ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . MEASURES ADOPTED BY THE INSTITUTIONS - DIRECTIVES - EFFECT

( EEC TREATY , THIRD PARA . OF ART . 189 )

FREE MOVEMENT OF PERSONS - FREEDOM OF ESTABLISHMENT AND FREEDOM TO PROVIDE SERVICES - VETERINARY SURGEONS - MUTUAL RECOGNITION OF DIPLOMAS - DUTIES IMPOSED ON MEMBER STATES - SCOPE

( COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 78/1026 , ARTS 2 AND 3 )

2 . FREE MOVEMENT OF PERSONS - FREEDOM OF ESTABLISHMENT AND FREEDOM TO PROVIDE SERVICES - VETERINARY SURGEONS - RIGHT TO PRACTISE A PROFESSION IN A MEMBER STATE OTHER THAN THE STATE AWARDING THE DIPLOMA - REQUIREMENT OF ENROLMENT ON THE REGISTER OF VETERINARY SURGEONS IN THE HOST MEMBER STATE - REFUSAL TO ENROL IN BREACH OF COMMUNITY LAW - ENFORCEMENT OF PENAL MEASURES - NOT PERMISSIBLE

( COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 78/1026 )

Summary

1 . ARTICLES 2 AND 3 OF DIRECTIVE 78/1026 , WHICH PROVIDE IN PARTICULAR FOR THE MUTUAL RECOGNITION OF DIPLOMAS , CERTIFICATES AND OTHER EVIDENCE OF FORMAL QUALIFICATIONS IN VETERINARY MEDICINE , IMPOSE CLEAR , COMPLETE , PRECISE AND UNCONDITIONAL DUTIES ON EACH MEMBER STATE WHICH LEAVE IT NO DISCRETION . IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES AN INDIVIDUAL MAY , IN PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE NATIONAL COURT , RELY UPON THOSE PROVISIONS WHERE THEY HAVE NOT BEEN IMPLEMENTED BY THE MEMBER STATE CONCERNED OR HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED INCOMPLETELY .

2.THE CONFORMITY WITH COMMUNITY LAW OF THE REQUIREMENT THAT VETERINARY SURGEONS SHOULD BE ENROLLED ON THE RELEVANT PROFESSIONAL REGISTER DEPENDS UPON WHETHER THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF COMMUNITY LAW AND IN PARTICULAR THE PRINCIPLE OF NON-DISCRIMINATION ARE OBSERVED .

ENROLMENT ON A PROFESSIONAL REGISTER CANNOT BE REFUSED ON GROUNDS WHICH FAIL TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE VALIDITY OF A PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATION OBTAINED IN ANOTHER MEMBER STATE IN SO FAR AS SUCH A QUALIFICATION IS ONE WHICH ALL THE MEMBER STATES AND THEIR PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS , ACTING AS BODIES ENTRUSTED WITH A PUBLIC DUTY , ARE REQUIRED TO RECOGNIZE UNDER COMMUNITY LAW .

THUS LEGISLATION WHICH PROVIDES FOR THE BRINGING OF CRIMINAL OR AD MINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST A VETERINARY SURGEON PRACTISING HIS PROFESSION WITHOUT HAVING BEEN ENROLLED ON THE PROFESSIONAL REGISTER , TO THE EXTENT TO WHICH SUCH ENROLMENT HAS BEEN REFUSED IN BREACH OF COMMUNITY LAW , IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH COMMUNITY LAW IN SO FAR AS ITS RESULT IS TO DEPRIVE OF ANY EFFECTIVENESS THE PROVISIONS OF THE TREATY AND OF DIRECTIVE 78/1206 .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS - QUANTITATIVE RESTRICTIONS - MEASURES HAVING EQUIVALENT EFFECT - IMPORTED USED BUSES - NON-ADMISSION TO REGISTRATION PROCEDURE - OBSTACLE TO INTRA-COMMUNITY TRADE

( EEC TREADY , ART . 30 )

2 . FREE MOVEMENTS OF GOODS - EXCEPTIONS - PROTECTION OF HUMAN LIFE - ROAD SAFETY - VEHICLE ROADWORTHINESS TESTS - COMPETENCE OF THE MEMBER STATES - LIMITS - IMPORTED USED BUSES - NON-ADMISSION TO REGISTRATION PROCEDURE - JUSTIFICATION - NONE

( EEC TREATY , ART . 36 )

Summary

1 . VEHICLE REGISTRATION RULES LAID DOWN BY A MEMBER STATE WHEREBY BUSES IMPORTED FROM OTHER MEMBER STATES AND MANUFACTURED MORE THAN SEVEN YEARS AGO ARE SUBJECT TO PROHIBITIONS OR RESTRICTIONS WHICH ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO BUSES WHICH HAVE ALREADY BEEN USED WITHIN THE NATIONAL TERRITORY CONSTITUTE AN OBSTACLE TO INTRA-COMMUNITY TRADE PROHIBITED BY ARTICLE 30 OF THE TREATY .

