CELEX: C1999/246/30
Language: en
Date: 1999-08-28 00:00:00
Title: Case C-233/99: Reference for a preliminary ruling by Københavns Byret by order of 17 June 1999 in the case of Anklagemyndigheden v Tonny Haugsted Hansen

C 246/14               EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                           28.8.1999
Contentions and principal arguments adduced in support                         State examination, without giving further details, gives the
                                                                               impression that all the areas of specialised medicine
                                                                               concerned must be the subject of comprehensive fresh
The pleas in law and main arguments correspond to those in                     training, whereas Article 8(3) provides at most for
Case C-227/99 (3); the period for transposition of the directives              additional training in certain areas. In addition, the Spanish
expired on 30 April 1997.                                                      authorities have not demonstrated the utility of such an
                                                                               examination if the training is to be merely supplementary
                                                                               and limited.
(1) OJ L 144 of 18.6.1996, p. 12.
(2) OJ L 144 of 18.6.1996, p. 35.                                         — Failure to give effect to Article 18 of Directive 93/16/EEC:
(3) Not yet published in the Official Journal.                                 Spain has not shown that the application of its existing
                                                                               domestic law can have an effect equivalent to the
                                                                               implementation of that article.
                                                                          (1) OJ L 165 of 7.7.1993, p. 1.
                                                                          (2) Council Directive 75/362/EEC of 16 June 1975 concerning the
                                                                              mutual recognition of diplomas, certificates and other evidence of
                                                                              formal qualifications in medicine, including measures to facilitate
Action brought on 17 June 1999 by the Commission of                           the effective exercise of the right of establishment and freedom to
the European Communities against the Kingdom of Spain                         provide services (OJ L 167 of 30.6.75, p. 1).
                          (Case C-232/99)
                         (1999/C 246/29)
                                                                          Reference for a preliminary ruling by Københavns Byret
                                                                          by order of 17 June 1999 in the case of Anklagemyn-
An action against the Kingdom of Spain was brought before                               digheden v Tonny Haugsted Hansen
Court of Justice on 17 June 1999 by the Commission of the
European Communities, represented by Isabel Martı́nez del
Peral and Bernard Monguin, of its Legal Service, acting as                                           (Case C-233/99)
Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the office
of Carlos Gómez de la Cruz, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.
                                                                                                     (1999/C 246/30)
The applicant claims that the Court of Justice should:                    Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
                                                                          European Communities by order of 17 June 1999 by
1. Declare that, by failing to give due effect within the                 Københavns Byret (Copenhagen District Court), which was
    prescribed period to Article 8 of Council Directive                   received at the Court Registry on 21 June 1999, for a
    93/16/EEC of 5 April 1993 (1) to facilitate the free move-            preliminary ruling in the case of Anklagemyndigheden (Public
    ment of doctors and the mutual recognition of their                   Prosecution Department) v Tonny Haugsted Hansen on the
    diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifi-          following questions:
    cations and by failing to give effect to Article 18 of that
    directive, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its
                                                                          1. Must European Parliament and Council Directive
    obligations under the EC Treaty and under that directive;
                                                                               94/62/EC(1) of 20 December 1994 on packaging and
                                                                               packaging waste, in particular Article 18, in conjunction
2. Order the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.                                with Articles 5, 7 and 9 thereof, be interpreted as
                                                                               precluding a national system under which criminal charges
                                                                               may be brought against a person who, contrary to certain
                                                                               national rules on the packaging of beer and soft drinks,
Contentions and principal arguments adduced in support
                                                                               has marketed imported canned cola in the metal packaging
                                                                               at issue in this case?
— Failure to give due effect to Article 8 of Directive
    93/16/EEC: a Member State may not make access to the
    training leading to the award of a specialist diploma in              2. If Question 1 is answered in the affirmative: Do the
    cases not covered by automatic recognition under the                       provisions of the directive, in particular Article 18, in
    directive systematically conditional upon the passing of a                 conjunction with Articles 5, 7 and 9 thereof, satisfy the
    State examination, like the public examination laid down                   conditions for being directly applicable, so that a person
    for access to the training to become a ‘Resident Medical                   who has been charged can rely directly on the provisions
    Intern’. Articles 39 (ex Article 48) and 43 (ex Article 52)                of the directive before national courts?
