You are on page 1of 2

21.6.

2003 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 146/9

2. The calorific value of waste which is to be combusted is not a JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
relevant criterion for the purpose of determining whether that
operation constitutes a disposal operation as referred to in
point D10 of Annex IIA to Directive 75/442, as amended by (Sixth Chamber)
Directive 91/156 and by Decision 96/350, or a recovery
operation as referred to in point R1 of Annex IIB thereof.
Member States may establish distinguishing criteria for that of 8 May 2003
purpose, provided that those criteria comply with those laid
down in the Directive.
in Case C-171/01 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Verfassungsgerichtshof): Wählergruppe ‘Gemeinsam
( 1) OJ C 161 of 2.6.2001. Zajedno/Birlikte Alternative und Grüne Gewerkschafter-
Innen/UG’ (1)

(EEC-Turkey Association — Freedom of movement for


workers — Article 10(1) of Decision No 1/80 of the
Association Council — Prohibition of discrimination as
regards conditions of work — Direct effect — Scope —
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT Legislation of a Member State excluding Turkish workers
from eligibility for election to a chamber of workers)
(Sixth Chamber)
(2003/C 146/15)
of 8 May 2003

in Case C-122/01 P: T. Port GmbH & Co. KG v Com- (Language of the case: German)
mission of the European Communities (1)
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
(Appeal — Bananas — Common organisation of the markets in the European Court Reports)
— Regulation (EC) No 478/95 — Export licence scheme —
Action for damages — Proof of damage and causal link)

(2003/C 146/14)
In Case C-171/01: Reference to the Court under Article 234
EC by the Verfassungsgerichtshof (Austria) for a preliminary
(Language of the case: German) ruling in the proceedings brought before that court by
Wählergruppe ‘Gemeinsam Zajedno/Birlikte Alternative und
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published Grüne GewerkschafterInnen/UG’, also represented: Bundesmi-
in the European Court Reports) nister für Wirtschaft und Arbeit, Kammer für Arbeiter und
Angestellte für Vorarlberg, Wählergruppe ‘Vorarlberger Arbei-
ter- und Angestelltenbund (ÖAAB) — AK-Präsident Josef Fink’,
Wählergruppe ‘FSG — Walter Gelbmann — mit euch ins
In Case C-122/01 P, T. Port GmbH & Co. KG, established in nächste Jahrtausend/Liste 2’, Wählergruppe ‘Freiheitliche und
Hambourg (Germany), represented by G. Meier, Rechtwanwalt: parteifreie Arbeitnehmer Vorarlberg — FPÖ’, Wählergruppe
Appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance of ‘Gewerkschaftlicher Linksblock’, and Wählergruppe ‘NBZ —
the European Communities (Fifth Chamber) of 1 February Neue Bewegung für die Zukunft’, on the interpretation of
2001 in Case T-1/99 T. Port v Commission [2001] ECR II- Article 10(1) of Decision No 1/80 of 19 September 1980 on
465, seeking to have that judgment set aside in part, the other the development of the Association, adopted by the Associ-
party to the proceedings being: Commission of the European ation Council established by the Association Agreement
Communities (Agents: K.-D. Borchardt and M. Niejahr), the between the European Economic Community and Turkey, the
Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of: J.-P. Puissochet, President Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of: J.-P. Puissochet, President
of the Chamber, R. Schintgen (Rapporteur), V. Skouris, of the Chamber, R. Schintgen (Rapporteur), V. Skouris,
F. Macken and N. Colneric, Judges; P. Léger, Advocate General; F. Macken and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, Judges; F.G. Jacobs,
M.-F. Contet, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, has Advocate General; M.-F. Contet, Principal Administrator, for
given a judgment on 8 May 2003, in which it: the Registrar, has given a judgment on 8 May 2003, in which
it has ruled:
1. Dismisses the appeal.
Article 10(1) of Decision No 1/80 of 19 September 1980 on the
2. Orders T. Port GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.
development of the Association, adopted by the Association Council
established by the Association Agreement between the European
( 1) OJ C 161 of 2.6.2001. Economic Community and Turkey, must be interpreted as:

— having direct effect in the Member States, and


C 146/10 EN Official Journal of the European Union 21.6.2003

— precluding the application of national legislation which excludes JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
Turkish workers duly registered as belonging to the labour force
of the host Member State from eligibility for election to the
general assembly of a body representing and defending the (Second Chamber)
interests of workers, such as the chambers of workers in Austria.
of 8 May 2003
( 1) OJ C 173 of 16.6.2001.
in Case C-268/01 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Verwaltungsgericht Weimar): Agrargenossenschaft
Alkersleben eG, v Freistaat Thüringen, ( 1)

(Milk and milk products — Council Regulation (EEC)


No 3950/92 — Scheme applicable to the territory of the
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT former German Democratic Republic — Reference quantities
— Concepts of ‘producer’ and ‘holding’ — Lessee of a
holding situated within that territory)
(Sixth Chamber)

(2003/C 146/17)
of 10 April 2003

(Language of the case: German)


in Case C-217/01 P: Michel Hendrickx v Centre européen
pour le développement de la formation professionnelle
(Cedefop) ( 1) (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
in the European Court Reports)
(Appeal — Officials — Resettlement Allowance — Action
which has become devoid of purpose — No need to adjudi-
cate)
In Case C-268/01: Reference to the Court under Article 234 EC
by the Verwaltungsgericht Weimar (Germany) for a prelimi-
(2003/C 146/16) nary ruling in the proceedings pending before that court
between Agrargenossenschaft Alkersleben eG, and Freistaat
(Language of the case: French) Thüringen, on the interpretation of Articles 3(2), 4(4), 5 and
9(c) and (d) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 3950/92 of
28 December 1992 establishing an additional levy in the milk
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published and milk products sector (OJ 1992 L 405, p. 1), as amended
in the European Court Reports) by Commission Regulation (EC) No 751/1999 of 9 April 1999
(OJ 1999 L 96, p. 11), the Court (Second Chamber), composed
of: R. Schintgen, President of the Chamber, V. Skouris
(Rapporteur) and N. Colneric, Judges; P. Léger, Advocate
In Case C-217/01 P, Michel Hendrickx (represented by General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment on 8 May
J.-N. Louis and V. Peere): Appeal against the order of the Court 2003, in which it has ruled:
of First Instance of the European Communities (Fifth Chamber)
of 12 March 2001 in Case T-298/00 Hendrickx v Cedefop
(not published in the ECR), seeking to have that order set aside, 1. Article 9(c) and (d) of Council Regulation No 3950/92 of
the other party to the proceedings being: Centre européen pour 28 December 1992 establishing an additional levy in the
le développement de la formation professionnelle (Cedefop) milk and milk products sector, as amended by Commission
(represented by B. Wägenbaur), the Court (Sixth Chamber), Regulation (EC) No 751/1999 of 9 April 1999 and read
composed of: J.-P. Puissochet, President of the Chamber, with Articles 3(2), 4(4) and 5 of the former regulation, must
C. Gulmann, F. Macken, N. Colneric (Rapporteur) and be interpreted as meaning that all the milk production of a
J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, Judges; A. Tizzano, Advocate General; farmer established in the territory of the former German
R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment on 10 April 2003, in Democratic Republic obtained on an independent basis in
which it: leased facilities situated in that territory but in different länder
must be imputed to the reference quantity provisionally allocated
to him.
1. Dismisses the appeal;
2. Article 9(c) and (d) of Regulation No 3950/92, as amended
2. Orders Mr Hendrickx to pay the costs. by Regulation No 751/99, and read with Articles 3(2), 4(4)
and 5 of the former regulation, must be interpreted as precluding
the competent national authorities from prohibiting a producer
( 1) OJ C 212 of 28.7.2001.
established in the former German Democratic Republic from
transferring his milk production to facilities in a commune
which, although forming part of that territory on the date of