2.AT THE PRESENT STAGE OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF COMMUNITY LAW , IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF MEMBER STATES TO ENSURE ROAD SAFETY WITHIN THEIR TERRITORIES AND TO ARRANGE FOR SUCH ROADWORTHINESS TESTS AS THEY CONSIDER NECESSARY FOR THAT PURPOSE . HOWEVER , IF SUCH REQUIREMENTS ARE TO JUSTIFY RESTRICTIONS ON IMPORTS FOR THE PURPOSES OF ARTICLE 36 OF THE TREATY , THEY MUST BE NECESSARY IN ORDER TO ATTAIN THE OBJECTIVE IN VIEW .

SUCH IS NOT THE CASE WHERE THE RULES OF A MEMBER STATE DO NOT PERMIT THE TESTING , FOR THE PURPOSES OF REGISTRATION , OF BUSES OLDER THAN SEVEN YEARS IMPORTED FROM ANOTHER MEMBER STATE . IF THE AUTHORITIES OF THE MEMBER STATE OF IMPORT TAKE THE VIEW THAT , IN ORDER TO REGISTER SUCH A VEHICLE , THEY MUST NOT ONLY SUBJECT IT TO TESTS BUT ALSO KNOW ITS MECHANICAL HISTORY FOR THE PERIOD IN WHICH IT WAS DRIVEN IN ANOTHER MEMBER STATE , THEY MAY REQUIRE PRODUCTION OF SUCH ROADWORTHINESS CERTIFICATES AS THEY CONSIDER NECESSARY .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . COMMUNITY LAW - PRINCIPLES - LEGAL CERTAINTY

2 . TAX PROVISIONS - HARMONIZATION OF LAWS - TURNOVER TAXES - COMMON SYSTEM OF VALUE-ADDED TAX - EXEMPTIONS PROVIDED FOR IN THE SIXTH DIRECTIVE - EXEMPTION FOR TRANSACTIONS CONSISTING OF THE NEGOTIATION OF CREDIT - POSSIBILITY OF INDIVIDUALS ' RELYING ON THE APPROPRIATE PROVISION IN THE EVENT OF THE DIRECTIVE ' S NOT BEING IMPLEMENTED - EXTENSION OF THE PERIOD FOR TRANSPOSING THE DIRECTIVE INTO NATIONAL LAW - EFFECTS

( COUNCIL DIRECTIVES 77/388 , ART . 13 B ( D ) 1 AND 78/583 , ART . 1 )

Summary

1 . COMMUNITY LEGISLATION MUST BE UNEQUIVOCAL AND ITS APPLICATION MUST BE PREDICTABLE FOR THOSE WHO ARE SUBJECT TO IT . POSTPONEMENT OF THE DATE OF ENTRY INTO FORCE OF A MEASURE OF GENERAL APPLICATION , ALTHOUGH THE DATE INITIALLY SPECIFIED HAS ALREADY PASSED , IS IN ITSELF LIABLE TO UNDERMINE THAT PRINCIPLE .

2 . IN THE ABSENCE OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF DIRECTIVE 77/388/EEC , THE PROVISION CONCERNING THE EXEMPTION FROM TURNOVER TAX OF THE NEGOTIATION OF CREDIT CONTAINED IN ARTICLE 13 B ( D ) 1 OF THAT DIRECTIVE COULD BE RELIED UPON BY A CREDIT NEGOTIATOR IN RELATION TO TRANSACTIONS CARRIED OUT BETWEEN 1 JANUARY AND 30 JUNE 1978 WHERE HE HAD REFRAINED FROM PASSING THE TAX ON TO PERSONS FOLLOWING HIM IN THE CHAIN OF SUPPLY . DIRECTIVE 78/583 OF 26 JUNE 1978 , EXTENDING THE PERIOD FOR IMPLEMENTING DIRECTIVE 77/388 , DOES NOT HAVE RETROACTIVE EFFECT IN RELATION TO TRANSACTIONS CARRIED OUT BY ECONOMIC OPERATORS PRIOR TO ITS ENTRY INTO FORCE .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . PRELIMINARY RULINGS - JURISDICTION OF THE COURT - LIMITS

( EEC TREATY , ART . 177 )

2.FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS - QUANTITATIVE RESTRICTIONS - MEASURES HAVING EQUIVALENT EFFECT - MICROBIOLOGICAL REQUIREMENTS APPLYING TO MILK PRODUCTS - ABSENCE OF COMMUNITY RULES - COMPETENCE OF THE MEMBER STATES - LIMITS

( EEC TREATY , ARTS 30 AND 36 )

3.FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS - QUANTITATIVE RESTRICTIONS - MEASURES HAVING EQUIVALENT EFFECT - CONCEPT - GOODS LAWFULLY PRODUCED AND MARKETED IN A MEMBER STATE - PROHIBITION ON IMPORTATION INTO ANOTHER MEMBER STATE ON THE GROUNDS OF MICROBIOLOGICAL REQUIREMENTS

( EEC TREATY , ART . 30 )

4.FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS - EXCEPTIONS - PROTECTION OF HUMAN HEALTH - RULES ON MICROBIOLOGICAL REQUIREMENT FOR MILK PRODUCTS - WHETHER PERMISSIBLE - CONDITIONS

( EEC TREATY , ART . 36 )

Summary

1 . ALTHOUGH THE COURT HAS NO JURISDICTION IN PROCEEDINGS UNDER ARTICLE 177 OF THE EEC TREATY TO RULE ON THE QUESTION WHETHER PROVISIONS OF NATIONAL LEGISLATION ARE COMPATIBLE WITH THE TREATY , IT MAY PROVIDE THE NATIONAL COURT WITH ALL SUCH CRITERIA FOR THE INTERPRETATION OF COMMUNITY LAW WHICH MAY ENABLE IT TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION .

2.SINCE THE COMMUNITY LEGISLATURE HAS NOT LAID DOWN MICROBIOLOGICAL REQUIREMENTS AFFECTING THE PRODUCTION AND MARKETING OF MILK AND MILK PRODUCTS EITHER WITHIN THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKET IN MILK PRODUCTS OR THROUGH HARMONIZATION OF RELEVANT NATIONAL LEGISLATION , THE MEMBER STATES MAY PRESCRIBE THE STANDARDS WHICH PRODUCTS INTENDED FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION MUST SATISFY IN THEIR OWN TERRITORIES . HOWEVER , THE NATIONAL PROVISIONS IN QUESTION CANNOT BE EXEMPT FROM THE APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 30 ET SEQ . OF THE TREATY .

3.THE PROHIBITION IN ARTICLE 30 OF MEASURES HAVING EQUIVALENT EFFECT APPLIES TO ALL TRADING RULES ENACTED BY THE MEMBER STATES WHICH ARE CAPABLE OF HINDERING , DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY , ACTUALLY OR POTENTIALLY , INTRA-COMMUNITY TRADE .

NATIONAL LEGISLATION PROHIBITING THE MARKETING OF GOODS LAWFULLY PRODUCED AND MARKETED IN THE EXPORTING MEMBER STATE ON THE GROUND THAT THEY DO NOT SATISFY THE MICROBIOLOGICAL REQUIREMENTS LAID DOWN IN THE IMPORTING MEMBER STATE CONSTITUTES A MEASURE EQUIVALENT IN EFFECT TO A QUANTITATIVE RESTRICTION WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 30 OF THE EEC TREATY .

4.NATIONAL LEGISLATION WHICH

( A ) DOES NOT ALLOW ACTIVE COLIFORM BACTERIA TO BE PRESENT IN A PASTEURIZED MILK PRODUCT - THE PRESENCE OF SUCH BACTERIA CONSTITUTING A DIRECT INDICATION THAT THE PRODUCT MAY BE A SOURCE OF REAL DANGER TO HUMAN HEALTH - AND

( B)IS INTENDED TO PREVENT SUCH A PRODUCT FROM CONTAINING AT THE TIME OF ITS CONSUMPTION NON-PATHOGENIC MICRO-ORGANISMS IN A QUANTITY WHICH MAY PRESENT A RISK TO THE HEALTH OF THE MOST SENSITIVE CONSUMERS AND TO THAT END FIXES THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF SUCH MICRO-ORGANISMS THAT MAY BE PRESENT ON THE DATE OF SALE OF THE PRODUCT ON THE BASIS OF ITS DETERIORATION IN THE TIME BETWEEN ITS SALE AND CONSUMPTION

COMPLIES WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ARTICLE 36 OF THE EEC TREATY .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . ECSC - PRICES - PUBLICATION OF PRICE LISTS AND CONDITIONS OF SALE - OBLIGATIONS OF UNDERTAKINGS ENGAGED IN THE DISTRIBUTION OF STEEL - DECISION NO 1836/81 - APPLICATION TO TRANSACTIONS STILL IN PROGRESS

( DECISION NO 1836/81/ECSC )

2 . MEASURES ADOPTED BY THE INSTITUTIONS - OBLIGATION TO PROVIDE A STATEMENT OF REASONS - SCOPE - DECISION IMPOSING A FINE

3 . ECSC - DECISION IMPOSING A FINE OR ORDERING A PERIODIC PENALTY PAYMENT - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE - OBLIGATION ON THE PART OF THE COMMISSION TO GIVE THE PARTY CONCERNED THE OPPORTUNITY TO SUBMIT ITS COMMENTS - SCOPE

( ECSC TREATY , ART . 36 )

Summary

1 . DECISION NO 1836/81 WAS BASED ON THE NEED TO IMPLEMENT A VERY SHORT-TERM ACTION FOR RATIONALIZATION OF THE STEEL MARKET IN SUCH A WAY AS TO BRING ABOUT THE RISE IN PRICES NECESSARY TO PREVENT FINANCIAL DISASTER . THE OBLIGATION INCUMBENT ON UNDERTAKINGS ENGAGED IN DISTRIBUTION ACTIVITIES TO PUBLISH THEIR PRICE LISTS AND TO REFRAIN FROM SELLING THEIR PRODUCTS AT A PRICE LOWER THAN THE LIST PRICE CONSTITUTES THE METHOD SELECTED BY THE COMMUNITY LEGISLATURE TO TERMINATE FORTHWITH THE GRANT OF INDIVIDUAL REBATES AND THE DISSIMILAR CONDITIONS OF SALES RESULTING THEREFROM AND THUS TO CONTRIBUTE TO A GENERAL INCREASE IN THE LEVEL OF PRICES . IT FOLLOWS THAT THE PROVISIONS OF DECISION NO 1836/81 MUST APPLY TO ALL TRANSACTIONS STILL IN PROGRESS AFTER ITS ENTRY INTO FORCE AND MUST TAKE PRECEDENCE , WHERE APPROPRIATE , OVER ANY OBLIGATIONS ARISING UNDER PRE-EXISTING FRAMEWORK AGREEMENTS .

2 . ALTHOUGH THE STATEMENT OF REASONS ON WHICH A DECISION IMPOSING A FINE FOR BREACH OF THE ECSC LEGISLATION ON PRICES IS BASED MAY BE SUCCINCT , IT MUST BE CONSIDERED SATISFACTORY IF THE INFRINGEMENT WITH WHICH AN UNDER TAKING IS CHARGED MAY BE CLEARLY ESTABLISHED FROM THE STATEMENT OF OBJECTIONS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE DECISION AND THE UNDERTAKING HAD ALREADY CLEARLY PERCEIVED , IN THE COURSE OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE , THE SCOPE OF THE OBJECTION COMMUNICATED TO IT .

3 . IT IS CLEAR FROM THE TERMS OF ARTICLE 36 OF THE ECSC TREATY THAT THE OBLIGATION ON THE PART OF THE COMMISSION TO GIVE THE PARTY CONCERNED THE OPPORTUNITY TO SUBMIT ITS COMMENTS BEFORE IMPOSING A PECUNIARY SANCTION OR ORDERING A PERIODIC PENALTY PAYMENT CANNOT BE UNDERSTOOD AS REQUIRING THE COMMISSION TO PUT FORWARD ITS COUNTER-ARGUMENTS IN RELATION TO THE ARGUMENTS PUT FORWARD IN ITS DEFENCE BY THE PARTY CONCERNED . THE RIGHTS OF THE DEFENCE ARE GUARANTEED BY THAT ARTICLE SINCE IT PROVIDES THE PARTY CONCERNED WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO PUT FORWARD ITS ARGUMENTS . THE COMMISSION CANNOT BE REQUIRED TO REPLY TO THOSE ARGUMENTS , TO CARRY OUT FURTHER INQUIRIES OR TO HEAR WITNESSES FOR THE PARTY CONCERNED , WHERE IT CONSIDERS THAT THE PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION OF THE CASE HAS BEEN SUFFICIENT .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . OBJECTION OF ILLEGALITY - ACTS WHOSE LEGALITY MAY BE CHALLENGED-INDIVIDUAL DECISION - COMMISSION ' S FAILURE TO ACT NOT CHALLENGED SUBSEQUENTLY BY AN ACTION BEFORE THE COURT - EXCLUSION

( ECSC TREATY , ART . 36 , THIRD PARAGRAPH )

2 . ECSC - PRODUCTION - STEEL PRODUCTION QUOTA SYSTEM - UNDERTAKING ' S PRODUCTION IN EXCESS OF ITS QUOTA - NECESSITY - PRINCIPLE NOT APPLICABLE

( ECSC TREATY , ART . 58 )

3 . ECSC - PRODUCTION - STEEL PRODUCTION QUOTA SYSTEM - UNDERTAKING ' S PRODUCTION IN EXCESS OF ITS QUOTA - FINE - SERIOUS ECONOMIC DIFFICULTIES IF QUOTA COMPLIED WITH - REDUCTION OF FINE - NOT POSSIBLE

( ECSC TREATY , ART . 58 )

Summary

1 . AN APPLICANT MAY NOT , IN THE COURSE OF AN ACTION FOR THE ANNULMENT OF AN INDIVIDUAL DECISION UNDER ARTICLE 33 OF THE ECSC TREATY , RELY ON THE SUBMISSION THAT ANOTHER INDIVIDUAL DECISION WHICH WAS ADDRESSED TO IT AND WHICH HAS BECOME FINAL IS UNALWFUL . SIMILARLY , AN APPLICANT MAY NOT , IN THE COURSE OF SUCH PROCEEDINGS , RELY ON THE FACT THAT THE COMMISSION HAS NOT COMPLIED WITH ITS DUTY TO ADOPT AN INDIVIDUAL DECISION IF IT HAS NOT BROUGHT AN ACTION BEFORE THE COURT CHALLENGING SUCH A REFUSAL TO ACT , AFTER HAVING RAISED THE MATTER WITH THE COMMISSION IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 35 ON THE ECSC TREATY .

2 . THE ARGUMENT OF NECESSITY CANNOT BE ENTERTAINED IN RELATION TO THE QUOTA SYSTEM PROVIDED FOR BY ARTICLE 58 OF THE ECSC TREATY , WHICH IS BASED ON SOLIDARITY BETWEEN ALL COMMUNITY STEEL UNDERTAKINGS IN THE FACT OF THE MANIFEST CRISIS IN THE STEEL INDUSTRY AND WHICH SEEKS AN EQUITABLE DISTRI BUTION OF THE DETRIMENTAL EFFECTS OF UNAVOIDABLE ECONOMIC CIRCUMSTANCES .

3 . THE REQUEST THAT A FINE BE REDUCED CANNOT BE JUSTIFED ON THE GROUND THAT PAYMENT OF A FINE COULD LEAD TO SERIOUS FINANCIAL DIFFICULTIES FOR THE UNDERTAKING CONCERNED . THE SYSTEM OF PRODUCTION QUOTAS WOULD BE GRAVELY COMPROMISED IF EVERY UNDERTAKING WERE ABLE , BY PLEADING NECESSITY DUE TO SERIOUS ECONOMIC DIFFICULTIES , TO EXCUSE ITSELF FROM OBSERVANCE OF THE RESTRICTIONS AND TO EXCEED AT WILL THE PRODUCTION QUOTA ALLOCATED TO IT . THE CHAIN REACTION THEREBY RELEASED WOULD CULMINATE IN THE COLLAPSE OF THE SYSTEM , SO THAT ARTICLE 58 OF THE TREATY WOULD BECOME A DEAD LETTER .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . FREE MOVEMENT OF PERSONS - WORKERS - PROVISIONS OF THE TREATY - SCOPE - STUDENTS - EXCLUSION

( EEC TREATY , ARTS 48 AND 51 )

2.SOCIAL SECURITY FOR MIGRANT WORKERS - FAMILY ALLOWANCES - WITHDRAWAL - PARENTS WHO ARE NATIONALS OF A NON-MEMBER COUNTRY OR ARE NOT EMPLOYED PERSONS - COMMUNITY PROVISIONS - INAPPLICABILITY

( EEC TREATY , ART . 48 ; REGULATION NO 1408/71 OF THE COUNCIL )

Summary

1 . THE POSITION OF A PERSON WHO HAS GONE TO ANOTHER MEMBER STATE IN ORDER TO FOLLOW A COURSE OF STUDY AND WHO , DURING THAT PERIOD , WAS NOT INSURED UNDER A SOCIAL SECURITY SCHEME SET UP FOR THE BENEFIT OF EMPLOYED PERSONS DOES NOT COME WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLES 48 TO 51 OF THE TREATY .

2 . NEITHER REGULATION NO 1408/71 NOR ARTICLE 48 OF THE TREATY PREVENTS FAMILY ALLOWANCES FROM BEING WITHDRAWN PURSUANT TO NATIONAL LEGISLATION ON THE GROUND THAT A CHILD IS PURSUING ITS STUDIES IN ANOTHER MEMBER STATE , WHERE THE PARENTS OF THE CHILD CONCERNED ARE NATIONALS OF A NON-MEMBER COUNTRY OR ARE NOT EMPLOYED PERSONS .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

MEMBER STATES - OBLIGATIONS - FAILURE TO IMPLEMENT DIRECTIVES - JUSTIFICATION - INSUFFUICIENCY

( EEC TREATY , ART . 169 )

Summary

A MEMBER STATE CANNOT RELY ON PROVISIONS , PRACTICES OR SITUATIONS IN ITS INTERNAL LEGAL SYSTEM TO JUSTIFY A FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH OBLIGATIONS OR TIME-LIMITS IMPOSED BY COMMUNITY DIRECTIVES .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . COMPETITION - AGREEMENTS , DECISIONS AND CONCERTED PRACTICES -UNDERTAKING - MEANING OF THE TERM - ECONOMIC UNIT - EXCLUSIVE DEALING AGREEMENT - LEGALLY INDEPENDENT UNDERTAKINGS PARTICIPATING IN AN AGREEMENT AS A SINGLE CONTRACTING PARTY - REGULATION NO 67/67 - APPLICATION

( EEC TREATY , ART . 85 ; REGULATION NO 67/67 OF THE COMMISSION )

2 . COMPETITION - AGREEMENTS , DECISIONS AND CONCERTED PRACTICES -PROHIBITION - BLOCK EXEMPTION - EXCLUSIVE DEALING AGREEMENTS -AGREEMENT ALSO COVERING COUNTRIES OUTSIDE THE COMMUNITY -REGULATION NO 67/67 - APPLICABILITY

( REGULATION NO 67/67 OF THE COMMISSION )

3 . COMPETITION - AGREEMENTS , DECISIONS AND CONCERTED PRACTICES -PROHIBITION - BLOCK EXEMPTION - EXCLUSIVE DEALING AGREEMENTS -RESTRICTIONS CONCERNING THE EXERCISE OF INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY RIGHTS - ELIGIBILITY FOR EXEMPTION - EXCLUSION - CONDITIONS

( REGULATION NO 67/67 OF THE COMMISSION , ART . 3 ( B ) ( 1 ))

Summary

1 . IN COMPETITION LAW , THE TERM ' ' UNDERTAKING ' ' MUST BE UNDERSTOOD AS DESIGNATING AN ECONOMIC UNIT FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE SUBJECT-MATTER OF THE AGREEMENT IN QUESTION EVEN IF IN LAW THAT ECONOMIC UNIT CONSISTS OF SEVERAL PERSONS , NATURAL OR LEGAL . REGULATION NR 67/67 OF THE COMMISSION ON THE APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 85 ( 3 ) OF THE TREATY TO CATEGORIES OF EXCLUSIVE DEALING AGREEMENTS MUST BE APPLIED EVEN IF SEVERAL LEGALLY INDEPENDENT UNDERTAKINGS PARTICIPATE IN THE AGREEMENT AS ONE CONTRACTING PARTY PROVIDED THAT THOSE UNDERTAKINGS CONSTITUTE AN ECONOMIC UNIT FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE AGREEMENT . IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES COMPETITION BETWEEN THE PERSONS PARTICIPATING TOGETHER , AS A SINGLE PARTY , IN THE AGREEMENT IN QUESTION IS IMPOSSIBLE .

2 . REGULATION NO 67/67 IS APPLICABLE WHERE THE OBLIGATIONS ENTERED INTO COVER NOT ONLY A DEFINED AREA OF THE COMMON MARKET BUT ALSO COUNTRIES OUTSIDE THE COMMUNITY .

3 . ARTICLE 3 ( B ) ( 1 ) OF REGULATION NO 67/67 MUST BE INTERPRETED AS EXCLUDING AN AGREEMENT FROM BLOCK EXEMPTION ONLY IF IT IS CLEAR FROM THE ACTUAL TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT OR FROM THE CONDUCT OF THE PARTIES THAT THEY INTEND TO USE , OR ARE IN FACT USING , AN INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY RIGHT IN SUCH A WAY AS TO PREVENT OR IMPEDE , WITH THE AID OF THAT RIGHT , PARALLEL IMPORTS INTO THE TERRITORY COVERED BY THE EXCLU- SIVE DEALERSHIP . THE FACT THAT AN AGREEMENT DOES NOT CONTAIN ANY PROVISION TO PREVENT ABUSE OF AN INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY RIGHT IS NOT IN ITSELF A SUFFICIENT REASON FOR EXCLUDING THAT AGREEMENT FROM THE APPLICATION OF REGULATION NO 67/67 .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS - NATIONAL LEGISLATION PROHIBITING RESIDENTS FROM USING VEHICLES ADMITTED UNDER TEMPORARY IMPORTATION RULES - NO EXCEPTION FOR USE WITHOUT INTENTION OF EVADING TAX - COMPATIBILITY WITH THE TREATY - PERIOD CONCERNED

( COUNCIL DIRECTIVE NO 83/182/EEC )

Summary

THE RULES OF THE EEC TREATY RELATING TO THE FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS DO NOT PRECLUDE NATIONAL LEGISLATION FROM IMPOSING ON PERSONS RESIDING IN THE TERRITORY OF A MEMBER STATE A PROHIBITION , SUBJECT TO CRIMINAL PENALTIES , ON THE USE OF MOTOR VEHICLES ADMITTED UNDER TEMPORARY IMPORTATION ARRANGEMENTS AND THUS EXEMPT FROM PAYMENT OF VALUE- ADDED TAX , EVEN IF THAT LEGISLATION MAKES NO EXCEPTION FOR CASES IN WHICH SUCH VEHICLES ARE USED WITHOUT ANY INTENTION OF EVADING TAX .

THAT STATEMENT APPLIES ONLY TO THE PERIOD BEFORE THE ENTRY INTO FORCE OF COUNCIL DIRECTIVE NO 83/182/EEC , WHICH GOVERNS THE MATTER AS FROM THAT DATE .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS - EXCEPTIONS - PUBLIC POLICY - MEANING - CONSIDERATIONS OF CONSUMER PROTECTION - EXCLUSION

( EEC TREATY , ARTS 30 AND 36 )

2.FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS - QUANTITATIVE RESTRICTIONS - MEASURES HAVING EQUIVALENT EFFECT - LEGISLATION ON UNFAIR COMPETITION - LAWFUL USE OF A DISTINCTIVE SYMBOL IN A MEMBER STATE - PROHIBITION OF ITS USE IN ANOTHER MEMBER STATE - NOT PERMISSIBLE - CONDITIONS

( EEC TREATY , ART . 30 )

Summary

1 . WHATEVER INTERPRETATION IS TO BE GIVEN TO THE TERM ' ' PUBLIC POLICY ' ' IN ARTICLE 36 OF THE EEC TREATY , IT CANNOT BE EXTENDED SO AS TO INCLUDE CONSIDERATIONS OF CONSUMER PROTECTION . SUCH CONSIDERATIONS MAY IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT IN ESTABLISHING WHETHER NATIONAL MEASURES APPLICABLE WITHOUT DISTINCTION TO DOMESTIC AND IMPORTED PRODUCTS ARE CAUGHT BY THE PROHIBITIONS LAID DOWN IN ARTICLE 30 ; THEY CANNOT , HOWEVER , SERVE TO JUSTIFY RESTRICTIONS ON IMPORTS UNDER ARTICLE 36 .

2.THE PROHIBITIONS LAID DOWN IN ARTICLE 30 OF THE EEC TREATY APPLY TO A MEMBER STATE ' S LEGISLATION ON UNFAIR COMPETITION IN SO FAR AS IT MAKES IT POSSIBLE TO PROHIBIT THE USE , BY AN UNDERTAKING ESTABLISHED IN ANOTHER MEMBER STATE , OF A DISTINCTIVE SYMBOL LAWFULLY USED IN THAT OTHER MEMBER STATE , ON THE SOLE GROUND THAT THE SYMBOL WAS FORMERLY USED BY A GROUP OF UNDERTAKINGS TO WHICH IT BELONGED , IN COMMON WITH AN UNDERTAKING ESTABLISHED IN THE FIRST MEMBER STATE WHICH HAS SINCE BEEN WOUND UP , AND THAT THE SYMBOL MIGHT THEREFORE BE REGARDED BY THE PUBLIC AS A REFERENCE TO THE DEFUNCT UNDERTAKING OR GROUP .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . SOCIAL POLICY - MEN AND WOMEN - EQUAL PAY - IMPLEMENTATION BY THE MEMBER STATES - RELIANCE ON REPRESENTATIVES OF MANAGEMENT AND LABOUR - INSUFFICIENT

( COUNCIL DIRECTIVE NO 75/117 )

2 . SOCIAL POLICY - MEN AND WOMEN - EQUAL PAY - IMPLEMENTATION BY THE MEMBER STATES - LEGAL CERTAINTY AND PROTECTION OF INDIVIDUALS - FAILURE TO MENTION EQUAL PAY FOR WORK OF EQUAL VALUE IN NATIONAL LEGISLATION - NOT PERMISSIBLE

( COUNCIL DIRECTIVE NO 75/117 , ART . 1 , FIRST PARA .)

