ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Approximation of laws – Medicinal products for human use – Directive 2001/83 – Advertising

(European Parliament and Council Directive 2001/83, as amended by Directive 2004/27, Art. 94(1))

Summary

Article 94(1) of Directive 2001/83 on the Community code relating to medicinal products for human use, as amended by Directive 2004/27, must be interpreted as not precluding financial incentive schemes implemented by the national public health authorities in order to reduce their public-health expenditure and designed to encourage, for the purpose of treating certain conditions, the prescription by doctors of specific named medicinal products containing an active substance different from the active substance of the medicinal product that was previously prescribed or that might have been prescribed but for such an incentive scheme.

In general terms, the health policy defined by a Member State and the public expenditure devoted to it do not pursue any profit-making or commercial aim. Since a financial incentive scheme forms part of such a policy, it cannot be regarded as falling within the commercial promotion of medicinal products.

However, in order to ensure the effectiveness of Directive 89/105 relating to the transparency of measures regulating the prices of medicinal products for human use and their inclusion in the scope of national health insurance systems, professionals in the pharmaceutical industry, whether or not the prescription of their medicinal products is subject to financial inducements, must also be able to verify that the financial incentive scheme implemented by the public authorities is based on objective criteria and that there is no discrimination between national medicinal products and those from other Member States. Consequently, even though Directive 89/105 has as an underlying principle the idea of minimum interference in the organisation by Member States of their domestic social security policies, national public health authorities which adopt a financial incentive scheme for the prescription of specific named medicinal products are required in particular to make such a scheme public and to make available to health-care professionals and professionals in the pharmaceutical industry the evaluations establishing the therapeutic equivalence of the active substances available belonging to the therapeutic class covered by that scheme.

(see paras 33, 37-38, 42, operative part)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Tax provisions – Harmonisation of laws – Turnover taxes – Common system of value added tax – Exemptions provided for in the Sixth Directive – Exemption for hospital and medical care and closely related activities – Exemption in respect of the provision of medical care in the exercise of the medical and paramedical professions

(Council Directive 2006/112, Art. 132(1)(b) and (c))

2. Tax provisions – Harmonisation of laws – Turnover taxes – Common system of value added tax – Exemptions provided for in the Sixth Directive – Exemption for hospital and medical care and closely related activities

(Council Directive 2006/112, Art. 132(1)(b))

Summary

1. When activities consisting in the dispatch of a kit for collecting blood from the umbilical cord of newborn children and in the testing and processing of that blood and, where appropriate, in the storage of stem cells contained in it for possible future therapeutic use, are intended only to ensure that a particular resource will be available for medical treatment in the uncertain event that treatment becomes necessary but not, in themselves, to diagnose, treat or cure diseases or health disorders, such activities, whether taken together or separately, do not come within the concept of ‘hospital and medical care’ in Article 132(1)(b) of Directive 2006/112 on the common system of value added tax, or within that of ‘the provision of medical care’ in Article 132(1)(c) of that directive. It would be otherwise, as regards the analysis of umbilical cord blood, only if such analysis were actually intended to enable a medical diagnosis to be made, which it is for the referring court to determine.

(see para. 47, operative part 1)

2. Activities ‘closely related’ to ‘hospital and medical care’, within the meaning of Article 132(1)(b) of Directive 2006/112 on the common system of value added tax, are to be interpreted as not covering activities consisting in the dispatch of a kit for collecting blood from the umbilical cord of newborn children and in the testing and processing of that blood and, where appropriate, in the storage of stem cells contained in it for possible future therapeutic use to which those activities are merely potentially related and which has not been performed, commenced or yet envisaged.

(see para. 52, operative part 2)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Tax provisions – Harmonisation of laws – Turnover taxes – Common system of value added tax – Deduction of input tax – Obligations of the taxable person – Holding of an invoice containing certain information

(Council Directive 2006/112, Arts 167, 178(a), 220, para. 1, and 226)

Summary

Articles 167, 178(a), 220(1) and 226 of Council Directive 2006/112 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as precluding national legislation or practice whereby the national authorities deny to a taxable person the right to deduct from the VAT which he is liable to pay the VAT due or paid in respect of services supplied to him on the grounds that the initial invoice, in the possession of the taxable person when the deduction is made, contained an incorrect completion date for the supply of services and the numbering of the subsequently corrected invoice and the credit note cancelling the initial invoice were not sequential, if the material conditions governing deduction are satisfied and, before the tax authority concerned has made a decision, the taxable person has submitted to the tax authority a corrected invoice stating the correct date on which that supply of services was completed, even though the numbering of that invoice and the credit note cancelling the initial invoice are not sequential.

Only the details listed in Article 226 of Directive 2006/112 must obligatorily appear, for VAT purposes, on invoices issued pursuant to Article 220 of that directive. It follows that it is not open to Member States to make the exercise of the right to deduct VAT dependent on compliance with conditions relating to the content of invoices which are not expressly laid down by the provisions of that directive.

(see paras 40-41, 45, operative part)
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Actions for failure to fulfil obligations – Examination of the merits by the Court – Situation to be taken into consideration – Situation on expiry of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 9)

2. Actions for failure to fulfil obligations – Right of the Commission to bring judicial proceedings – To be exercised at its discretion (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 10)

Subject of the case

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations – Failure to adopt or communicate within the prescribed period the measures necessary to comply with Directive 2006/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 February 2006 concerning the management of bathing water quality and repealing Directive 76/160/EEC, (OJ 2006 L 64, p. 37).

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed period, all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2006/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 February 2006 concerning the management of bathing water quality and repealing Directive 76/160/EEC, the Czech Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

2. Orders the Czech Republic to pay the costs.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Approximation of laws – Labelling and presentation of foodstuffs – Directives 79/112, 2000/13 and 2000/36 – Cocoa and chocolate products

(European Parliament and Council Directives 2000/13, Art. 2(1)(a), and 2000/36, Art. 3(1) and (5);Council Directive 79/112)

Summary

A Member State whose legislation provides that the adjective ‘pure’ may be added to the sales name of chocolate products which do not contain vegetable fats other than cocoa butter fails to fulfil its obligations under Article 3(1) of Directive 2000/36 relating to cocoa and chocolate products intended for human consumption in conjunction with Article 2(1)(a) of Directive 2000/13 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the labelling, presentation and advertising of foodstuffs, and under Article 3(5) of Directive 2000/36.

Directive 2000/36 carried out full harmonisation of the sales names of chocolate products, whilst the Community legislature provided that the addition of substitute vegetable fats does not entail the use of different names for such products but the presence of additional information on the label. Thus, the addition of vegetable fats other than cocoa butter to cocoa and chocolate products which satisfy the minimum contents required by that directive cannot substantially alter the nature of those products to the point where they are transformed into different products. The inclusion in another part of the labelling of a neutral and objective statement informing consumers of the absence from the product of vegetable fats other than cocoa butter would be sufficient to ensure that consumers are given correct information.

(see paras 29, 32, 39, 41, 45, 49, operative part)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Social policy – Male and female workers – Access to employment and working conditions – Equal treatment – Directive 76/207 – National rules facilitating the dismissal of workers who have acquired the right to draw their retirement pension

(Council Directive 76/207, Art. 3(1)(c))

Summary

Article 3(1)(c) of Directive 76/207 on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women as regards access to employment, vocational training and promotion, and working conditions, as amended by Directive 2002/73, must be interpreted as meaning that national rules which, in order to promote access of younger persons to employment, permit an employer to dismiss employees who have acquired the right to draw their retirement pension, when that right is acquired by women at an age five years younger than the age at which it is acquired by men, constitute direct discrimination on the grounds of sex prohibited by that directive.

(see para. 46, operative part)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Approximation of laws – Electronic commerce – Directive 2000/31

(European Parliament and Council Directive 2000/31)

2. Free movement of goods – Quantitative restrictions – Measures having equivalent effect

(Art. 34 TFEU and 36 TFEU; European Parliament and Council Directive 2000/31, Art. 3(4))

Summary

1. National rules relating to the selling of contact lenses fall within the scope of Directive 2000/31 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (‘Directive on electronic commerce’) since they concern the act of selling such lenses via the Internet, namely, in particular, the on line offer and the conclusion of the contract by electronic means. On the other hand, the national rules relating to the supply of contact lenses are not covered by that directive.

(see paras 28, 31, 77, operative part)

2. Articles 34 TFEU and 36 TFEU, and Directive 2000/31 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (‘Directive on electronic commerce’), must be interpreted as precluding national legislation which authorises the selling of contact lenses only in shops which specialise in medical devices.

Such legislation constitutes a measure having an effect equivalent to a quantitative restriction, as prohibited by Article 34 TFEU, since the consequent prohibition on the selling of contact lenses via the Internet applies to contact lenses from other Member States, which are sold by mail order and delivered to the home of customers resident within the national territory, and deprives traders from other Member States of a particularly effective means of selling those products, thus significantly impeding the access of those traders to the market of the Member State concerned.

It is true that by reserving the supply of contact lenses to the opticians’ shops which offer the services of a qualified optician, such legislation is appropriate for securing the attainment of the objective of ensuring protection of the health of contact lens users. However, in adopting such legislation, the national legislature exceeded the limits of the discretion which it is allowed to determine the level of protection which it wishes to afford to public health, and that legislation must be held to go beyond what is necessary to attain the claimed objective, since that objective can be achieved by measures which are less restrictive than those provided for under that legislation, namely measures which subject to certain restrictions only the first supply of lenses and which require the economic operators concerned to make available a qualified optician to the customer.

For the same reasons, since it contains a prohibition on selling contact lenses via the Internet, that legislation cannot be held to be proportionate to the objective of ensuring the protection of public health, for the purposes of Article 3(4) of Directive 2000/31.

(see paras 58, 64, 74-76, 78, operative part)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Tax provisions – Harmonisation of laws – Turnover taxes – Common system of value added tax – Deduction of input tax

(Council Directive 77/388, Art. 17(3)(a))

2. Tax provisions – Harmonisation of laws – Turnover taxes – Common system of value added tax – Deduction of input tax – Exclusions from the right of deduction

(Council Directive 77/388, Art. 17(3)(a))

Summary

1. Article 17(3)(a) of Sixth Directive 77/388, on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes, must be interpreted as meaning that a Member State may not refuse to allow a taxable person to deduct input value added tax paid on the acquisition of goods in that Member State, when those goods have been used for the purposes of leasing transactions carried out in another Member State, solely on the ground that the output transactions have not given rise to the payment of value added tax in the second Member State.

Under Article 17(3)(a), the right to deduct input value added tax for certain transactions in respect of other output transactions carried out in another Member State depends on whether that right to deduct exists when all those transactions are carried out within the territory of the same Member State. Consequently, the fact that a Member State has not collected output value added tax because of the manner in which it has categorised a commercial transaction cannot deny a taxable person the right to deduct input value added tax paid in another Member State.

(see paras 32, 42, 46, operative part 1)

2. The principle of prohibiting abusive practices does not preclude the right to deduct value added tax – recognised in Article 17(3)(a) of Sixth Directive 77/388, on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes – in circumstances in which a company established in one Member State elects to have its subsidiary, established in another Member State, carry out transactions for the leasing of goods to a third company established in the first Member State, in order to avoid a situation in which value added tax is payable on the sums paid as consideration for those transactions, the transactions having been categorised in the first Member State as supplies of rental services carried out in the second Member State, and in that second Member State as supplies of goods carried out in the first Member State.

Taxable persons are generally free to choose the organisational structures and the form of transactions they consider to be most appropriate for their economic activities and for the purposes of limiting their tax burdens. A trader’s choice between exempt transactions and taxable transactions may be based on a range of factors, including tax considerations relating to the neutral system of value added tax. Where it is possible for the taxable person to choose from among a number of transactions, he may choose to structure his business in such a way as to limit his tax liability.

(see paras 53-55, operative part 2)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Social policy – Approximation of laws – Transfers of undertakings – Safeguarding of employees’ rights – Directive 2001/23 – Scope

(Council Directive 2001/23, Art. 1(1)(a) and (b))

Summary

Article 1(1)(a) and (b) of Directive 2001/23 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the safeguarding of employees’ rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of undertakings or businesses must be interpreted as meaning that that directive does not apply to a situation in which a municipal authority which has contracted out the cleaning of its premises to a private company decides to terminate its contract with that company and to undertake the cleaning of those premises itself by hiring new staff for that purpose.

It is true that cleaning services can be regarded as an activity essentially based on manpower and, consequently, a group of employees who are permanently assigned to the common task of cleaning may, in the absence of other factors of production, amount to an economic entity. That entity’s identity must nonetheless be retained after the transfer in question. However, the mere fact that the activity carried out by a private company and that carried out by the municipal authority are similar, even identical, does not lead to the conclusion that an economic entity has retained its identity. An entity cannot be reduced to the activity entrusted to it. Its identity emerges from several indissociable factors, such as its workforce, its management staff, the way in which its work is organised, its operating methods or indeed, where appropriate, the operational resources available to it. In particular, the identity of an economic entity cannot be retained if the majority of its employees are not taken on by the supposed transferee.

(see paras 39, 41, 43, operative part)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Citizens of the European Union – Provisions of the FEU Treaty – Scope ratione personae – Minor child national of a Member State never having exercised his right of free movement – Included

(Art. 20 TFEU)

Summary

Article 20 TFEU is to be interpreted as meaning that it precludes a Member State from refusing a third country national upon whom his minor children, who are European Union citizens, are dependent, a right of residence in the Member State of residence and nationality of those children, and from refusing to grant a work permit to that third country national, in so far as such decisions deprive those children of the genuine enjoyment of the substance of the rights attaching to the status of European Union citizen.

Citizenship of the Union is intended to be the fundamental status of nationals of the Member States. Such a refusal would lead to a situation in which those children, citizens of the Union, would have to leave the territory of the Union in order to accompany their parents. Similarly, if a work permit were not granted to such a person, he would risk not having sufficient resources to provide for himself and his family, which would also result in the children, citizens of the Union, having to leave the territory of the Union. In those circumstances, those citizens of the Union would, in fact, be unable to exercise the substance of the rights conferred on them by virtue of their status as citizens of the Union.

(see paras 41, 44-45, operative part)
Case C-452/09

Tonina Enza Iaia and Others

v

Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca and Others

(Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Corte d’appello di Firenze)

‛Directive 82/76/EEC — Freedom of establishment and freedom to provide services — Doctors — Acquisition of the title of medical specialist — Remuneration during the period of training — Five-year limitation period in respect of the right to payment of periodic remuneration’

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber), 19 May 2011 I - 4045

Summary of the Judgment

Union law — Rights conferred on individuals — Infringement by a Member State — Obligation to make good damage caused to individuals — Rules on compensation

Union law must be interpreted as not precluding a Member State from relying on the expiry of a reasonable limitation period as a defence in legal proceedings brought by an individual for the purpose of safeguarding rights conferred by a directive, even though the Member State had not transposed that directive correctly, on condition that, by its conduct, that Member State was not responsible for the delay in bringing the action. The finding by the Court that there has been a breach of Union law does not affect the starting point of the limitation period, if that breach is not in doubt. In such a situation, a ruling by the Court that there has been such a breach is not necessary to enable the beneficiaries to ascertain the full extent of their rights. The fact that the period starts to run before that ruling does not therefore render it virtually impossible or excessively difficult to safeguard the rights derived from Union law.

(see paras 23-24, operative part)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Approximation of laws – Insider dealing and market manipulation (market abuse) – Prohibition – Market manipulation – Fixing the price of one or more financial instruments at an abnormal or artificial level – Definition

(European Parliament and Council Directive 2003/6, Art. 1(2)(a), second indent, and 5)

Summary

Article 1(2)(a), second indent, of Directive 2003/6 on insider dealing and market manipulation (market abuse) must be interpreted as not requiring, in order for the price of one or more financial instruments to be considered to have been fixed at an abnormal or artificial level, that price to maintain an abnormal or artificial level beyond a certain period.

In that respect, the purpose of Directive 2003/6, as is noted, in particular, in recitals 2 and 12 in the preamble thereto, is to protect the integrity of EU financial markets and to enhance investor confidence in those markets. That confidence depends on, inter alia, investors being placed on an equal footing and protected against the improper use of insider information and price manipulations. The objectives thus pursued by Directive 2003/6 would be compromised if conduct such as that contemplated in Article 1(2)(a), second indent, of that directive could fall outside the scope of the prohibition of market manipulation set out in Article 5 of that directive solely on the ground that it gave rise to a single transaction and, consequently, a single listing, without the price of the financial instrument or instruments at issue maintaining an abnormal or artificial level beyond a certain period.

(see paras 27, 29-30, and operative part)