    of the EC Treaty, for the implementation of which
    Directives 75/362/EEC (2) and 93/16/EEC were adopted,                 3. If Question 1 is answered in the negative: Does Article 28
    require the Member States to take account, in the broadest                 of the EC Treaty (ex Article 30), in conjunction with
    and most practical way, of training already undertaken in                  considerations of environmental protection (see judgment
    another Member State. However, to subject migrants to a                    of 20 September 1988 in Case 302/86 Commission v
 ---pagebreak--- 28.8.1999               EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                       C 246/15
     Denmark [1988] ECR 4607), preclude a national system                   — part of the revenue generated by the levy is allocated to
     under which criminal charges may be brought against a                       activities which, in view of their nature and immediate
     person who, contrary to certain national rules on the                       objectives, concern primary production of pigs in the
     packaging of beer and soft drinks, has marketed imported                    Member State, and thus also benefit exported pigs,
     canned cola in the metal packaging at issue in this case?                   whereas another part of the revenue generated by the
                                                                                 levy is allocated to activities which, in view of their
                                                                                 nature and immediate objectives, concern only slaugh-
(1) OJ 1994 L 365, p. 10.                                                        tering and further processing in the Member State and
                                                                                 the sale on the domestic and export markets of
                                                                                 nationally processed derivatives of the primary
                                                                                 product, and thus do not benefit exported pigs?
                                                                        II. If Question I is answered in the affirmative: does it make
                                                                            any difference to the answer that the levy scheme was,
                                                                            pursuant to Article 95(3) (Presumably Article 93(3)) of the
                                                                            EC Treaty, notified to and approved by the EU Commission
                                                                            as being lawful State aid?
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Vestre Landsret
by order of 16 June 1999 in the case of Niels Nygård v
                        Svineafgiftsfonden
                         (Case C-234/99)
                                                                        Reference for a preliminary ruling by the High Court of
                         (1999/C 246/31)                                Justice (England and Wales), Queen’s Bench Division,
                                                                        Divisional Court, by order of that Court of 18 December
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                  1998, in the case of The Queen against Secretary of State
European Communities by order of 16 June 1999 by the                    for the Home Department, Ex parte: Eleanora Ivanova
Vestre Landsret (Western Regional Court), which was received                                         Kondova
at the Court Registry on 21 June 1999, for a preliminary ruling
in the case of Niels Nygard v Svineafgiftsfonden on the                                          (Case C-235/99)
following questions:
                                                                                                 (1999/C 246/32)
I.   Must Articles 9, 12 and 16 of the EC Treaty or Article 95
     of the EC Treaty be construed as meaning that those
     provisions, or that provision, preclude a public body in a         Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
     Member State from charging a production levy in respect            European Communities by an order of the High Court of
     of pigs produced in the Member State in question and               Justice (England and Wales), Queen’s Bench Division, Div-
     exported live to another Member State, in the case where:          isional Court, of 18 December 1998, which was received at
                                                                        the Court Registry on 22 June 1999, for a preliminary ruling
                                                                        in the case of The Queen against Secretary of State for the
     — a similar levy is charged for each pig produced in the           Home Department, Ex parte: Eleanora Ivanova Kondova, on
         Member State in question and sold for slaughter on the         the following questions:
         domestic market;
                                                                        1. Does Article 45 of the Association Agreement between the
     — the detailed rules for calculating the levy do not give              EEC and the Republic of Bulgaria (‘the Agreement’: OJ
         rise to discrimination between the two product groups,             1993 L 358, p.1) (1) confer rights of establishment upon a
         since, when the different ‘weight categories’ are being            Bulgarian national who, under national immigration law,
         determined for slaughtered and live pigs, it can be                is treated as having entered the territory of that Member
         assumed that compensation is provided for the average              State illegally?
         difference between ‘carcass weight’ and ‘live weight’,
         but                                                            2. If the answer to the first question is ‘yes’, does Article 45
                                                                            of the Agreement have direct effect within the national
     — the levy in respect of pigs sold for slaughter on the                legal systems of Member States, notwithstanding the
         domestic market becomes payable when they are                      provisions of Article 59 of the Agreement?
         delivered for slaughter, whereas the levy in respect of
         pigs exported live becomes payable at the time of              3. If the answer to the second question is ‘yes’,
         export;
                                                                            i) to what extent may a Member State apply its laws and
                                                                                 regulations regarding entry and stay, work, labour
     — in the first case, the levy is payable by the producer,                   conditions and establishment of natural persons, and
         whereas in the second case it is payable by the exporter,               supply of services, to persons invoking Article 45 of the
         irrespective of whether he is also the producer, and;                   Agreement, without violating the proviso contained in
                                                                                 the penultimate sentence of Article 59(1) of the
     — the levy is not charged in respect of pigs sold live on                   Agreement and, inter alia, the principle of pro-
         the domestic market, and;                                               portionality?