3 . COMMUNITY LAW - INTERPRETATION - MEASURES ADOPTED BY COMMUNITY INSTITUTIONS - UNILATERAL DECLARATIONS MADE AT THE TIME OF ENACTMENT - WHETHER OR NOT TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT - NO

Summary

1 . ALTHOUGH MEMBER STATES MAY LEAVE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PRINCIPLE OF EQUAL PAY IN THE FIRST INSTANCE TO REPRESENTATIVES OF MANAGEMENT AND LABOUR , THAT POSSIBILITY DOES NOT DISCHARGE THEM FROM THE OBLIGATION OF ENSURING , BY APPROPRIATE LEGISLATIVE AND ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS , THAT ALL WORKERS IN THE COMMUNITY ARE AFFORDED THE FULL PROTECTION PROVIDED FOR IN DIRECTIVE NO 75/117 . THAT STATE GUARANTEE MUST COVER ALL CASES WHERE EFFECTIVE PROTECTION IS NOT ENSURED BY OTHER MEANS , FOR WHATEVER REASON , AND IN PARTICULAR CASES WHERE THE WORKERS IN QUESTION ARE NOT UNION MEMBERS , WHERE THE SECTOR IN QUESTION IS NOT COVERED BY A COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT OR WHERE SUCH AN AGREEMENT DOES NOT FULLY GUARANTEE THE PRINCIPLE OF EQUAL PAY .

2 . THE PRINCIPLES OF LEGAL CERTAINTY AND OF THE PROTECTION OF INDIVIDUALS REQUIRE AN UNEQUIVOCAL STATEMENT OF THE RIGHTS FLOWING FROM DIRECTIVE NO 75/117 SO AS TO GIVE THE PERSONS CONCERNED , AND IN PARTICULAR WORKERS WHOSE RIGHTS ARE NOT LAID DOWN IN COLLECTIVE AGREEMENTS , A CLEAR AND PRECISE UNDERSTANDING OF THEIR RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS AND ENABLE THE COURTS TO ENSURE THAT THOSE RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS ARE OBSERVED . NATIONAL LEGISLATION IMPLEMENTING THE DIRECTIVE WHICH SETS OUT THE PRINCIPLE OF EQUAL PAY WITHOUT SPEAKING OF WORK OF EQUAL VALUE , THUS RESTRICTING THE SCOPE OF THE PRINCIPLE , DOES NOT FULFIL THOSE CONDITIONS .

3 . UNILATERAL DECLARATIONS ENTERED BY MEMBER STATES IN THE MINUTES OF COUNCIL MEETINGS CANNOT BE RELIED UPON FOR THE INTERPRETATION OF COMMUNITY MEASURES , SINCE THE OBJECTIVE SCOPE OF RULES LAID DOWN BY THE COMMON INSTITUTIONS CANNOT BE MODIFIED BY RESERVATIONS OR OBJECTIONS WHICH MEMBER STATES MAY HAVE MADE AT THE TIME THE RULES WERE BEING FORMULATED .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

CONVENTION ON JURISDICTION AND THE ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENTS - EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION - DISPUTES CONCERNING TENANCIES OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY - CONCEPT - SHORT LETTING OF A HOLIDAY HOME - INCLUDED - OBLIGATIONS OF THE PARTIES UNDER THE TENANCY AGREEMENT - OBLIGATIONS IN RESPECT OF WHICH COURTS HAVE EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION

( CONVENTION OF 27 SEPTEMBER 1968 , ART . 16 ( 1 ))

Summary

1 . ARTICLE 16 ( 1 ) OF THE CONVENTION OF 27 SEPTEMBER 1968 APPLIES TO ALL LETTINGS OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY , EVEN FOR A SHORT TERM , AND EVEN WHERE THEY RELATE ONLY TO THE USE AND OCCUPATION OF A HOLIDAY HOME .

2 . ALL DISPUTES CONCERNING THE OBLIGATIONS OF THE LANDLORD OR OF THE TENANT UNDER A TENANCY , IN PARTICULAR THOSE CONCERNING THE EXISTENCE OF TENANCIES OR THE INTERPRETATION OF THE TERMS THEREOF , THEIR DURATION , THE GIVING UP OF POSSESSION TO THE LANDLORD , THE REPAIRING OF DAMAGE CAUSED BY THE TENANT OR THE RECOVERY OF RENT AND OF INCIDENTAL CHARGES PAYABLE BY THE TENANT , SUCH AS CHARGES FOR THE CONSUMPTION OF WATER , GAS AND ELECTRICITY , FALL WITHIN THE EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION CONFERRED BY ARTICLE 16 ( 1 ) OF THE CONVENTION ON THE COURTS OF THE STATE IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS SITUATED . ON THE OTHER HAND , DISPUTES WHICH ARE ONLY INDIRECTLY RELATED TO THE USE OF THE PROPERTY LET , SUCH AS THOSE CONCERNING THE LOSS OF HOLIDAY ENJOYMENT AND TRAVEL EXPENSES , DO NOT FALL WITHIN THAT EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION .