CELEX: C2003/304/05
Language: en
Date: 2003-12-13 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court of 21 October 2003 In Joined Cases C-261/01 and C-262/01 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van Beroep te Antwerpen): Belgische Staat v Eugene Van Calster, Felix Cleeren (C-261/01) and between Belgische Staat and Openbaar Slachthuis NV (C-262/01) (Aid financed by parafiscal charges — Compulsory charges to finance a fund for animal health and livestock production — Retroactive effect of the charges — Validity of a Commission decision concerning State aid — Powers of the Commission)

13.12.2003               EN                           Official Journal of the European Union                                                C 304/3
2.    Refers the case back to the Court of First Instance;                    2.    The connections which must link films in order that they can
                                                                                    come within the exception laid down for ‘series’ by Article 11(3)
3.    Reserves the costs.                                                           of Directive 89/552 must relate to the content of the films
                                                                                    concerned, such as, for example, the development of the same
                                                                                    story from one episode to another or the reappearance of one or
(1) OJ C 200 of 14.07.2001.
                                                                                    more characters in different episodes.
                                                                              (1) OJ C 289 of 13.10.2001.
                  JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                           (Fifth Chamber)
                        of 23 October 2003
                                                                                               JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
in Case C-245/01 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Niedersächsisches Oberverwaltungsgericht): RTL
Television GmbH v Niedersächsische Landesmedienan-                                                   of 21 October 2003
                 stalt für privaten Rundfunk (1)
                                                                              In Joined Cases C-261/01 and C-262/01 (Reference for a
(Directive 89/552/EEC — Article 11(3) — Television broad-                     preliminary ruling from the Hof van Beroep te Antwer-
casting — Television advertising — Advertising breaks in                      pen): Belgische Staat v Eugene Van Calster, Felix Cleeren
          audiovisual works — Definition of ‘series’)                         (C-261/01) and between Belgische Staat and Openbaar
                                                                                                Slachthuis NV (C-262/01) (1)
                           (2003/C 304/04)
                                                                              (Aid financed by parafiscal charges — Compulsory charges
                   (Language of the case: German)                             to finance a fund for animal health and livestock production
                                                                              — Retroactive effect of the charges — Validity of a
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published        Commission decision concerning State aid — Powers of the
                    in the European Court Reports)                                                        Commission)
                                                                                                        (2003/C 304/05)
In Case C-245/01: Reference to the Court under Article 234
EC by the Niedersächsisches Oberverwaltungsgericht (Ger-
many) for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending                                         (Language of the case: Dutch)
before that court between RTL Television GmbH and Nieder-
sächsische Landesmedienanstalt für privaten Rundfunk, on the
interpretation of Article 11(3) of Council Directive 89/552/                  (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
EEC of 3 October 1989 on the coordination of certain                                             in the European Court Reports)
provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative
action in Member States concerning the pursuit of television
broadcasting activities (OJ 1989 L 298, p. 23), as amended by
Directive 97/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the                      In Joined Cases C-261/01 and C-262/01: Reference to the
Council of 30 June 1997 (OJ 1997 L 202, p. 60), the                           Court under Article 234 EC by the Hof van Beroep te
Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of: C.W.A. Timmermans                         Antwerpen (Belgium) for a preliminary ruling in the proceed-
(Rapporteur), President of the Fourth Chamber, acting for the                 ings pending before that court between Belgische Staat and
President of the Fifth Chamber, D.A.O. Edward and P. Jann,                    Eugene Van Calster, Felix Cleeren (C-261/01) and between
Judges; F.G. Jacobs, Advocate General; M.-F. Contet, Principal                Belgische Staat and Openbaar Slachthuis NV (C-262/01), on
Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on                     the interpretation of Community law, in particular of
23 October 2003, in which it has ruled:                                       Article 93 of the EC Treaty (now Article 88 EC) and Article 173
                                                                              of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 230 EC) and
1.    Films which have been made for television and which provide,            of the Commission Decision of 9 August 1996 relating to aid
      from their conception, for breaks for the insertion of advertising      measure No N 366/96, the Court, composed of: V. Skouris,
      are covered by the term ‘films made for television’ in                  President, P. Jann, C.W.A. Timmermans (Rapporteur), C. Gul-
      Article 11(3) of Council Directive 89/552/EEC of 3 October              mann, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues and A. Rosas (Presidents of
      1989 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by             Chambers), D.A.O. Edward, A. La Pergola, J.-P. Puissochet,
      law, regulation or administrative action in Member States               R. Schintgen, F. Macken, N. Colneric and S. von Bahr, Judges;
      concerning the pursuit of television broadcasting activities, as        F.G. Jacobs, Advocate General; H. von Holstein, Deputy
      amended by Directive 97/36/EC of the European Parliament                Registrar, has given a judgment on 21 October 2003, in which
      and of the Council of 30 June 1997.                                     it has ruled:
 ---pagebreak--- C 304/4                  EN                          Official Journal of the European Union                                            13.12.2003
1.    Article 93(3) of the EC Treaty (now Article 88(3) EC) must be          of 19 September 1980 on the development of the Association,
      interpreted as precluding, in circumstances such as those in           adopted by the Association Council set up by the Association
      the main proceedings, the levying of charges which finance             Agreement between the European Economic Community and
      specifically an aid scheme that has been declared compatible           Turkey, the Court, composed of: V. Skouris, President, P. Jann,
      with the common market by a Commission decision, in so far             C.W.A. Timmermans, C. Gulmann, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues and
      as those charges are imposed retroactively in respect of a period      A. Rosas (Presidents of Chambers), D.A.O. Edward, A. La
      prior to the date of that decision.                                    Pergola, J.-P. Puissochet, R. Schintgen (Rapporteur), F. Macken,
                                                                             N. Colneric and S. von Bahr, Judges; J. Mischo, Advocate
2.    The Commission Decision of 9 August 1996 relating to aid               General; H.A. Rühl, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar,
      measure No N 366/96 does not approve the retroactive effect            has given a judgment on 21 October 2003, in which it has
      of the Law of 23 March 1998 on the establishment of a                  ruled:
      budgetary fund for the health and quality of animals and
      animal products.
(1) OJ C 303 of 27.10.2001.
                                                                             —    Article 41(1) of the Additional Protocol, signed at Brussels on
                                                                                  23 November 1970 and concluded, approved and confirmed
                                                                                  on behalf of the Community by Council Regulation (EEC)
                                                                                  No 2760/72 of 19 December 1972, and of Article 13 of
                                                                                  Decision No 1/80 of 19 September 1980 on the development
                                                                                  of the Association, adopted by the Association Council set up
                                                                                  by the Association Agreement between the European Economic
                                                                                  Community and Turkey, must be interpreted as meaning that:
                  JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                           those two provisions have direct effect in the Member States so
                                                                                  that Turkish nationals to whom they apply are entitled to rely
                                                                                  on them before the national courts to prevent the application of
                        of 21 October 2003                                        inconsistent rules of national law;
in Joined Cases C-317/01 and C-369/01 (Reference for a
preliminary ruling from the Bundessozialgericht): Eran
Abatay and Others (C-317/01) Nadi Sahin (C-369/01) v
                    Bundesanstalt für Arbeit (1)                             —    Article 41(1) and Article 13 prohibit generally the introduction
                                                                                  of new national restrictions on the right of establishment and
                                                                                  the freedom to provide services and freedom of movement for
(EEC-Turkey Association — Interpretation of Article 41(1)                         workers from the date of the entry into force in the host Member
of the Additional Protocol and Article 13 of Decision No 1/                       State of the legal measure of which those articles are part;
80 — Abolition of restrictions on the freedom of movement
for workers, on the freedom of establishment and on the
freedom to provide services — ‘Standstill’ clauses — Direct
effect — Scope — Legislation of a Member State requiring a
    work permit in the international road haulage sector)                    —    Article 13 of Decision No 1/80 is applicable to Turkish
                                                                                  nationals only if their residence in the territory of the host
                                                                                  Member State is not only lawful but for a sufficient period to
                           (2003/C 304/06)                                        allow them progressively to become integrated there;
                    (Language of the case: German)
                                                                             —    in circumstances such as those in the cases in the main
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                                                                                  proceedings, Article 41(1) of the Additional Protocol is
                    in the European Court Reports)
                                                                                  applicable to international road haulage of goods originating
                                                                                  in Turkey, where those services are carried out in the territory of
                                                                                  a Member State;
In Joined Cases C-317/01 and C-369/01: Reference to the
Court under Article 234 EC by the Bundessozialgericht
(Germany) for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending
before that court between Eran Abatay and Others (C-317/01)                  —    the protection of Article 41(1) can be relied on not only by an
Nadi Sahin (C-369/01) and Bundesanstalt für Arbeit, on the                        undertaking established in Turkey which performs services in a
interpretation of Article 41(1) of the Additional Protocol                        Member State but also by the employees of such an undertaking
signed at Brussels on 23 November 1970 and concluded,                             to preclude a new restriction on the freedom to provide services;
approved and confirmed on behalf of the Community by                              however, it may not be relied on to that end by an undertaking
Council Regulation (EEC) No 2760/72 of 19 December 1972                           established in a Member State where those using the services
(JO 1972 L 293, p. 1) and of Article 13 of Decision No 1/80                       are established in the same Member State;