You are on page 1of 2

C 258/28 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 15.8.

98

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Kantongerecht Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal du
te Groningen by judgments of that court of 20 May 1998 Travail de LieÁge (7th Chamber) by judgment of that court
in the case of Hendrik Van der Woude against Stichting of 17 June 1998 in the case of Marie-Nathalie D'Hoop
Beatrixoord against the Office National de l'Emploi
(Case C-222/98) (Case C-224/98)
(98/C 258/45) (98/C 258/47)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by judgment of the Kantongerecht
European Communities by judgment of the Tribunal du
te Groningen (Cantonal Court, Groningen) of 20 May
Travail de LieÁge (7eÁme chambre) (LieÁge Labour Court Ð
1998, received at the Court Registry on 17 June 1998, for
7th Chamber) of 17 June 1998, received at the Court
a preliminary ruling in the case of Hendrik Van der
Registry on 22 June 1998, for a preliminary ruling in the
Woude against Stichting Beatrixoord on the following
case of Marie-Nathalie D'Hoop against the Office
question:
National de l'Emploi on the following question:

Are Article II(G) of the CAO (1) (which prohibits any
departure from the terms of that collective labour Given that the Court of Justice has already interpreted
agreement (2)) and Article 32 thereof (which lays down the Article 48 of the EC Treaty and Article 7 of Regulation
medical expenses insurance rules (3)), read in conjunction No 1612/68 (1) to mean that Article 36 of the Royal
with each other, contrary to Articles 85 and 86 of the EC Decree of 25 November 1991 cannot prevent a dependent
Treaty? child of a Community migrant worker who has completed
his secondary education in an establishment in a Member
(1) Collectieve Arbeidsovereenkomst voor het ziekenhuiswezen State other than Belgium from being eligible to receive the
(Collective Labour Agreement relating to medical treatment). tideover allowance, are those provisions to be interpreted
(2) may not . . . agree with the employee any conditions of as meaning that Article 36 of the aforesaid royal decree
employment which are not regulated by this CAO'. also cannot prevent a Belgian student who has completed
(3) Employees (and former employees) may be members of the his secondary education in an establishment in a Member
IZZ collective medical expenses insurance scheme. In State other than Belgium and is seeking his first
accordance with that article, Beatrixoord pays 50 % of the
employment from being eligible to receive the tideover
premium due from Mr Van der Woude in respect of the
collective (individual) IZZ Medical Expenses Scheme. allowance?

(1) Council Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 of 15 October 1968
relating to the free movement of workers within the
Community (OJ L 257 of 19.10.1968, p. 2).

Reference for a preliminary ruling by Kammarrätten,
Stockholm by order of 16 June 1998 in the case of
Arlanda Customs Authority v Adidas AG
(Case C-223/98)
Action brought on 22 June 1998 by the Commission of
(98/C 258/46)
the European Communities against the French Republic
(Case C-225/98)
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by order of 16 June 1998 from (98/C 258/48)
Kammarrätten, Stockholm (Administrative Court of
Appeal, Stockholm), which was received at the Court
Registry on 18 June 1998, for a preliminary ruling in the An action against the French Republic was brought before
case of Arlanda Customs Authority v Adidas AG on the the Court of Justice of the European Communities on
following question: 22 June 1998 by the Commission of the European
Communities, represented by Michael Nolin, of its Legal
Service, acting as Agent, with an address for service in
Does Council Regulation (EC) No 3295/94 (1) constitute a
Luxembourg at the office of Carlos Gómez de la Cruz, of
bar to application of rules of national law under which
its Legal Service, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.
the names of declarers or consignees of imported goods,
which the trade-mark owner has found to be counterfeit,
may not be disclosed to the trade-mark owner? The applicant claims that the Court should:

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 3295/94 of 22 December 1994
laying down measures to prohibit the release from free Declare that, in the course of the various procedures for
circulation, export, re-export or entry for a suspensive the award of public service contracts for the construction
procedure of counterfeit and pirated goods (OJ L 341 of and maintenance of school buildings conducted by the
30.12.1994, p. 8). Nord-Pas de Calais Region and the DeÂpartement du Nord
over a period of three years, the French Republic has
failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 59 of the EC
15.8.98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 258/29

Treaty as well as under Articles 12, 26 and 29 of Directive freedom of Community architects to provide their
71/305/EEC (1) as amended by Directive 89/440/EEC (2) services (by requiring proof that the main architect
and Articles 8, 11, 22 and 30 of Directive 93/37/EEC (3). was a member of the Architects' Association), the
DeÂpartement du Nord failed to fulfil its obligations
under Article 59 of the EC Treaty.
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
Ð Infringement of Article 12(5) of Directive 71/305/EEC
and of Article 11(5) of Directive 93/37/EEC: during
Ð Infringement of Article 12 of Directive 71/305/EEC the period 1993 to 1995, the Nord-Pas de Calais
and of Article 11 of Directive 93/37/EEC: during the Region did not publish any award notice.
period 1993 to 1995, the pre-notification procedure
was only rarely followed by the Nord-Pas de Calais
Region. So far as concerns the DeÂpartement du Nord, Ð Infringement of Article 8(3) of Directive 93/37/EEC:
the Commission found no pre-notification notice the French authorities refused to forward to the
published in the Official Journal of the European Commission the minutes of the procedures in issue.
Communities, Supplement S, during the same period.
(1) OJ L 185 of 16.8. 1971, p. 5.
(2) OJ L 210 of 21.7. 1989, p. 1.
Ð Infringement of Article 30 of Directive 93/37/EEC: the (3) OJ L 199 of 9.8. 1993, p. 54.
Commission acknowledges that the taking into
account of employment-related projects may be
considered to be a valid additional criterion, but only
as a condition of performance. By expressly presenting
an employment-related condition as a criterion for
awarding contracts, the French authorities have
infringed Article 30. Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Sixth Tax
Chamber of the Cour d'Appel de Bruxelles by judgment of
that court of 12 June 1998 in the case of Georges Van der
Zwalmen and Elisabeth Massart against the Belgian State
Ð Infringement of Article 22 of Directive 93/37/EEC: in
notices which appeared in the Official Journal of (Case C-229/98)
18 February 1995, the phrase limited number of (98/C 258/49)
candidates' (Heading 13), gives the impression that
that number could be less than 5.
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by the Sixth Tax Chamber of the
Ð Infringement of Article 29(2) of Directive 71/305/EEC Cour d'Appel de Bruxelles (Court of Appeal, Brussels) by
and of Article 30(2) of Directive 93/37/EEC: in most judgment of 12 June 1998, which was received at the
of the notices, the contracting authorities, in order to Court Registry on 26 June 1998, for a preliminary ruling
indicate the award criteria, resorted to the method of in the case of Georges Van der Zwalmen and Elisabeth
award by reference to the Public Contracts Code'. Massart v Belgian State, on the following questions:
However, a general reference to a provision of
domestic legislation cannot fulfil the obligation to
advertise. Must Article 13 of the Protocol on the Privileges and
Immunities of the European Communities be interpreted
as:
Ð Infringement of Article 59 of the EC Treaty: the
technical specifications selected by the contracting (1) prohibiting the Member States, under fiscal
authorities could have the effect of favouring national legislation applicable to personal tax, from creating,
undertakings who are familiar with the system of for the taxation of married couples and their
quality certification and which are used to providing children, a distinct category of taxpayers by reason of
documents or services in accordance with the the fact that one of them is a European official,
references laid down in the contract notice. Moreover, receiving as such earned income which is exempted
undertakings established in other Member States are under a convention, without reservation as to
not encouraged to submit tenders inasmuch as they progressive rates of tax, and from making for that
do not have the means of knowing beforehand category two separate assessments whereby the tax is
whether their qualifications comply with those determined for each of them on the basis of his own
technical particulars in the absence of any equivalent income and that of his children which is available to
qualification. him by operation of law, whilst at the same time,
where appropriate, each remains jointly and severally
liable for the tax debt of the household (see
Ð Infringement of Article 59 of the EC Treaty; Article 295 of the 1964 Income Tax Code and
infringement of Article 26 of Directive 71/305/EEC: by Article 394 of the 1992 Income Tax Code),
imposing restrictions in a number of notices on the whereas, for married couples in which one spouse