CELEX: C2000/285/04
Language: en
Date: 2000-10-07 00:00:00
Title: Case C-289/00: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Corte di Appello di Genova, First Civil Division, by order of that court of 21 June 2000 in the case of Fincantieri — Cantieri Navali Italiani SpA and Finmeccanica SpA v Federico Bianchi and Others

C 285/2                 EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                      7.10.2000
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Hessisches                     21 June 2000, which was received at the Court Registry on
Finanzgericht by order of that court of 21 February 2000                 24 July 2000, for a preliminary ruling in the case of Fincantieri
in the case of Medi Bayreuth Weihermüller & Voigtmann                    — Cantieri Navali Italiani SpA and Finmeccanica SpA v
     GmbH & Co. KG v Oberfinanzdirektion Koblenz                         Federico Bianchi and Others, on the following questions:
                         (Case C-263/00)
                                                                         Must Articles 1(2)(e) and 2(1)(c) of Council Regulation (EEC)
                                                                         No 3541/92 (1) of 7 December 1992 be interpreted as meaning
                         (2000/C 285/03)                                 that Italian natural persons (in this case the respondent
                                                                         lawyers) are not permitted, in reliance on a transfer of a claim
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                   pro solvendo (for payment of fees for legal representation) by an
European Communities by order of the Hessiches Finanzger-                Iraqi subject (in this case Rafidain Bank), to require in Italy
icht (Finance Court, Hessen) of 21 February 2000, received at            from an Italian legal person (in this case Fincantieri and
the Court Registry on 28 June 2000, for a preliminary ruling             Finmeccanica) payment in respect of an award of costs to the
in the case of Medi Bayreuth Weihermüller & Voigtmann                    Iraqi subject (the transferor of the claim) contained in an Italian
GmbH & Co. KG v Oberfinanzdirektion Koblenz (Principal                   judgment which has become res judicata?
Revenue Office, Koblenz) on the following questions:
a)    Does the description ‘orthopaedic appliances’ within the
      meaning of CN Code No 9021 cover functional knee                   (1) OJ L 361 of 10.12.1992, p. 1.
      supports with tracking stays and functional knee orthoses
      with a supportive effect, consisting essentially of neo-
      prene, with two removable aluminium side stays, 30 cm
      and 37 cm long respectively, with extension-limited
      polycentric joints and two Velcro fastening straps, where
      proper use of each of the above appliances requires an
      individual setting of the joints with extension-limiting
      wedges?
                                                                         Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Oberster
b)    Does the term ‘solely’, used in Note 1(b) of CN Chapter 90
                                                                         Gerichtshof of the Republic of Austria, by a decision of
      and in Note 2(b) to CN Chapters 61 and 62 allow the
                                                                         that court of 27 June 2000 in the case of Johann Franz
      elasticity of the material to be regarded as the sole relevant
                                                                         Duchon v Pensionsversicherungsanstalt der Angestellten
      criterion even if the supportive function is strengthened
      by other materials?
                                                                                                  (Case C-290/00)
c)    If Question b) is answered in the affirmative:
      Is General Rule A.3(b) in the General rules for the                                         (2000/C 285/05)
      interpretation of the comined nomenclature suitable for
      determining the question when the supportive function              Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
      of the other materials is predominant, or what other               European Communities by a decision of the Oberster Gerichts-
      criteria should be used to determine the question?                 hof (Supreme Court) of the Republic of Austria of 27 June
                                                                         2000, which was received at the Court Registry on 24 July
                                                                         2000, for a preliminary ruling in the case of Johann Franz
                                                                         Duchon v Pensionsversicherungsanstalt der Angestellten on
                                                                         the following questions:
                                                                         1.    Does the situation of an employed person who, as a
                                                                               national of a country which is now a Member State, was
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Corte di Appello                     employed prior to the accession of that Member State in
di Genova, First Civil Division, by order of that court of                     another Member State and sustained an accident there,
21 June 2000 in the case of Fincantieri — Cantieri Navali                      fall within the scope of Council Regulation (EEC)
Italiani SpA and Finmeccanica SpA v Federico Bianchi                           No 1408/71 of 14 June 1971(1) on the application of
                            and Others                                         social security schemes to employed persons, to self-
                                                                               employed persons and to members of their families
                         (Case C-289/00)                                       moving within the Community, as amended and updated
                                                                               by Council Regulation (EEC) No 2001/83 of 2 June
                                                                               1983 (2), as amended by Council Regulation (EEC)
                         (2000/C 285/04)
                                                                               No 1249/92 of 30 April 1992 (3), where the person
                                                                               concerned applies for an occupational disability pension
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                         after the accession of the Member State and the accident
European Communities by an order of First Civil Division of                    at work can have the effect of establishing entitlement to
the Corte di Appello di Genova (Genoa Appeal Court) of                         an occupational disability pension?