Back to EUR-Lex homepage

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search
You are here

Document C2004/273/35

Case C-392/04: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Bundesverwaltungsgericht by order of that court of 7 July 2004 in the case i-21-germany GmbH against the Federal Republic of Germany

OJ C 273, 6.11.2004, p. 20–20 (ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, NL, PL, PT, SK, SL, FI, SV)

6.11.2004   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 273/20

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Bundesverwaltungsgericht by order of that court of 7 July 2004 in the case i-21-germany GmbH against the Federal Republic of Germany

(Case C-392/04)

(2004/C 273/35)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by order of the Bundesverwaltungsgericht of 7 July 2004, which was received at the Court Registry on 16 September 2004, for a preliminary ruling in the case of i-21-germany GmbH against the Federal Republic of Germany on the following questions:

1.

Is Article 11(1) of Directive 97/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 April 1997 on a common framework for general authorisations and individual licences in the field of telecommunications services (the licensing directive) to be interpreted as precluding the imposition of a licence fee calculated to anticipate the amount of a national regulatory authority's general administrative costs over a period of 30 years, to be charged in advance?

If the answer to Question 1 is in the affirmative:

2.

Are Article 10 EC and Article 11 of the licensing directive to be interpreted as meaning that a fee assessment that determines fees within the meaning of Question 1 and which has not been contested although such a possibility is afforded under national law must be set aside where that is permissible under national law but not mandatory?
Top