Sie sind auf Seite 1von 2

C 190/2 EN Official Journal of the European Union 12.8.

2006

Interveners in support of the defendant: Commission of the Euro- Re:


pean Communities (represented by: C. O'Reilly and C. Laden-
burger, Agents) and Federal Republic of Germany (represented Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Articles 43 EC
by: A. Tiemann, W.-D. Plessing and M. Lumma, Agents) and 49 EC — French system for the grant of licences to
performing artists established in another Member State who do
not possess a licence issued under comparable conditions in
Re: their State of origin — Presumption of salaried status applied
to performing artists recognised as service providers established
Annulment of the last subparagraph of Article 4(1), Article 4(6) in their State of origin where they usually provide similar
and Article 8 of Council Directive 2003/86/EC of 22 services
September 2003 on the right to family reunification (OJ 2003
L 251, p. 12) — Derogations from the right to family reunifica-
tion of minor children.
Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment 1. By making the grant of a licence to performing artists' engage-
ments agencies, established in another Member State, subject to
The Court: the need to engage performers, and

1) Dismisses the application; — by imposing the presumption of salaried status on performing


artists who are recognised as service providers and established
2) Orders the European Parliament to pay the costs; in their Member State of origin, where they usually provide
similar services,
3) Orders the Federal Republic of Germany and the Commission of
the European Communities to bear their own costs.
— the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under
Article 49 EC.

(1) OJ C 47, 21.02.2004.


2. The action is dismissed as to the remainder.

3. The Commission of the European Communities and the French


Republic are ordered to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 217, 28.8.2004.


Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 15 June 2006 —
Commission of the European Communities v French
Republic

(Case C-255/04) (1)

(Admissibility — Inconsistency between the grounds pleaded


and the heads of claim in the application initiating proceed- Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 15 June 2006
ings — Rule whereby a Court may not rule ultra petita — (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht
Article 49 EC — National legislation making the grant of a Breisach — Germany) — Badischer Winzerkeller eG v
licence subject to the needs of the market — National legisla- Land Baden-Württemberg
tion imposing a presumption of salaried status — Reversal of
the burden of proof — Absence of detailed procedural rules
within the meaning of the Peterbroeck case-law — Social (Case C-264/04) (1)
protection — Coordination of the applicable legislation by
Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 — Pre-emption — Action to (Directive 69/335/EEC — Indirect taxes on the raising of
combat concealed employment) capital — Merger of companies — Rectification of the land
register — Charging of a fee — Whether a 'transfer duty' —
(2006/C 190/03) Conditions for charging the fee)

Language of the case: French


(2006/C 190/04)

Language of the case: German


Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-


sented by: E. Traversa and A.-M. Rouchaud-Joët, Agents)
Referring court
Defendant: French Republic (represented by: G. de Bergues and
A. Hare, Agents) Amtsgericht Breisach
12.8.2006 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 190/3

Parties to the main proceedings Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 22 June 2006
(reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d'appel
de Poitiers, France) — Conseil général de la Vienne v
Directeur général des douanes et droits indirects
Applicant: Badischer Winzerkeller eG

(Case C-419/04) (1)


Defendant: Land Baden-Württemberg
(Post-clearance recovery of import duties — Remission of
import duties — Conditions — Article 871 of the regulation
implementing the Community Customs Code — Scope of the
obligation to submit the case to the Commission — Failure
on the part of a person liable for payment acting in good
Re: faith to declare additional royalties which should have been
incorporated in the customs value of imported goods)

(2006/C 190/05)
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Amtsgericht Breisach
-am- Rhein — Interpretation of Articles 4, 10 (c) and 12(2)of
Council Directive 69/335/EEC of 17 July 1969 concerning Language of the case: French
indirect taxes on the raising of capital (OJ, English Special
Edition 1969 (II), p.412), as amended by Council Directive
73/79/EEC of 9 April 1973 (OJ 1973 L 103, p. 13), Council
Directive 73/80/EEC of 9 April 1973 (OJ 1973 L 103, p. 15), Referring court
Council Directive 74/553/EEC of 7 November 1974 (0J 1974 L
303, p. 9), and Council Directive 85/303/EEC of 10 June 1985
(0J 1985 L 156, p. 23) — Fee due for rectification of the land Cour d'appel de Poitiers
register following a change of owner of an agricultural coop-
erative company as a result of merger and calculated by refer-
ence to the value of the land Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Conseil général de la Vienne

Respondent: Directeur général des douanes et droits indirects


Operative part of the judgment

Re:
The Court:
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Cour d'Appel de Poitiers
(Court of Appeal, Poitiers, France) — Interpretation of Article
1. A fee charged for rectification of the land register, such as that at 871 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July
issue in the main proceedings, falls in principle within the prohibi- 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of
tion under Article 10(c) of Council Directive 69/335/EEC of 17 Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Com-
July 1969 concerning indirect taxes on the raising of capital, as munity Customs Code (OJ 1993 L 253, p. 1) — Recovery of
amended by Council Directive 85/303/EEC of 10 June 1985. the amount of the customs debt — Obligatory nature of refer-
ence to the Commission in the event of doubt as to the scope
of the criteria relating to the recovery or the remission of
duties resulting from a customs debt
2. A tax such as that at issue in the main proceedings may, in dero-
gation from Article 10(c) of Directive 69/335, as amended by
Directive 85/303, be regarded as a transfer duty authorised by
Article 12(1)(b) of Directive 69/335, as amended by Directive Operative part of the judgment
85/303, provided it is not higher than those applicable to similar
operations in the taxing Member State. Article 871 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July
1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council
Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs
It is for the national court to verify whether that tax complies with Code, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1677/98 of
the provisions of Article 12(2) of Directive 69/335, as amended 29 July 1998, must be interpreted as meaning that, in the context of
by Directive 85/303. a recovery procedure or a procedure for remission of uncollected
customs duties, the national customs authorities are not required to
submit the case to the Commission for a decision where the doubts
which they had had as regards the precise scope of the criteria laid
(1) OJ C 228, 11.09.2004.
down in Article 220(2)(b) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92
of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code with
regard to a particular case have disappeared, even after those authori-
ties have expressed their intention to refer the matter to the Commis-
sion, or where the doubts relate to the subsequent entry in the