|
20.12.2008 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 327/10 |
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Naumburg (Germany) lodged on 18 September 2008 — Investitionsbank Sachsen-Anhalt — Anstalt der Norddeutschen Landesbank — Girozentrale v District Auditor for the State Treasury of the Land Sachsen-Anhalt attached to the Landgericht Magdeburg
(Case C-404/08)
(2008/C 327/16)
Language of the case: German
Referring court
Oberlandesgericht Naumburg
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Investitionsbank Sachsen-Anhalt– Anstalt der Norddeutschen Landesbank — Girozentrale
Defendant: District Auditor for the State Treasury of the Land Sachsen-Anhalt attached to the Landgericht Magdeburg
Questions referred
|
1. |
Should Article 86(1) EC, in conjunction with Article 81(1)(a) and (d) and 81(2) EC, be interpreted as meaning that the exemption from court costs and fees granted by the Land of Saxony-Anhalt to the Investment Bank established by it under Paragraph 6(1) of the Investitionsbank-Begleitgesetz (Investment Bank Ancillary Law) of 18 December 2003 (Gesetz- und Verordungsblatt des Landes Sachsen-Anhalt (GVBl. LSA) No 47/2003, p. 371) is invalid? |
|
2. |
If the question under 2.1 is answered in the negative: Should the Community-law rules on competition under the first sentence of Article 86(2) EC be interpreted as meaning that the Investment Bank, like the Land of Saxony-Anhalt, enjoys exemption from court costs and fees only when it performs official tasks within the meaning of Paragraph 6 of the Regulation of 30 December 2003 establishing the Investment Bank of Saxony-Anhalt (GVBl. LSA 2004, p. 20), as amended by amending regulation of 2 December 2006 (GVBl. LSA, p. 534)? |