securities of the companies acquired)

C 397/8               EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                     19.12.98
               JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                     the enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial
                                                                         matters (OJ L 299, 31.12.1972), as amended by the
                       (Third Chamber)
                                                                         Convention of 9 October 1978 on the Accession of
                     of 27 October 1998                                  the Kingdom of Denmark, Ireland and the United
                                                                         Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, by
in Case C-51/97 (reference for a preliminary ruling from                 the Convention of 25 October 1982 on the Accession
the Cour de Cassation): ReÂunion EuropeÂenne SA and                      of the Hellenic Republic and by the Convention of
Others v. Spliethoff's Bevrachtingskantoor BV and the                    26 May 1989 on the Accession of the Kingdom of
          Master of the vessel Alblasgracht V002 (1)                     Spain and the Portuguese Republic, but of matters
(Brussels Convention Ð Interpretation of Articles 5(1) and               relating to tort, delict or quasi-delict within the
(3) and 6 Ð Claim for compensation by the consignee or                   meaning of Article 5(3) of that Convention.
insurer of the goods on the basis of the bill of lading
against a defendant who did not issue the bill of lading
but is regarded by the plaintiff as the actual maritime             2. The place where the consignee of the goods, on
                            carrier)                                     completion of a transport operation by sea and then
                                                                         by land, merely discovered the existence of the damage
                        (98/C 397/12)                                    to the goods delivered to him cannot serve to
                                                                         determine the place where the harmful event
                                                                         occurred' within the meaning of Article 5(3) of the
                (Language of the case: French)                           Convention of 28 September 1968, as interpreted by
                                                                         the Court.
 (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be
          published in the European Court Reports)                  3. Article 6(1) of the Convention of 27 September 1968
                                                                         must be interpreted as meaning that a defendant
                                                                         domiciled in a Contracting State cannot be sued in
                                                                         another Contracting State before a court seised of an
In Case C-51/97: reference to the Court from the Cour de
                                                                         action against a co-defendant not domiciled in a
Cassation (Court of Cassation) (France), under the
                                                                         Contracting State on the ground that the dispute is
Protocol of 3 June 1971 on the interpretation by the
                                                                         indivisible rather than merely displaying a connection.
Court of Justice of the Convention of 27 September 1968
on jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments in civil
and commercial matters, for a preliminary ruling in the             (1) OJ C 94, 22.3.1997.
proceedings pending before that court between ReÂunion
EuropeÂenne      SA     and     Others     and     Spliethoff's
Bevrachtingskantoor BV and the Master of the vessel
Alblasgracht V002 Ð on the interpretation of Articles 5(1)
and (3) and 6 of the said Convention of 27 September
1968 (OJ L 299, 31.12.1972, p. 32), as amended by the
Convention of 9 October 1978 on the Accession of the                               JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
Kingdom of Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom of
Great Britain and Northern Ireland (OJ L 304,                                               (Sixth Chamber)
30.10.1978, p. 1 and Ð amended text Ð p. 77), by the                                      of 27 October 1998
Convention of 25 October 1982 on the Accession of the
Hellenic Republic (OJ L 388, 31.12.1982, p. 1) and by the           in Case C-152/97 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
Convention of 26 May 1989 on the Accession of the                   the Commissione Tributaria Provinciale di Milano):
Kingdom of Spain and the Portuguese Republic (OJ L 285,             Abruzzi Gas SpA (Agas) v. Amministrazione Tributaria di
1989, p. 1) Ð the Court (Third Chamber), composed of:                                           Milano (1)
J.-P. Puissochet, President of the Chamber, J. C. Moitinho
de Almeida (Rapporteur) and C. Gulmann, Judges; G.                  (Directive 69/335/EEC Ð Indirect taxes on the raising of
Cosmas, Advocate-General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given            capital Ð Merger of companies Ð Acquisition by a
a judgment on 27 October 1998, in which it has ruled:               company which already holds all the securities of the
                                                                                          companies acquired)
                                                                                             (98/C 397/13)
1. An action by which the consignee of goods found to
     be damaged on completion of a transport operation by
     sea and then by land, or by which his insurer who has                          (Language of the case: Italian)
     been subrogated to his rights after compensating him,
     seeks redress for the damage suffered, relying on the
     bill of lading covering the maritime transport, not
     against the person who issued that document on his               (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be
     headed paper but against the person whom the                             published in the European Court Reports)
     plaintiff considered to be the actual maritime carrier,
     falls within the scope not of matters relating to a
     contract within the meaning of Article 5(1) of the             In Case C-152/97: reference to the Court under Article 177
     Convention of 27 September 1968 on jurisdiction and            of the EC Treaty from the Commissione Tributaria
 ---pagebreak--- 19.12.98             EN                Official Journal of the European Communities                                      C 397/9
Provinciale (Provincial Tax Court), Milan (Italy) for a           obligations under the EC Treaty Ð the Court (First
preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that         Chamber), composed of: P. Jann (Rapporteur), President
court between Abruzzi Gas SpA (Agas) and                          of the Chamber, L. Sevón and M. Wathelet, Judges; A. La
Amministrazione Tributaria di Milano Ð on the                     Pergola, Advocate-General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given
interpretation of Council Directive 69/335/EEC of 17 July         a judgment on 27 October 1998, in which it:
1969 concerning indirect taxes on the raising of capital
(OJ English Special Edition 1969 (II), p. 412), as amended
by Council Directive 85/303/EEC of 10 June 1985 (OJ
L 156, 15.6.1985, p. 23) Ð the Court (Sixth Chamber),             1. Declares that, failing to adopt within the period
composed of: G. Hirsch, President of the Second Chamber,               prescribed the laws, regulations and administrative
acting for the President of the Sixth Chamber, G. F.                   provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive
Mancini, J. L. Murray, H. Ragnemalm (Rapporteur) and                   93/103/EC of 23 November 1993 concerning the
K. M. Ioannou, Judges; G. Cosmas, Advocate-General;                    minimum safety and health requirements for work on
D. Louterman-Hubeau, Principal Administrator, for the                  board fishing vessels (13th individual directive within
Registrar, has given a judgment on 27 October 1998, in                 the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/
which it has ruled:                                                    EEC), Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under
                                                                       Article 13(1) thereof;
Council Directive 69/335/EEC of 17 July 1969 concerning           2. Orders Ireland to pay the costs.
indirect taxes on the raising of capital, as amended by
Council Directive 85/303/EEC of 10 June 1985, does not
preclude the levying of registration duty in respect of the       (1) OJ C 370, 6.12.1997.
acquisition of companies by a company which already
holds all the shares in the companies acquired.
(1) OJ C 199, 28.6.1997.
                                                                                 JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                                                                                          (Fifth Chamber)
                                                                                        of 29 October 1998
              JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                      in Case C-185/96: Commission of the European
                                                                               Communities v. Hellenic Republic (1)
                       (First Chamber)
                                                                  (Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations Ð
                     of 27 October 1998                                    Benefits for large families Ð Discrimination)
      in Case C-364/97: Commission of the European                                         (98/C 397/15)
                  Communities v. Ireland (1)
(Failure to fulfil obligations Ð Non-transposition of
                    Directive 93/103/EC)                                          (Language of the case: Greek)
                         (98/C 397/14)
                                                                    (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be
                                                                            published in the European Court Reports)
               (Language of the case: English)
                                                                  In Case C-185/96: Commission of the European
In Case C-364/97: Commission of the European                      Communities (Agent: Maria Patakia) v. Hellenic Republic
Communities (Agent: Pieter Jan Kuijper) v. Ireland (Agent:        (Agents: Ioanna Galani-Maragkoudaki and Stamatina
Michael A. Buckley) Ð application for a declaration that,         Vodina) Ð application for a declaration that, by
by not adopting and/or by not communicating to the                precluding by regulation or administrative practice on the
Commission the laws, regulations and administrative               grounds of their nationality employed or self-employed
provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 93/         workers from other Member States and the members of
103/EC of 23 November 1993 concerning the minimum                 their families from being attributed large-family status for
safety and health requirements for work on board fishing          the purpose of the award of special benefits for such
vessels (13th individual directive within the meaning of          families and from being awarded family allowances, the
Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC) (OJ L 307,                 Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under
13.12.1993, p. 1), Ireland has failed to fulfil its               Articles 48 and 52 of the EC Treaty, Article 7 of Council