You are on page 1of 1

C 135/4 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 13.5.

2000

Action brought on 16 February 2000 by the Commission Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Oberlandesge-
of the European Communities against the Italian Republic richt Innsbruck by order of that court of 15 February
2000 in the case of Leopold Hein against Pensions-
versicherungsanstalt der Arbeiter
(Case C-49/00)
(Case C-58/00)
(2000/C 135/05)
(2000/C 135/06)
An action against the Italian Republic was brought before the Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
Court of Justice on 16 February 2000 by the Commission of European Communities by order of the Oberlandesgericht
the European Communities, represented by Enrico Traversa, (Higher Regional Court) Innsbruck of 15 February 2000,
Legal Adviser, and Nicola Yerrell, of its Legal Service, acting as received at the Court Registry on 23 February 2000, for a
Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the office preliminary ruling in the case of Leopold Hein against
of Carlos Gómez de la Cruz, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg. Pensionversicherungsanstalt der Arbeiter (Employees’ Pension
Insurance Institution) on the following question:
The applicant claims that the Court should:
Is Article 10a of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 (1) of
14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to
(a) Declare that: employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members
of their families moving within the Community, as amended
— by failing to require employers to evaluate all health and updated by Council Regulation (EEC) No 2001/83 of
and safety risks existing in the work place, 2 June 1983, in conjunction with Annex IIa inserted by
Council Regulation (EEC) No 1247/92 of 30 April 1992(2), to
— by allowing employers to decide whether or not to be interpreted as meaning that the care allowance under
enlist external services for the adoption of protective the Bundespflegegeldgesetz (federal care-allowance law) falls
and preventive measures when the skills available within the scope of that provision and is therefore a special
within the undertaking are insufficient, non-contributory benefit within the meaning of Article 4(2a)
of that regulation, with the result that the position of a person,
— by failing to define the capabilities and aptitudes which such as the applicant, who, after 1 June 1992, satisfied the
the persons responsible for protective and preventive conditions for the award of that benefit is governed exclusively
measures against occupational risks to workers’ health by the system of coordination established by the said Article
and safety must possess, 10a?

the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under (1) OJ 1971 L 149, p. 2.
Article 6(3)(a) and 7(3), (5) and (8) of Council Directive (2) OJ 1992 L 136, p. 1.
89/391/EEC (1) of 12 June 1989 on the introduction of
measures to encourage improvements in the safety and
health of workers at work;

(b) Order the Italian Republic to pay the costs.


Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Bundesverwal-
tungsgericht by order of 18 January 2000 in the case of
1. Land Baden-Württemberg v Günther Schilling, the
Contentions and principal arguments adduced in support Oberbundesanwalt beim Bundesverwaltungsgericht par-
ticipating in the proceedings and 2. Bezirksregierung
The Commission considers that the Italian legislation Lüneburg v Hans-Otto Nehring, the Oberbundesanwalt
implementing Directive 89/391/EEC is not sufficient to fulfil beim Bundesverwaltungsgericht participating in the pro-
certain obligations imposed on the Member States by that ceedings
directive. In particular, the Commission criticises the Italian
Republic for failing correctly and fully to give effect to the (Case C-63/00)
following provisions of the directive:
(2000/C 135/07)
— Article 6(3)(a); Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by order of 18 January 2000 by
— Article 7(3); the Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Federal Administrative Court),
which was received at the Court Registry on 28 February
— Article 7(5) and (8). 2000, for a preliminary ruling on the interpretation of Article
10(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 3887/92 (1), as amended by
Regulation (EEC) No 1648/95 (2): in the case of 1. Land Baden-
(1) OJ L 183 of 29.6.1989, p. 1. Württemberg v Günther Schilling, the Oberbundesanwalt beim
Bundesverwaltungsgericht participating in the proceedings and
2. Bezirksregierung Lüneburg v Hans-Otto Nehring participat-
ing in the proceedings on the following question: