CELEX: C2002/202/21
Language: en
Date: 2002-08-24 00:00:00
Title: Case C-247/02: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per la Lombardia Sezione staccata di Brescia by order of that Court of 22 June 2002 in the case of Sintesi S.p.A. against Autorità per la Vigilanza sui Lavori Pubblici; intervener: Ingg. Provera e Carrassi S.p.A.

C 202/14               EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                       24.8.2002
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunal Supre-                 Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Bundesfinanz-
mo, Sala de lo Contencioso-Administrativo, Sección: Ter-                 hof by order of that Court of 7 May 2002 in the case of
cera by order of that Court of 16 May 2002 in the                           Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Hafen against Ricardas Jonusas
appeal brought by Asociación Profesional de Empresas de
Reparto y Manipulado de Correspondencia and Asocia-
ción Nacional de Empresas de Externalización y Gestión                                          (Case C-246/02)
                de Envı́os y Pequeña Paqueterı́a
                                                                                                   (2002/C 202/20)
                         (Case C-240/02)
                                                                          Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
                                                                          European Communities by order of the Bundesfinanzhof
                         (2002/C 202/19)                                  (Federal Finance Court) of 7 May 2002, received at the Court
                                                                          Registry on 8 July 2002, for a preliminary ruling in the case of
                                                                          Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Hafen against Ricardas Jonusas on the
                                                                          following questions:
                                                                          1.   Is Article 4(19) of the Customs Code to be interpreted as
                                                                               meaning that the notification to the customs authorities
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                         of the arrival at a particular place of goods introduced into
European Communities by order of the Tribunal Supremo, Sala                    the Community customs territory must refer expressly
de lo Contencioso-Administrativo, Sección: Tercera (Supreme                   to goods which are hidden or concealed in secret
Court, Contentious-Administrative Chamber, Third Section) of                   compartments?
16 May 2002, received at the Court Registry on 1st July 2002,
for a preliminary ruling in the appeal brought by Asociación
Profesional de Empresas de Reparto y Manipulado de Corres-                2.   If Question 1 is answered affirmatively:
pondencia (Trade Association of Mail Delivery and Handling
Companies) and Asociación Nacional de Empresas de Exter-                      Is Article 40 of the Customs Code to be interpreted as
nalización y Gestión de Envı́os y Pequeña Paqueterı́a (National             meaning that such notification must also be made by the
Association of Companies dedicated to the Externalisation and                  driver of a lorry who was not aware and should not have
Handling of Letters and Small Packages) on the following                       been aware of the goods hidden or concealed in the lorry?
questions:
Does the interpretation of Recital 21 to Directive 97/67/EC (1)
permit the exclusion from ‘self-provision’ of postal services
provided by the sender (or another person acting exclusively
on his behalf), if that person is not also the receiver, if the
services are provided in the course of his commercial activity,           Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunale
or carried out using the mailbag system or other similar                  Amministrativo Regionale per la Lombardia Sezione
methods, or if self-provision disrupts the services reserved to           staccata di Brescia by order of that Court of 22 June 2002
the universal service provider?                                           in the case of Sintesi S.p.A. against Autorità per la
                                                                          Vigilanza sui Lavori Pubblici; intervener: Ingg. Provera e
                                                                                                    Carrassi S.p.A.
May money order services be included amongst those reserved                                        (Case C-247/02)
to the universal postal service provider?
                                                                                                   (2002/C 202/21)
(1) Directive 97/67/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council
    of 15 December 1997 on common rules for the development of
    the internal market of Community postal services and the              Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
    improvement of quality of service. (OJ L 15 of 21.1.1998, p. 14.)     European Communities by order of the Tribunale Amministra-
                                                                          tivo Regionale per la Lombardia Sezione staccata di Brescia
                                                                          (Lombardy Regional Administrative Court, Brescia Chamber)
                                                                          of 22 June 2002, received at the Court Registry on 8 July
                                                                          2002, for a preliminary ruling in the case of Sintesi S.p.A.
                                                                          against Autorità per la Vigilanza sui Lavori Pubblici; intervener:
                                                                          Ingg. Provera e Carrassi S.p.A. on the following questions:
 ---pagebreak--- 24.8.2002              EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                       C 202/15
‘Does Article 30(1) of Directive 93/37 of 14 June 1993 (1), in           —     by forwarding incomplete information as to the quantity
so far as it allows individual contracting authorities to choose               of sludge used annually in agriculture as dry matter
either the lowest price or the most economically advantageous                  (information in that regard is completely missing for
offer as the criterion for the award of a contract, constitute                 Abruzzo and Campania and has been incorrectly forward-
a logically consistent application of the principle of free                    ed, that is to say, the information forwarded did not relate
competition which is already enshrined in Article 85 of the                    to dry matter, in respect of Tuscany and Sicily),
Treaty (now Article 81 EC) and requires that all tenders
submitted as part of a procedure for the award of a contract             —     by failing to make proper provision so that the registers
announced within the single market be assessed in such a way                   in which are entered the composition and characteristics
as not to prevent, restrict or distort comparison between                      of the sludge, as required by Annex II A to Directive 86/
them?’                                                                         278/EEC (1), are properly updated, at least as regards
                                                                               Lombardy, Emilia Romagna, Tuscany, Abruzzo, Campa-
                                                                               nia, Valle d’Aosta, Sicily and the Marche, and
‘Does Article 30 of Directive 93/37 of 14 June 1993, as a
strictly logical consequence, preclude Article 21 of Law No 109
of 11 February 1994 from excluding, for the award of public              —     by failing to make proper provision so that the registers
works contracts under open and restricted procedures, the                      in which are entered the quantities of sludge produced
choice by the contracting authority of the criterion of the most               (with regard to the whole of Italy) and the sludge used in
economically advantageous tender, and prescribing, as a                        agriculture (as regards Abruzzo, Campania, Tuscany and
general rule, that of the lowest price only?’                                  Sicily) are properly updated,
                                                                         the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under
(1) OJ L 199 of 9.8.1993, p. 54.                                         Article 17 of Council Directive 86/278/EEC, as amended
                                                                         by Article 5 of Council Directive 91/692/EEC (2), and of
                                                                         Article 10(1)(a) and (b) of Directive 86/278/EEC;
                                                                         Order the Italian Republic to pay the costs.
Action brought on 8 July 2002 by the Commission of the                   Pleas in law and main arguments
    European Communities against the Italian Republic
                                                                         According to Article 17 of Council Directive 86/278/EEC, as
                        (Case C-248/02)                                  amended by Article 5 of, together with Annex VI(g) to,
                                                                         Council Directive 91/692/EEC, which seeks to standardise and
                        (2002/C 202/22)                                  rationalises reports on the implementation of those directives
                                                                         concerning the environment, the Member States are to provide
                                                                         information every three years on the application of Directive
                                                                         86/278/EEC.
An action against the Italian Republic was brought before the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 8 July 2002
by the Commission of the European Communities, represented               Italy has forwarded inadequate and incomplete information
by Hans Stovlbæk and Roberto Amorosi, acting as Agents.                  on the quantity of sewage sludge used in agriculture in 1995 to
                                                                         1997 and on the composition and the characteristics of the
                                                                         sludge as required by Annex II A to the directive.
The applicant claims that the Court should:
Declare that:                                                            Furthermore, the Italian authorities have made no provision to
                                                                         keep up to date the registers in which are entered the
                                                                         composition and the characteristics of the sludge, as required
—     by forwarding incomplete information on the average                by Annex II A to the directive, nor have they made provision
      values for concentrations (mg/kg dry matter) on an                 to keep up to date the registers in which are entered the
      annual basis of heavy metal (cadmium, copper, nickel,              quantities of sludge produced and used in agriculture, contrary
      lead, zinc, mercury and chromium) and of the elements              to Article 10(1)(b) of the directive.
      nitrogen and phosphorus contained in sewage sludge
      (information in that regard is completely missing for
      Lombardy, Emilia Romagna, Tuscany, Abruzzo, Campa-
                                                                         (1) OJ 1986 L 181, p. 6.
      nia, Valle d’Aosta and Sicily and are inadequate in respect        (2) OJ 1991 L 377, p. 48.
      of the Marche),
—     by failing to forward any information as to quantity
      (t/year) of sewage sludge produced as dry matter,