9.7.2005   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 171/9

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Sozialgericht Berlin by order of that court of 11 April 2005 in ITC Innovative Technology Center GmbH v Bundesagentur für Arbeit

(Case C-208/05)

(2005/C 171/17)

Language of the case: German

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by order of the Sozialgericht Berlin (Germany) of 11 April 2005, received at the Court Registry on 12 May 2005, for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings between ITC Innovative Technology Center GmbH and Bundesagentur für Arbeit on the following questions:

1.

To what extent are rules of Community law protecting freedom of movement, particularly Articles 18 EC and 39 EC and Articles 3 and 7 of Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68, (1) infringed by an interpretation of the second sentence of paragraph 421(g)(1) of Book III of the Sozialgesetzbuch-Arbeitsförderung (Social Law Code provisions on the promotion of employment) ('SGB III') to the effect that employment covered by compulsory social security means only employment that comes within the scope of application of the Sozialgesetzbuch?

2.

a)

To what extent is it possible and necessary to interpret the provision in conformity with European law so as to avoid an infringement as described in Question 1?

b)

If an interpretation in conformity with Community law should not be possible or necessary, to what extent does the second sentence of paragraph 421(g)(1) of SGB III infringe rules of Community law protecting freedom of movement?

3.

To what extent are rules of Community law protecting competition and freedom to provide services, particularly Articles 49 EC, 50 EC and 87 EC in conjunction with Articles 81 EC, 85 EC and 86 EC, or other rules of Community law, infringed by an interpretation of the second sentence of paragraph 421(g)(1) of SGB III to the effect that employment covered by compulsory social security means only employment that comes within the scope of application of the Sozialgesetzbuch?

4.

a)

To what extent is it possible and necessary to interpret the provision in conformity with European law so as to avoid an infringement as described in Question 3?

b)

If an interpretation in conformity with Community law should not be possible or necessary, to what extent does the second sentence of paragraph 421(g)(1) of SGB III infringe Community law inasmuch as the free movement of workers is not protected?

(1)  OJ, English Special 1968(II), p. 475.

  翻译：