CELEX: C1998/137/13
Language: en
Date: 1998-05-02 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 18 February 1998 by the Commission of the European Communities against TVR-Tecnologie Vetroresina SpA (Case C-40/98)

C 137/6               EN                Official Journal of the European Communities                                   2.5.98
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad              The applicant claims that the Court should:
der Nederlanden by order of that court of 11 February
1998 in the case of staatssecretaris van FinancieÈn against
                                                                   1. order Silena to pay ECU 15 000, together with interest
                     B. G. M. Verkooyen
                                                                       at the rate of ECU 4,17 per day from 10 May 1995 to
                        (Case C-35/98)                                 31 December 1996, totalling ECU 2 481,15, and ECU
                                                                       2,8 per day from 1 January 1997 until the day of
                         (98/C 137/11)
                                                                       actual payment;
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the             2. order Silena to pay the costs.
European Communities by order of the Hoge Raad der
Nederlanden (Supreme Court of the Netherlands) of
                                                                   Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
11 February 1998, received at the Court Registry on
13 February 1998, for a preliminary ruling in the case of
staatssecretaris van FinancieÈn against B. G. M. Verkooyen         The action, brought under an arbitration clause, seeks
on the following questions.                                        payment of a sum of money owed by the defendant by
                                                                   way of transfer of the right to market the technical
                                                                   package' in the context of Agreement No 10433-94-09-
1. Must Article 1(1) of Council Directive 88/361/EEC (1)           TICRISPI. The Commission decided to terminate the
    in conjunction with point I(2) in Annex I to that              contract on the ground of the defendant's failure to
    Directive be interpreted as meaning that a restriction         perform. The effects of the termination of the contract are
    arising from a provision of the income tax legislation         governed by italian law.
    of a Member State which exempts shareholders, up to
    a certain amount, from liability to income tax on
    dividends, but restricts that exemption to dividends
    paid in respect of shares in companies established in
    that Member State, has been prohibited since 1 July
    1990 pursuant to Article 6(1) of that Directive?
                                                                   Action brought on 18 February 1998 by the Commission
                                                                   of the European Communities against TVR-Tecnologie
2. If the answer to question 1 is in the negative, must                                    Vetroresina SpA
    Articles 6 and/or 52 of the EC Treaty be interpreted as
                                                                                           (Case C-40/98)
    meaning that a restriction of the kind referred to in
    that question is incompatible with one or both of                                       (98/C 137/13)
    those Articles?
                                                                   An action against TVR-Tecnologie Vetroresina SpA, whose
3. Do the answers to the questions set out above differ            registered office is in Rome, was brought before the Court
    depending on whether the person seeking the benefit            of Justice of the European Communities on 18 February
    of such an exemption is an ordinary shareholder or an          1998 by the Commission of the European Communities,
    employee (of a subsidiary company) who holds the               represented by Eugenio de March, Legal Adviser, assisted
    shares in question in the context of an employees'             by Alberto Dal Ferro, of the Vicenza Bar, with an address
    savings plan?                                                  for service in Luxembourg at the office of Carlos Gómez
                                                                   de la Cruz, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.
(1) OJ L 178, 8.7.1998, p. 5.
                                                                   The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                   Ð order the defendant to repay ECU 211 307 together
                                                                       with interest, from 21 December 1991 until payment
                                                                       is actually made, at a rate of ECU 69,47 per day,
Action brought on 18 February 1998 by the Commission
     of the European Communities against Silena SpA
                                                                   Ð order the defendant to pay ECU 20 000 by way of
                        (Case C-39/98)                                 compensation for damage,
                         (98/C 137/12)
                                                                   Ð order the defendant to pay the costs.
An action against Silena SpA, having its office in Cernusco
                                                                   Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
sul Naviglio (Italy), was brought before the Court of
Justice of the European Communities on 18 February
1998 by the Commission of the European Communities,                The action, brought under an arbitration clause, seeks the
represented by Eugenio de March, Legal Adviser, acting as          repayment of an advance paid under contract 3440/1/0/
Agent, assisted by Alberto Dal Ferro, of the Vicenzo Bar,          187/91/6-BCR-I(30) for the completion of a project
with an address for service in Luxembourg at the office of         concerning the study of measuring systems for products
Carlos Gómez de la Cruz, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.                 manufactured from composite materials. The Commission
 ---pagebreak--- 2.5.98                EN                Official Journal of the European Communities                                   C 137/7
decided to terminate the contract, governed by Italian law,        gerichtshof (Administrative Court), Vienna, of 21 January
on the ground of breach of contract by the defendant.              1998, received at the Court Registry on 19 February
                                                                   1998, for a preliminary ruling in the cases of Johann
                                                                   Seemeier and Jörg Schreiber against the Unabhängiger
                                                                   Verwaltungssenat des Landes Salzburg (Independent
                                                                   Administrative Board for the Land of Salzburg) and Jörg
                                                                   Schreiber against the Unabhängiger Verwaltungssenat für
Action brought on 18 February 1998 by the Commission               Kärnten     (Independent     Administrative     Board     for
of the European Communities against TVR-Tecnologie                 Carinthia),    additional    party:   Bundesminister      für
                        Vetroresina SpA                            Wissenschaft und Verkehr (Federal Minister for Science
                                                                   and Transport), on the following question:
                        (Case C-41/98)
                         (98/C 137/14)
                                                                   are Articles 30 to 36 of the EC Treaty (provisions on the
An action against TVR-Tecnologie Vetroresina SpA, whose            freedom of movement of goods) and the other provisions
registered office is in Rome, was brought before the Court         of applicable Community law to be interpreted as
of Justice of the European Communities on 18 February              preventing a Member State from restricting the transport
1998 by the Commission of the European Communities,                of animals for slaughter in that animals may be
represented by Eugenio de March, Legal Adviser, assited            transported for slaughter only as far as the nearest suitable
by Alberto Dal Ferro, of the Vicenza Bar, with an address          abattoir in that State, and may be transported for
for service in Luxembourg at the office of Carlos Gómez            slaughter in any event only if the provisions of law
de la Cruz, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.                              regarding motor vehicles and traffic regulation are
                                                                   observed and a total journey time of six hours and a
The applicant claims that the Court should:                        distance of 130 kilometres are not exceeded, whereby, in
                                                                   calculating the distance, account is taken of only half of
                                                                   the kilometres actually travelled on a motorway?
Ð order the defendant to repay ECU 77 558,80 together
    with interest, from 1 February 1990 until payment is
    actually made, at a rate of ECU 24,97 per day,
Ð order the defendant to pay to the Commission ECU
    7 700, or any other amount which the Court might
    deem equitable, by way of compensation for damage,
                                                                   Reference for a preliminary ruling from the
Ð order the defendant to pay the costs.                            Bundespatentgericht (Federal Patents Court) by order of
                                                                   that court of 29 January 1998 in the case of BASF AG v.
                                                                              President of the German Patent Office
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
                                                                                          (Case C-44/98)
The action, brought under an arbitration clause, seeks the
                                                                                           (98/C 137/16)
repayment of an advance paid under contract BREU-
0114-I(A) for the design of structures manufactured from
composite materials using CAD-CAM techniques, and the
completion of a completely automated production                    Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
prototype, using the filament-winding' method. The                European      Communities      by    an    order    of    the
Commission decided to terminate the contract, governed             Bundespatentgericht (Federal Patents Court) of 29 January
by Italian law, on the ground of breach of contract by the         1998, which was received at the Court Registry on
defendant.                                                         20 February 1998, for a preliminary ruling in the case of
                                                                   BASF AG v. President of the German Patent Office on the
                                                                   following question:
                                                                   is it compatible with the principles of the free movement
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Verwaltungs-             of goods (Articles 30 and 36 of the EC Treaty) for a
gerichtshof, Vienna, by order of that court of 21 January          patent granted by the European Patent Office with effect
1998 in the cases of Johann Seemeier and Jörg Schreiber            in a Member State which is drafted in a language other
against the Unabhängiger Verwaltungssenat des Landes               than the official language of that Member State to be
Salzburg and Jörg Schreiber against the Unabhängiger               deemed void ab initio if the patent-holder does not file
Verwaltungssenat für Kärnten, Additional Party: Bundes-            with the patent office of the Member State in question a
           minister für Wissenschaft und Verkehr                   translation of the patent specification in the official
                        (Case C-42/98)                             language of that Member State within three months of the
                                                                   publication in the European Patent Bulletin of the
                         (98/C 137/15)                             mention of the grant of the patent?
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by order of the Verwaltungs-