22.1.2005

Official Journal of the European Union

C 19/4

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(First Chamber)

of 25 November 2004

in Case C-109/03 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven): KPN Telecom BVv Onafhankelijke Post en Telecommunicatie Autoriteit (OPTA) (1)

(Telecommunications - Directive 98/10/EC - Application of open network provision to voice telephony - Supply of information on subscribers - Determination of prices)

(2005/C 19/06)

Language of the case: Dutch

In Case C-109/03: reference for a preliminary ruling under Article 234 EC from the College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven (Netherlands), by decision of 8 January 2003, received at the Court on 10 March 2003, in the proceedings between KPN Telecom BV and Onafhankelijke Post en Telecommunicatie Autoriteit (OPTA), in the presence of: Denda Multimedia BV, Denda Directory Services BV – the Court (First Chamber), composed of: P. Jann (Rapporteur), President of Chamber, A. Rosas, K. Lenaerts, S. von Bahr and K. Schiemann, Judges; M. Poiares Maduro, Advocate General; H. von Holstein, Deputy Registrar, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 25 November 2004, in which it has ruled:

Article 6(3) of Directive 98/10/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 1998 on the application of open network provision (ONP) to voice telephony and on universal service for telecommunications in a competitive environment must be interpreted as meaning that the words ‘relevant information’ refer only to data relating to subscribers who have not expressly objected to being listed in a published directory and which are sufficient to enable users of a directory to identify the subscribers they are looking for. Those data include in principle the name and address, including postcode, of subscribers, together with any telephone numbers allocated to them by the entity concerned. However, it is open to the Member States to provide that other data are to be made available to users where, in light of specific national circumstances, they appear to be necessary in order to identify subscribers.

Article 6(3) of Directive 98/10, in so far as it provides that the relevant information must be provided to third parties on terms which are fair, cost oriented and non-discriminatory, must be interpreted as meaning that:

—	with regard to data such as the name and address of the persons and the telephone number allocated to them, only the costs of actually making those data available to third parties may be invoiced by the supplier of the universal service;

—

with regard to additional data which such a supplier is not bound to make available to third parties, the supplier is entitled to invoice, apart from the costs of making that provision, the additional costs which he has had to bear himself in obtaining the data provided that those third parties are treated in a non-discriminatory manner.

(1) OJ C 146 of 21.6.2003.