ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. International agreements — Agreements concluded by the Community — Direct effect — Article 38(1), first indent, of the Association Agreement between the Communities and Slovakia — (Association Agreement between the Communities and Slovakia, Art. 38(1), first indent)

2. International agreements — Association Agreement between the Communities and Slovakia — Workers — Equal treatment — Working conditions — Article 38(1), first indent, of the Agreement — Scope — Rule laid down by a sports federation determining the conditions under which professional sportsmen may engage in gainful employment — Included — (Association Agreement between the Communities and Slovakia, Art. 38(1), first indent)

3. International agreements — Association Agreement between the Communities and Slovakia — Workers — Equal treatment — Working conditions — Rule laid down by a sports federation limiting the participation in certain competitions of professional players originating in non-member countries — Not permissible — (Association Agreement between the Communities and Slovakia, Art. 38(1), first indent)

Summary

1. The first indent of Article 38(1) of the Association Agreement between the Communities and Slovakia, which provides that workers of Slovak nationality legally employed in the territory of a Member State must not be subject to discrimination based on nationality in regard to working conditions, remuneration or dismissal, as compared to that Member State's own nationals, has direct effect, with the result that Slovak nationals who invoke it are entitled to rely on it before national courts of the host Member State.

see para. 30

2. The first indent of Article 38(1) of the Association Agreement between the Communities and Slovakia applies to a rule drawn up by a sports federation which determines the conditions under which professional sportsmen engage in gainful employment.

see para. 37

3. The first indent of Article 38(1) of the Association Agreement between the Communities and Slovakia precludes the application to a professional sportsman of Slovak nationality, who is lawfully employed by a club established in a Member State, of a rule drawn up by a sports federation in that State under which clubs are authorised to field, during league or cup matches, only a limited number of players from non-member countries that are not parties to the Agreement on the European Economic Area.

see para. 58, operative part
3

The first, second, third and eighth paragraphs of Section 3(l)(h), of Lagen (1947:576) om statlig inkomstskatt (the Law on State Income Tax, ‘SIL’), as amended, provides: ‘A transfer of an asset, to which the rules in Sections 25 to 31 apply, without consideration to a Swedish limited company in which the transferor or his kin directly or — unlike the case described in the third paragraph — indirectly holds shares shall be treated as though the asset were disposed of for a consideration equivalent to cost. The same shall apply to a transfer for a consideration which is less than both the market value of the asset and cost. If the market value is less than cost, the asset in that case shall be deemed to have been disposed of for a consideration equivalent to market value. If no consideration is paid, the combined cost of the shares of the transferor and his kin in the limited company shall be increased by an amount equivalent to the cost of the asset or, in the case described in the third sentence of the first paragraph, the market value. If consideration is paid, the cost shall be increased by the difference between the cost or market value and the consideration. A transfer of an asset to which the rules in Sections 25 to 31 apply, for no consideration or for a consideration which is less than the market value of the asset, to a foreign legal person in which the transferor or his kin directly or indirectly has a holding shall be treated as though the asset were disposed of for a consideration equivalent to the market value. The same shall apply in the case of a transfer to a Swedish limited company in which such a foreign legal person either directly or indirectly has a holding. … An asset which, under the first or third paragraph, is to be considered to have been disposed of for a certain consideration shall, in application of ... this law, be deemed to have been acquired for the same consideration by the purchaser.’
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Sixth Chamber)

9 January 2003

((Directive 89/104/EEC – Articles 4(4)(a) and 5(2) – Trade marks with a reputation – Protection against use of a sign in respect of identical or similar products or services))

In Case C-292/00,

and

THE COURT (Sixth Chamber),,

after considering the written observations submitted on behalf of:

─

─

─

─

having regard to the Report for the Hearing,

after hearing the oral observations of Davidoff & Cie SA and Zino Davidoff SA, represented by J. Frisinger; of Gofkid Ltd, represented by M. Wirtz; of the United Kingdom Government, represented by J.E. Collins, acting as Agent, assisted by M. Tappin, Barrister; and of the Commission, represented by W. Berg, at the hearing on 13 December 2001,

after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 21 March 2002,
Case C-442/00





Ángel Rodríguez Caballero

v

Fondo de Garantía Salarial (Fogasa)





(Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Castilla-La Mancha)

«(Social policy – Protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer – Directive 80/987/EEC – Scope – Claims – Pay – Salarios de tramitación – Payment guaranteed by the guarantee institution – Payment subject to the adoption of a judicial decision)»

Opinion of Advocate General Geelhoed delivered on 27 June 2002 I - 0000

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber), 12 December 2002 I - 0000

Summary of the Judgment

1.. Social policy – Approximation of laws – Protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer – Directive 80/987 – Scope – Claims – Pay – Unfair dismissal – Sum payable by way of remuneration during proceedings challenging dismissal (salarios de tramitación) – Inclusion under national legislation only of sums determined by a judicial decision to the exclusion of those acknowledged in a conciliation procedure – Breach of the principle of equal treatment – Not permissible

(Council Directive 80/987, Arts 1(1), 3(1) and 10)

2.. Social policy – Approximation of laws – Protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer – Directive 80/987 – Scope of the guarantee offered by the guarantee institution – National legislation providing for the guarantee in respect of the sums payable, in the event of unfair dismissal, by way of remuneration during the proceedings challenging dismissal (salarios de tramitación), which are determined by judicial decision, but refusing the guarantee in respect of the sums acknowledged in a conciliation procedure – Breach of the principle of equal treatment – Obligations and powers of the national court – Elimination of discrimination – Application to members of the group disadvantaged by the discrimination of the arrangements enjoyed by the favoured group

(Council Directive 80/987, Art. 2(2))

1.

2.
Case C-156/00





Kingdom of the Netherlands

v

Commission of the European Communities





«(Annulment of Commission Decision C (2000) 485 final – Remission of import duties – Inward processing – Lack of equivalence between Community products and imported products)»

Opinion of Advocate General Léger delivered on 11 July 2002 I - 0000

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber), 13 March 2003 I - 0000

Summary of the Judgment

1.. Own resources of the European Communities – Repayment or remission of import duties – Remission of compensatory interest on the amount of duties owing – Powers of the Commission – Not included

(Council Regulation No 2913/92, Art. 239; Commission Regulation No 2454/93, Arts 905 and 907)

2.. Own resources of the European Communities – Post-clearance recovery of import or export duties – Communication of the amount of duties to the debtor – Limitation period – Not included

(Council Regulation No 2913/92, Art. 221(3))

3.. Own resources of the European Communities – Repayment or remission of import duties – Circumstances in which no deception or obvious negligence may be attributed to the person concerned – Concept of obvious negligence

(Council Regulation No 2913/92, Art. 239(1) and Art. 220)

1.

2.

3.
Case C-228/00





Commission of the European Communities

v

Federal Republic of Germany





«(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Article 7(2) and (4) of Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 – Classification of the purpose of a shipment of waste (recovery or disposal) – Incinerated waste – Point R1 of Annex II B to Directive 75/442/EEC – Concept of use principally as a fuel or other means to generate energy)»

Opinion of Advocate General Jacobs delivered on 26 September 2002 I - 0000

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber), 13 February 2003 I - 0000

Summary of the Judgment

1.. Environment – Waste – Regulation No 259/93 on shipments of waste – Competence of the authorities to which notification of a proposed shipment of waste is addressed to check classification (recovery or disposal) and to object to a shipment which is wrongly classified – Competence of the Member States to lay down general rules for classification – Conditions

(Council Regulation No 259/93, Art. 7(2))

2.. Environment – Waste – Directive 75/442 – Annex II B – Distinction between a disposal operation and a recovery operation – Use of waste in cement kilns – Classification as a recovery operation – Conditions

(Council Directive 75/442, as amended by Commission Decision 96/350, Annex II B)

1.

2.
Case C-329/00





Kingdom of Spain

v

Commission of the European Communities





«(EAGGF – Clearance of accounts – Expenditure for 1996 and 1997 – Compensatory aid for banana producers)»

Opinion of Advocate General Mischo delivered on 3 October 2002 I - 0000

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber), 19 June 2003 I - 0000

Summary of the Judgment

1.. Agriculture – EAGGF – Clearance of accounts – Compensatory aid for banana producers – Disallowance of expenditure arising from irregularities in the application of the Community rules – Financial adjustment provided for in Article 5(2)(c) of Regulation No 729/70 – Temporal scope – Date to be taken into account when calculating the time-limit of 24 months

(Council Regulations No 729/70, Art. 5(2)(c), and No 1287/95)

2.. Agriculture – EAGGF – Clearance of accounts – Disallowance of expenditure arising from irregularities in the application of the Community rules – Disputed by the Member State concerned – Burden of proof – Shared by the Commission and the Member State

3.. Acts of the institutions – Statement of reasons – Obligation – Scope – Decision relating to the clearance of accounts in respect of expenditure financed by the EAGGF

(Art. 253 EC)

1.

2.

3.
Case C-438/00





Deutscher Handballbund eV

v

Marcos Kolpak





(Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Hamm)

«(External relations – Association Agreement between the Communities and Slovakia – Article 38(1) – Freedom of movement for workers – Principle of non-discrimination – Handball – Limitation on the number of professional players having the nationality of non-member countries who may play on a team in the league of a sports federation)»

Opinion of Advocate General Stix-Hackl delivered on 11 July 2002 I - 0000

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber), 8 May 2003 I - 0000

Summary of the Judgment

1.. International agreements – Agreements concluded by the Community – Direct effect – Article 38(1), first indent, of the Association Agreement between the Communities and Slovakia

(Association Agreement between the Communities and Slovakia, Art. 38(1), first indent)

2.. International agreements – Association Agreement between the Communities and Slovakia – Workers – Equal treatment – Working conditions – Article 38(1), first indent, of the Agreement – Scope – Rule laid down by a sports federation determining the conditions under which professional sportsmen may engage in gainful employment – Included

(Association Agreement between the Communities and Slovakia, Art. 38(1), first indent)

3.. International agreements – Association Agreement between the Communities and Slovakia – Workers – Equal treatment – Working conditions – Rule laid down by a sports federation limiting the participation in certain competitions of professional players originating in non-member countries – Not permissible

(Association Agreement between the Communities and Slovakia, Art. 38(1), first indent)

1.

2.

3.
Joined Cases C-57/00 P and C-61/00 P





Freistaat Sachsen

and

Volkswagen AG and Volkswagen Sachsen GmbH



v

Commission of the European Communities





«(State aid – Compensation for the economic disadvantages caused by the division of Germany – Serious disturbance in the economy of a Member State – Regional economic development – Community framework for State aid in the motor vehicle industry)»

Opinion of Advocate General Mischo delivered on 28 May 2002

Judgment of the Court, 30 September 2003

Summary of the Judgment

1.. State aid – Prohibited – Derogations – Aid for areas affected by the division of Germany – Scope of the derogation – Strict interpretation – Economic disadvantages caused by the isolation created by the frontier established between the two zones

(Art. 92(1) and (2)(c) of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Art. 87(1) and (2)(c) EC)

2.. Acts of the institutions – Statement of reasons – Obligation – Scope – Decision consistent with previous decisions – Permissibility of summary statement of reasons

(Art. 190 of the EC Treaty (now Art. 253 EC))

3.. Appeals – Grounds – Plea put forward for the first time in the appeal – Inadmissible

(Rules of Procedure of the Court, Arts. 42(2) and 118)

4.. State aid – Prohibited – Derogations – Aid which may be regarded as compatible with the common market – Aid to remedy serious disturbance in the economy of a Member State – Strict interpretation – Disturbance affecting the whole of the economy of the Member State concerned

(Art. 92(3)(a)(b) and (c) of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Art. 87(3)(a), (b) and (c) EC))

5.. Appeals – Grounds – Plea challenging the decision of the Court of First Instance on costs – Inadmissible where all other pleas rejected

(Statute of the Court, Art. 51, second para.)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.
Case C-280/00





Altmark Trans GmbH and Regierungspräsidium Magdeburg

v

Nahverkehrsgesellschaft Altmark GmbH





(Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Germany))

«(Regulation (EEC) No 1191/69 – Operation of urban, suburban and regional scheduled transport services – Public subsidies – Concept of State aid – Compensation for discharging public service obligations)»

Opinion of Advocate General Léger delivered on 19 March 2002 I - 0000

Opinion of Advocate General Léger delivered on 14 January 2003 I - 0000

Judgment of the Court, 24 July 2003 I - 0000

Summary of the Judgment

1.. Transport – Action by the Member States concerning public service obligations – Regulation No 1191/69 – Derogation authorised for undertakings operating urban, suburban or regional scheduled transport services – Extent of the option available to Member States – Obligation to delimit clearly the use made of that option – Observance of legal certainty

(Council Regulation No 1191/69, Art. 1(1), second subpara.)

2.. State aid – Effect on trade between Member States – Adverse effect on competition – Exclusion by the Commission of the transport sector from the de minimis rule

(EC Treaty, Art. 92(1) (now, after amendment, Art. 87(1) EC); Commission Regulation No 69/2001; Commission Notice 96/C 68/06)

3.. State aid – Definition – Measures intended to offset the cost of public service tasks assumed by an undertaking – Not included – Conditions – Clearly defined public service obligations – Establishment in an objective and transparent manner of the parameters used to calculate the compensation – Compensation limited to covering costs – Determination of the compensation, where the undertaking is not chosen by a public procurement procedure, on the basis of an analysis of the costs of a typical undertaking in the sector concerned

(EC Treaty, Art. 92(1) (now, after amendment, Art. 87(1) EC))

4.. Transport – Aid for transport – Application of Article 77 of the Treaty (now Article 73 EC) – Limitation to cases covered by secondary Community legislation

(EC Treaty, Art. 77 (now Art. 73 EC); Council Regulations Nos 1191/69 and 1107/70)

1.

2.

3.

4.
Keywords



Keywords

1. Actions for failure to fulfil obligations - Examination of merits by the Court - Situation to be taken into consideration - Situation at the end of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion

(Art. 226 EC)

2. Member States - Obligations - Implementation of directives - Failure to fulfil obligations - Justification based on internal legal system - Not permissible

(Art. 226 EC)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Actions against Member States for failure to fulfil obligations — Commission's right to bring an action — Exercise of that right not dependent on a specific interest in bringing an action — (Art. 226 EC)

2. Approximation of laws — Procedures for the award of public service contracts — Directive 92/50 — Award of contracts — Negotiated procedure without prior publication of a contract notice — Conditions governing permissibility — Technical or artistic reasons, or reasons connected with the protection of exclusive rights — Meaning — Environmental protection — Whether included — (Council Directive 92/50, Art. 11(3)(b))

Summary

1. In exercising its powers under Article 226 EC the Commission does not have to show that there is a specific interest in bringing an action. The provision is not intended to protect the Commission's own rights. The Commission's function, in the general interest of the Community, is to ensure that the Member States give effect to the Treaty and the provisions adopted by the institutions thereunder and to obtain a declaration of any failure to fulfil the obligations deriving therefrom with a view to bringing it to an end. Given its role as guardian of the Treaty, the Commission alone is therefore competent to decide whether it is appropriate to bring proceedings against a Member State for failure to fulfil its obligations and to determine the conduct or omission attributable to the Member State concerned on the basis of which those proceedings should be brought. It may therefore ask the Court to find that, in not having achieved, in a specific case, the result intended by the directive, a Member State has failed to fulfil its obligations.

see paras 29-30

2. Environmental protection is capable of constituting a technical reason for the purposes of Article 11(3)(b) of Directive 92/50 relating to the coordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts. That provision stipulates that contracting authorities may award public service contracts by negotiated procedure without prior publication of a contract notice when, for technical or artistic reasons, or for reasons connected with the protection of exclusive rights, the services may be provided only by a particular service provider. However, the procedure used where there is a technical reason of that kind must comply with the fundamental principles of Community law, in particular the principle of non-discrimination as it follows from the provisions of the Treaty on the right of establishment and the freedom to provide services.

see paras 59-60, 62
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Acts of the institutions — Directives — Implementation by the Member States — Need for clear and precise transposition — Directive 90/388 on competition in the markets for telecommunications services — Member States' obligation to designate clearly the competent authority for the grant of rights of way for the provision of networks and to establish transparent administrative procedures — (Art. 249 EC, third para.; Commission Directive 90/388, Art. 4d)

Summary

In respect of the transposition of a directive into the legal order of a Member State, it is essential that the national legislation in question effectively ensures that the directive is fully applied, that the legal position under national law is sufficiently precise and clear and that individuals are made fully aware of their rights.

In particular, in relation to the designation of the authority competent to implement the directive, even if the Member States are free to delegate powers to their domestic authorities as they consider fit and to implement directives by means of measures adopted by various authorities, the fact remains that individuals must be made fully aware of their rights.

Thus, as regards the effective transposition of the first subparagraph of Article 4d of Directive 90/388 on competition in the markets for telecommunications services, as amended by Directive 96/19, under which Member States are not to discriminate between providers of public telecommunications networks with regard to the granting of rights of way for the provision of such networks, the competent national authority for the grant of such rights must be clearly designated and transparent administrative procedures must be established to implement them. Lack of transparency is capable of discouraging undertakings wishing to provide public telecommunications networks from making applications for rights of way.

see paras 32, 36-37, 39