CELEX: C2001/173/18
Language: en
Date: 2001-06-16 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 22 February 2001 in Case C-187/99 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Supremo Tribunal Administrativo): Fazenda Pública v Fábrica de Queĳo Eru Portuguesa Lda (Inward processing relief arrangements — Regulation (EEC) No 1999/85 — Rate of yield of the processing operation — Authorisation issued by the competent customs authority — Power of that authority unilaterally to alter the rate of yield)

16.6.2001                 EN                        Official Journal of the European Communities                                            C 173/11
services acquired by the transferor in order to effect the transfer have       1.    Article 95a of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of the Council
a direct and immediate link with a clearly defined part of his economic              of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes
activities, so that the costs of those services form part of the overheads           to employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members
of that part of the business, and all the transactions relating to that              of their families moving within the Community, as amended by
part of the business are subject to value added tax, he may deduct all               Council Regulation (EEC) No 1248/92 of 30 April 1992,
the value added tax charged on his costs of acquiring those services.                laying down transitional provisions for application of Regu-
                                                                                     lation No 1248/92, applies to recipients of pensions who,
                                                                                     before the date of entry into force of the amendments introduced
(1) OJ C 1 of 4.1.1999.                                                              by the latter regulation, had already brought proceedings before
                                                                                     a national court seeking to obtain the right to the pension
                                                                                     by contesting the application of the national rules against
                                                                                     overlapping, even if a final decision in those proceedings had
                                                                                     not yet been given at the time of the entry into force of the new
                                                                                     provisions.
                                                                               2.    It is for the national court to determine, first, whether its
                                                                                     national law requires an application for review to be made
                   JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                             either to the competent social security institution within the
                                                                                     period prescribed and in accordance with the relevant formal
                                                                                     requirements, or to the court itself according to the applicable
                            (Fifth Chamber)                                          rules of procedure. Second, it is for that court to ensure that
                                                                                     those requirements are not less favourable than those governing
                         of 22 February 2001                                         similar situations under domestic law and that they are not
                                                                                     such as to render impossible in practice or excessively difficult
                                                                                     the exercise of the rights conferred on claimants by Regulation
in Joined Cases C-52/99 and C-53/99 (reference for a                                 No 1408/71, as amended by Regulation No 1248/92.
preliminary ruling from the Cour du Travail de Liège
(Belgium)): Office National des Pensions (ONP) v Giocon-
da Camarotto (C-52/99), Giuseppina Vignone (C-53/99) (1)                       (1) OJ C 100 of 10.4.1999.
(Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71, as amended by
Regulation (EEC) No 1248/92 — Social security Insurance
relating to old age and death — Calculation of benefits —
    Changes to the rules governing calculation of benefits)
                            (2001/C 173/17)                                                      JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                                                                                                        (Second Chamber)
                      (Language of the case: French)
                                                                                                       of 22 February 2001
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published         in Case C-187/99 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
                     in the European Court Reports)                            the Supremo Tribunal Administrativo): Fazenda Pública v
                                                                                           Fábrica de Queijo Eru Portuguesa Lda (1)
In Joined Cases C-52/99 and C-53/99: reference to the Court
under Article 177 of the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) from                   (Inward processing relief arrangements — Regulation (EEC)
the Cour du Travail de Liège (Higher Labour Court, Liège) for                  No 1999/85 — Rate of yield of the processing operation —
a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that                    Authorisation issued by the competent customs authority —
court between Office National des Pensions (ONP) and Giocon-                   Power of that authority unilaterally to alter the rate of yield)
da Camarotto (C-52/99), Giuseppina Vignone (C-53/99) — on
the interpretation of Article 95a of Council Regulation (EEC)                                             (2001/C 173/18)
No 1408/71 of 14 June 1971 on the application of social
security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed
persons and to members of their families moving within the
                                                                                                 (Language of the case: Portuguese)
Community (OJ, English Special Edition 1971 (II), p. 416), as
amended by Council Regulation (EEC) No 1248/92 of 30 April
1992 (OJ 1992 L 136, p. 7) — the Court (Fifth Chamber),
composed of: A. La Pergola, President of the Chamber,                          (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
D.A.O. Edward (Rapporteur) and P. Jann, Judges; S. Alber,                                          in the European Court Reports)
Advocate General; H. von Holstein, Deputy Registrar, for the
Registrar, has given a judgment on 22 February 2001, in                        In Case C-187/99: reference to the Court under Article 177 of
which it has ruled:                                                            the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) from the the Supremo
 ---pagebreak--- C 173/12                  EN                       Official Journal of the European Communities                                          16.6.2001
Tribunal Administrativo (Supreme Administrative Court) (Por-                  Communities (Agent: H. van Vliet) — application for partial
tugal) for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending                    annulment of Commission Decision 98/358/EC of 6 May
before that court between Fazenda Pública and Fábrica de                    1998 on the clearance of the accounts presented by the
Queijo Eru Portuguesa Lda, intervener Ministério Público — on                Member States in respect of the expenditure for 1994 of the
the interpretation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1999/85 of                  Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and
16 July 1985 on inward processing relief arrangements                         Guarantee Fund (OJ 1998 L 163, p. 28), in so far as it disallows
(OJ 1985 L 188, p. 1) and, in particular, Article 11 thereof —                expenditure of NLG 16 378 716,63 incurred by the applicant
the Court (Second Chamber), composed of: V. Skouris, Presi-                   in connection with the prefinancing of export refunds — the
dent of the Chamber, R. Schintgen (Rapporteur) and N. Colne-                  Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of: C. Gulmann, President
ric, Judges; A. Tizzano, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar,               of the Chamber, V. Skouris, J.-P. Puissochet, R. Schintgen and
has given a judgment on 22 February 2001, in which it has                     F. Macken (Rapporteur), Judges; S. Alber, Advocate General;
ruled:                                                                        H.A. Rühl, Registrar, has given a judgment on 6 March 2001,
                                                                              in which it:
1.    Article 11 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1999/85 of
      16 July 1985 on inward processing relief arrangements is to             1.    Dismisses the application;
      be interpreted as applying not only to the conditions or
      requirements for the issue of an authorisation under the inward
      processing relief arrangements but also to the conditions               2.    Orders the Kingdom of the Netherlands to pay the costs.
      imposed by the authorisation on its holder for the use or
      functioning of those arrangements and, consequently, the
      customs authority may unilaterally alter the rate of yield fixed        (1) OJ C 299 of 26.9.1998.
      by it at the time when the authorisation was issued where, while
      the arrangements are being used, the rate of yield proves to be
      higher than the rate fixed in the authorisation.
2.    Neither Regulation No 1999/85 nor the principle of legal
      certainty precludes the customs authority from altering unilat-
      erally a rate of yield fixed by it in the authorisation even if it is
      proved that the customs authority was supervising and con-
      trolling the activities of the holder of the authorisation before it
      was issued.                                                                              JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
(1) OJ C 204 of 17.7.1999.                                                                             of 6 March 2001
                                                                              in Case C-273/99 P: Bernard Connolly v Commission of
                                                                                               the European Communities (1)
                                                                              (Appeal — Officials — Disciplinary proceedings — Suspen-
                   JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                      sion — Statement of reasons — Alleged misconduct —
                                                                              Articles 11, 12 and 17 of the Staff Regulations — Equal
                           (Sixth Chamber)                                                                 treatment)
                           of 6 March 2001
                                                                                                        (2001/C 173/20)
in Case C-278/98: Kingdom of the Netherlands v Com-
           mission of the European Communities (1)
                                                                                                  (Language of the case: French)
(EAGGF — Clearance of accounts — 1994 — Cereals, beef
                                 and veal)
                                                                              (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                            (2001/C 173/19)                                                      in the European Court Reports)
                      (Language of the case: Dutch)                           In Case C-273/99 P: Bernard Connolly, a former official of
                                                                              the Commission of the European Communities, residing in
                                                                              London, United Kingdom, represented by J. Sambon and
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published        P.-P. van Gehuchten, avocats, with an address for service in
                     in the European Court Reports)                           Luxembourg, appeal against the judgment of the Court of First
                                                                              Instance of the European Communities (First Chamber) of
In Case C-278/98: Kingdom of the Netherlands (Agents:                         19 May 1999 in Case T-203/95 Connolly v Commission
M.A. Fierstra and N. Wijmenga) v Commission of the European                   [1999] ECR-SC I-A-83 and II-443, seeking to have that