CELEX: C1996/197/32
Language: en
Date: 1996-07-06 00:00:00
Title: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de Première Instance de Bruxelles by judgment of that court of 23 April 1996 in the case of Jyri Lehtonen and ASBL Castors Canada Dry Namur-Braine v. ASBL Fédération royale belge des sociétés de basket-ball (Case C-176/96)

6 . 7. 96          LEN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                     No C 197/ 15
Jersey of 11 April 1996 , which was received at the Court              2 . If there has been a supply of goods or services effected
Registry on 20 May 1996 , for a preliminary ruling in the                   for   consideration,      what    is  the    nature    of the
case of Rui Alberto Pereira Roque against His Excellency the               consideration in relation to such transaction ?
Lieutenant Governor of Jersey, on the following
questions:                                                             P ) OJ No L 145, 13 . 6 . 1977, p. 1 ; EE 09 FI , p . 54 .
1 . On the premise that British citizens are not liable to
     immigration control in, or to be deported from, Jersey,
     does Article 4 of the third Protocol to the Act of
     Accession of the United Kingdom to the European
     Communities ( l ) have the effect that nationals of
     another Member State are equally not liable to be                 Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Sala de lo Social of
     deported from Jersey ?                                            the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Castilla la Mancha by
                                                                       order of that court of 25 April 1996 in the case of Francisca
2 . If the answer to the first question is 'No', does the said         Sanchez Hidalgo and Others against Asociacion de Servicios
     Article 4 prohibit the competent authorities in Jersey                      Aser and Sociedad Cooperativa Minerva
     from deporting a national of another Member State save                                    ( Case C-1 73/96 )
     where such deportation is justified on grounds of public                                    ( 96/C 197/31 )
     policy, public security or public health ?
                                                                       Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
3 . If the answer to the second question is 'Yes', does the            European Communities by an order of the Sala de lo Social
     said Article 4 prohibit the competent authorities of              del Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Castilla la Mancha
     Jersey from deporting a national of another Member                ( Social Chamber of the High Court of Justice, Castilla la
     State from Jersey where the considerations of public              Mancha ), received at the Court Registry on 20 May 1996 ,
     policy applied by those authorities would not in practice         for a preliminary ruling in the case of Francisca Sanchez
     lead to the deportation of that person from the United            Hidalgo and Others against Asociacion de Servicios Aser
     Kingdom ?                                                         and Sociedad Cooperativa Minerva Ayuntamiento, on the
                                                                       following question:
0 ) OJ, English Special Edition, 27. 3 . 1972, p. 164.
                                                                       Must there be regarded as falling within the scope of
                                                                       Directive 77/187/EEC of 14 February 1977 ( ! ) the case of an
                                                                       undertaking which ceases to provide, for a municipality
                                                                       which had awarded it a contract for that purpose, the service
                                                                       of home help for certain persons in need, whereupon a new
                                                                       contract for that service is awarded to a different
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the High Court of                undertaking, without there being any transfer of material
Justice, Queen's Bench Division, by order of that court of             assets and without there being, either in the collective
 13 May 1996, in the case of the Commissioners of Customs              agreement or in the tendering conditions, any provision
   and Excise against the First National Bank of Chicago               pursuant to which the new undertaking must be subrogated
                        Case C- 1 72/96 )
                                                                       to the employment relationship between the workers and
                                                                       the previous undertaking to which the contract had been
                          96/C 197/30                                  awarded ?
 Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                (M OJ No L 61 , 5 . 3 . 1977, p . 26 ; EE 05 F2 , p . 122 .
 European Communities by an order of the High Court of
Justice, Queen's Bench Division, of 13 May 1996 , which
 was received at the Court Registry on 20 May 1996 , for a
 preliminary ruling in the case of the Commissioners of
 Customs and Excise against the First National Bank of
 Chicago, on the following questions :
                                                                       Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de
                                                                        Première Instance de Bruxelles by judgment of that court of
 On the proper interpretation of Council Directive                      23 April 1996 in the case ofJyri Lehtonen and ASBL Castors
 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonization of the                  Canada Dry Namur-Braine v. ASBL Fédération royale belge
 laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes —                                   des sociétés de basket-ball
 common system of value-added tax: uniform basis of                                             (Case C-1 76/96 )
 assessment ^), and in relation to transactions of foreign
 exchange as defined by the British Bankers' Association ( as                                     ( 96/C 197/32 )
 set out in paragraph 1 of the findings of fact):
                                                                        Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
 1 . Do such foreign exchange transactions constitute                   European Communities by a judgment of the Tribunal de
      the supply of goods or services effected for                      Première Instance de Bruxelles ( Court of First Instance,
      consideration ?                                                   Brussels ) of 23 April 1996 , which was received at the Court
 ---pagebreak--- No C 197/ 16            EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                          6 . 7. 96
Registry on 22 May 1996, for a preliminary ruling in the                Action brought on 24 May 1996 by the United Kingdom
case of Jyri Lehtonen and ASBL Castors Canada Dry                          against the Commission of the European Communities
Namur-Braine v. ASBL Fédération royale belge des sociétés                                            ( Case C-1 80/96 )
de basket-ball on the following question :
                                                                                                       ( 96/C 197/34 )
Are the rules of a sports federation which prohibit a club
from playing a player in the competition for the first time if          An action against the Commission of the European
he has been engaged after a specified date contrary to the              Communities was brought before the Court of Justice of the
Treaty of Rome ( in particular Articles 6 , 48 , 85 and 86 ) in         European Communities on 24 May 1996 by the United
the case of a professional player who is a national of a                Kingdom, represented by Lindsey Nicoll, of the Treasury
Member State of the European Union, notwithstanding the                 Solicitor's Department, acting as Agent, assisted by K. P. E.
sporting reasons put forward by the federations to justify              Lasok, QC, and David Anderson, Barrister, with an address
those rules, namely the need to prevent distortion of the               for service in Luxembourg at the British Embassy, 14
competitions ?                                                          boulevard Roosevelt.
                                                                        The applicant respectfully submits that:
                                                                        ( a ) Commission Decision 96/239/EEC ( 1 ) should be
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunale
Amministr^tivo Regionale per la Lombardia by order of                          annulled ; alternatively;
that court of 7 November 1995 in the case of Stefano Serbini
                 v. Ministry of Foreign Trade                           ( b ) Article 1 of Commission Decision 96/239 should be
                                                                               annulled insofar as it applies to :
                         ( Case C- 1 78/96 )
                           ( 96/C 197/33 )                                         ( i ) live bovine animals permitted to be exported from
                                                                                         the United Kingdom by Decision 94/474/EEC (2 );
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                                   and/or
European Communities by order of the Tribunale
Amministrativo Regionale per la Lombardia ( Lombardy                             ( ii ) the semen and/or embryos of live bovine animals;
Regional Administrative Court ) of 7 November 1 995 ,                                    and/or
received at the Court Registry on 22 May 1996 , for a
preliminary ruling in the case of Stefano Serbini v . Ministry                 ( iii ) meat of bovine animals less than 30 months old
of Foreign Trade on the following questions :                                            slaughtered in the United Kingdom or meat from
                                                                                         bovine animals certified to come from herds that
1 . Is the purchase of unrefined gold for investment
     purposes covered by the concept of 'capital movements'                              have not experienced any case of BSE and have
     in Article 67 ( 1 ) of the Treaty which was in force until                          not been exposed to any actual or potential source
     31 December 1993 ?                                                                  of feed contaminated with the BSE agent;
                                                                                         and/or
2. If an affirmative answer is given to the preceding
     question, were the provisions of Directive                                ( iv ) products obtained from bovine animals
     88/361/EEC ( 1 ) applicable to the purchase of unrefined                            slaughtered in the United Kingdom which are
     gold for investment purposes as at 31 July 1993 and did                             liable to enter the animal feed or human food
     those provisions have direct effect so as to render                                 chains and materials destined for use in medicinal
     inapplicable national provisions of the kind contained in                           products, cosmetics or pharmaceutical products;
     Article 15 of Presidential Decree No 148 of 31 March                                and/or
     1988 ?
                                                                                  (v ) gelatin and/or tallow; and/or
 3 . If an affirmative answer is given to the preceding
     question, are the provisions of Directive 88/361 /EEC
                                                                                ( vi ) exports to third countries ( save to the extent that
     still applicable following the entry into force of
                                                                                         there is a real risk of deflection of trade, where
     Article 73a of the EC Treaty ( added by Article G ( 15 ) of
                                                                                          appropriate );
     the Treaty on European Union), according to which 'as
     from 1 January 1994, Articles 67 to 73 shall be replaced
     by Articles 73b, 73c, 73d, 73e, 73f and 73g', or is the             (c ) each of the contested acts should be annulled;
     liberalization of capital movements henceforth
     governed entirely by Articles 73b to 73g ?                          and
 4 . If the answer to the first part of the preceding question is        ( d ) the Commission should be ordered to pay the costs of
      in the negative, is Article 73b ( 1 ) of the EC Treaty now                the United Kingdom .
      applicable to the purchase of unrefined gold for
      investment purposes, and does it have direct effect ?
                                                                         Pleas in law and main arguments:
 (M OJ No L 178 , 8 . 7. 1988 , p . 5 .
                                                                         In brief, the contested Decision and the contested acts are
                                                                         unlawful for the following reasons: