ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Agriculture - Common organisation of the markets - Products processed from fruit and vegetables - Production aid - Obligation for processors to pay producers a minimum price - Contributions by producers to certain related expenses - Whether permissible - Calculation on flat-rate basis - Not permissible

(Council Regulation No 426/86; Commission Regulation No 1558/91, Art. 6(3)(e))

Summary

$$The Community legislation on the system of production aid for certain products obtained from fruit and vegetables harvested in the Community does not prevent processors from rendering certain services to producers, such as providing containers for harvesting tomatoes, the costs of which may be charged to the producer. Moreover, the fact that the provisions of a trade management agreement for tomatoes intended for industrial processing made between associations of producers and of processors in a Member State provide, in relation to the costs chargeable to the producers, for a limit calculated in relation to the costs of transport is not, of itself, contrary to the Community legislation. However, the Member States must ensure strict compliance with the obligation of the processors to pay the minimum price, and particularly that the costs of the transport from the place of production to the place of processing are not charged to the producers.

Any direct or indirect circumvention of that obligation is a breach of Community law. Article 6(3)(e) of Regulation No 1558/91 laying down detailed rules for the application of the system of production aid for products processed from fruit and vegetables is intended to ensure that the minimum price is not circumvented by the indirect means of invisible practices.

Regardless of whether the provisions of such an agreement are sufficiently transparent, a widespread practice, by which the producers' contribution is calculated not according to the cost actually incurred for each producer, but by a flat-rate method charging producers the maximum percentage allowed by the trade agreement, does not satisfy the obligation for processors to pay a minimum price.

( see paras. 19-22 )
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Procedure - Intervention - Plea of inadmissibility not raised by the defendant - Not admissible

(EC Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 37, fourth para.; Rules of Procedure, Art. 93(4))

2. Actions for annulment - Pleas in law - Infringement of essential procedural requirements - Lack of authentication of an act

(EC Treaty, Art. 173 (now, after amendment, Art. 230 EC); Commission Rules of Procedure, Art. 16, first para.)

Summary

1. Under the fourth paragraph of Article 37 of the EC Statute of the Court of Justice, submissions made in an application to intervene are limited to supporting the submissions of one of the parties. Moreover, under Article 93(4) of the Rules of Procedure, an intervener must accept the case as he finds it at the time of his intervention.

It follows that an intervener has no standing to raise a plea of inadmissibility and the Court is thus not bound to adjudicate on such a plea where the defendant in whose support it was granted leave to intervene, has raised no plea of inadmissibility.

( see paras 27-29 )

2. It is the mere failure to authenticate an act which constitutes the infringement of an essential procedural requirement and it is not necessary also to establish that the act is vitiated by some other defect or that the lack of authentication resulted in harm to the person relying on it. Moreover, it is indispensable for authentication of the act to precede its notification because otherwise there would always be a risk that the notified text would not be identical to the text adopted by the Commission.

( see para. 47 )
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Transport - Maritime transport - Freedom to provide services - Restrictions - National rule requiring payment of a tariff by sea-going vessels longer than 41 metres only - Whether permissible - Conditions

(EC Treaty, Arts 56 and 59 (now, after amendment, Arts 46 EC and 49 EC); Council Regulation No 4055/86)

Summary

$$As regards situations falling within the scope of Regulation No 4055/86 applying the principle of freedom to provide services to maritime transport between Member States and between Member States and third countries, that regulation, in conjunction with Articles 56 and 59 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Articles 46 EC and 49 EC), does not preclude a vessel traffic services system provided for under national law which requires the payment of a tariff by sea-going vessels longer than 41 metres which participate in that system on a mandatory basis, while other vessels, such as inland waterway vessels, are exempt from that tariff, in so far as there is in fact a correlation between the amount of that tariff and the cost of the service from which those sea-going vessels benefit.

( see para. 44, operative part )
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Acts of the institutions - Directives - Implementation by the Member States - Need for full transposition - List contained in the annex to the Directive reproduced in its entirety in the preparatory work for the implementing law - Whether permissible

(Council Directive 93/13, Art. 3(3))

Summary

$$Each of the Member States to which a directive is addressed is obliged to adopt, within its national legal system, all the measures necessary to ensure that the directive is fully effective, in accordance with the objective it pursues. It is essential that the legal situation resulting from national implementing measures be sufficiently precise and clear and that individuals be made fully aware of their rights so that, where appropriate, they may rely on them before the national courts.

The latter condition is of particular importance where the directive in question is intended to confer rights on nationals of other Member States, as is the case for Directive 93/13 on unfair terms in consumer contracts. As regards the annex referred to in Article 3(3) of the Directive, the annex in question is, according to the terms of Article 3(3), to contain an indicative and non-exhaustive list of terms which may be regarded as unfair. It is not disputed that a term appearing in the list need not necessarily be considered unfair and, conversely, a term that does not appear in the list may none the less be regarded as unfair. In so far as it does not limit the discretion of the national authorities to determine the unfairness of a term, the list contained in the annex to the Directive does not seek to give consumers rights going beyond those that result from Articles 3 to 7 of the Directive. It in no way alters the result sought by the Directive which, as such, is binding on Member States.

It follows that the full effect of the Directive can be ensured in a sufficiently precise and clear legal framework without the list contained in the annex to the Directive forming an integral part of the provisions implementing the Directive. Inasmuch as the list contained in the annex to the Directive is of indicative and illustrative value, it constitutes a source of information both for the national authorities responsible for applying the implementing measures and for individuals affected by those measures. Member States must therefore, in order to achieve the result sought by the Directive, choose a form and method of implementation that offer a sufficient guarantee that the public can obtain knowledge of it.

( see paras 15, 18, 20-22 )
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Free movement of goods – Quantitative restrictions – Measures having equivalent effect – Administrative practice classifying as medicinal products certain vitamin preparations containing three times more than the recommended daily amount – Justification – Protection of public health – Absence – Requirement for detailed assessment on a case-by-case basis

(EC Treaty, Arts 30 and 36 (now, after amendment, Arts 28 EC and 30 EC; Council Directive 65/65, Art. 1)

Summary

A Member State has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 30 of the Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 28 EC) when it automatically classifies as medicinal products vitamin preparations lawfully manufactured or marketed as food supplements in other Member States where they contain three times more vitamins, other than vitamins A and D, than the daily amount recommended by the national food association.

Since such a classification, which is based solely on the recommended daily amount, does not fully satisfy the requirement for a classification on the basis of the pharmacological properties of each vitamin preparation and, consequently, it does not necessarily follow that all preparations concerned come within the definition of a ‘function’ medicinal product for the purposes of Directive 65/65 relating to proprietary medicinal products, that practice creates a barrier to trade, in so far as vitamin preparations lawfully marketed or produced in other Member States as food supplements cannot be marketed in the Member State in question until they have been subject to the marketing authorisation procedure for medicinal products.

That practice cannot be justified for reasons of protection of the health and life of humans referred to in Article 36 of the Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 30 EC), since it does not make a distinction by reference to the different vitamins added or, in particular, to the level of risk to public health which their addition could entail and, consequently, the automatic nature of that practice does not make it possible to identify and assess a real risk to public health, which requires a detailed assessment on a case-by-case basis of the effects which the addition of the vitamins in question could entail.

(see paras 62, 65, 78-79, 83, operative part)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Acts of the institutions — Statement of reasons — Obligation — Scope — ECSC Decision — (Art. 15 CS)

2. Procedure — Grounds of judgments — Scope

3. ECSC — Steel aid — Commission Decision — Legality to be assessed in the light of the information available when the decision was adopted — Member State granting the aid and the recipient thereof to be diligent as regards the communication of all relevant information — (General Decision No 3855/91, Art. 6(4))

4. Appeal — Grounds — Review by the Court of the appraisal of the evidence — Not possible except where the sense has been distorted

Summary

1. The statement of reasons required by Article 15 CS must be appropriate to the act at issue and must disclose in a clear and unequivocal fashion the reasoning followed by the institution which adopted the measure in question in such a way as to enable the persons concerned to ascertain the reasons for the measure and to enable the competent court to exercise its power of review. It is not necessary for the reasoning to go into all the relevant facts and points of law, since the question whether the statement of reasons meets the requirements of Article 15 CS must be assessed with regard not only to its wording but also to its context and to all the legal rules governing the matter in question.

see para. 72

2. The Court of First Instance is required to give reasons for its decisions but is not obliged to respond in detail to every single argument advanced by the applicant, particularly if the argument is not sufficiently clear and precise and was not adequately supported by evidence.

see para. 81

3. The legality of a decision concerning State aid must be assessed in the light of the information available to the Commission when the decision was adopted.

A Member State cannot rely on information which it failed to provide to the Commission during the administrative procedure in order to challenge the legality of such a decision.

Since the decision to initiate the procedure provided for by Article 6(4) of the Fifth Steel Aid Code contains an adequate preliminary analysis by the Commission setting out the reasons for the doubts it entertained regarding the compatibility of the aid in question with the common market, it is for the Member State concerned and, where appropriate, the recipient of the aid to put forward arguments to show that the aid is compatible with the common market.

see paras 86-88

4. Although it is for the Court of First Instance alone to assess the value which should be attached to the evidence produced, a plea alleging distortion of the clear sense of that evidence is admissible in an appeal.

see para. 121
Case C-29/99





Commission of the European Communities

v

Council of the European Union





«(International agreements – Convention on Nuclear Safety – Accession decision – Compatibility with the Euratom Treaty – External competence of the Community – Articles 30 to 39 of the Euratom Treaty)»

Opinion of Advocate General Jacobs delivered on 13 December 2001 I - 0000

Judgment of the Court, 10 December 2002 I - 0000

Summary of the Judgment

1.. Actions for annulment – Subject-matter – Partial annulment – Condition – Whether contested provisions can be severed – Declaration attached to the Council decision approving the accession of the European Atomic Energy Community to the Nuclear Safety Convention

(Euratom Treaty, Art. 146)

2.. Actions for annulment – Actionable measures – Council decision approving the accession of the European Atomic Energy Community to an international agreement – Absence in the Euratom Treaty of a procedure for seeking a preliminary opinion from the Court – Not relevant

(Euratom Treaty, Art. 146)

3.. International agreements – Council Decision approving the accession of the European Atomic Energy Community to the Nuclear Safety Convention – Obligation for the Council to communicate a complete declaration of its competences

(Euratom Treaty, Art. 101(2))

4.. EAEC – Community competences in the area of nuclear safety – Definition on the basis of a distinction between protection of the health of the general public and the safety of sources of ionising radiation – Excluded

5.. EAEC – Health protection – Community competences in the fields covered by the Nuclear Safety Convention

(Euratom Treaty, Arts 30 to 32, 33, second para., and 37)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.
Keywords



Keywords

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

(Art. 226 EC)

2. Actions for failure to fulfil obligations - Prelitigation phase - Reasoned opinion - Period allowed to the Member State - Default subsequently remedied - Interest in pursuing the action - Possible liability of the Member State

(Art. 226 EC)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Social security for migrant workers - Unemployment - Legislation under which receipt of a higher rate of unemployment benefit is conditional on the unemployed person living together with the members of his family in the competent Member State - Not permissible

(Council Regulation No 1408/71, Arts 1(f)(i) and 68(2))

Summary

$$Article 68(2) of Regulation No 1408/71, as amended and updated by Regulation No 118/97, read in conjunction with Article 1(f)(i) thereof, precludes national rules under which receipt of a higher rate of unemployment benefit is conditional on the unemployed person living together with the members of his family in the territory of the competent Member State.

( see para. 23 and operative part )
Keywords



Keywords

1. Acts of the institutions - Directives - Implementation by the Member States - Inadequacy of mere administrative practices

(Art. 249 EC, third para.)

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

(Art. 226 EC)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Tax provisions - Harmonisation of laws - Turnover taxes - Common system of value added tax - Exemptions provided by the Sixth Directive - Banking transactions referred to in Article 13B(d)(5) - Transactions, including negotiation, in securities - Definition

(Council Directive 77/388, Art. 13B(d)(5))

Summary

$$On a proper construction of Article 13B(d)(5) of the Sixth Directive 77/388 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes transactions in securities means transactions liable to create, alter or extinguish parties' rights and obligations in respect of securities; it does not mean the supply of a mere physical, technical or administrative service which does not alter the legal or financial situation.

Negotiation in securities does not cover services, performed by a subcontractor to a party to a contract relating to a financial product, limited to providing information about the financial product and, as the case may be, receiving and processing applications for subscription to the relevant securities, without issuing them. It does, on the other hand, cover the separate service rendered to a party to such a contract by an intermediary consisting, amongst other things, in pointing out suitable opportunities for the conclusion of such a contract, making contact with another party or negotiating, in the name of and on behalf of a client, the detail of the payments to be made by either side.

( see paras 28, 33, 39-41 and operative part )
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Common Customs Tariff - Tariff headings - Ink-cartridge without integrated print head which can only be used in a particular type of printer - Classification under sub-heading No 3215 90 80 of the Combined Nomenclature

Summary

$$Annex I to Regulation No 2658/87 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff, as amended by Regulation No 1734/96, must be interpreted as meaning that an ink-cartridge without integrated print head, consisting of plastic casing, foam, a metal screen, seals, tape seal, labels, ink and packing material, is to be classified, pursuant to general rule 3(b) for the interpretation of the Combined Nomenclature, under sub-heading No 3215 90 80 of the Combined Nomenclature. The element which gives the cartridge its essential character is the ink which it contains.

The fact, moreover, that the product in question can only be used, as regards both the cartridge and the ink, in a particular type of printer does not mean that it can be described as a part or accessory of a printer within the meaning of heading 8473 of the Combined Nomenclature, in so far as the cartridge plays no particular role in the actual mechanical functioning of the printer and merely enables it to fulfil its usual function.

( see paras 27, 31-32, 35, operative part )
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Competition - Undertakings entrusted with the management of services of general economic interest - Treaty rules - Direct effect

(EC Treaty, Art. 90(2) (now Art. 86(2) EC))

2. Competition - Community rules - Undertaking - Definition - Undertakings entrusted by law with the management of a scheme providing insurance against accidents at work and occupational diseases - Exclusion - Conditions

(EC Treaty, Arts 85 and 86 (now Arts 81 EC and 82 EC))

Summary

1. The provisions of Article 90(2) of the Treaty (now Article 86(2) EC) may be relied on by individuals before national courts in order to obtain review of compliance with the conditions which they lay down.

( see para. 19 )

2. The concept of an undertaking, within the meaning of Articles 85 and 86 of the EC Treaty (now Articles 81 EC and 82 EC), does not cover a body which is entrusted by law with the management of a scheme providing compulsory insurance against accidents at work and occupational diseases, where the amount of benefits and the amount of contributions are subject to supervision by the State and the compulsory affiliation which characterises such an insurance scheme is essential for the financial balance of the scheme and for application of the principle of solidarity, which means that benefits paid to insured persons are not strictly proportionate to the contributions paid by them.

Such a body fulfils an exclusively social function. Accordingly its activity is not an economic activity for the purposes of competition law.

( see paras 44-46 and operative part )
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Tax provisions - Harmonisation of laws - Turnover taxes - Common system of value added tax - Power of Member States to maintain certain exemptions on a transitional basis - Services supplied by authors, artists and performers of works of art - Definition - First transfer of a work of art by the artist himself - Excluded - Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations

(Council Directive 77/388, Art. 2, and Annex F, paragraph 2)

Summary

$$A Member State which maintains in force legislation exempting from value added tax both the sale of a work of art by the artist, either directly or through an agent, and the importation of a work of art by the owner-artist fails to fulfil its obligations under Article 2 of the Sixth Directive 77/388 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes. It is clear from the strict wording of the exemption laid down in Annex F(2) to the Sixth Directive, which refers to services supplied by authors, artists, performers ... that that concept does not cover the supply of works of art, even where it is the first supply by the artist or his agent.

( see paras 35-36, 38, operative part )
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Agriculture - Uniform legislation - Maximum residue limits of veterinary medicinal products in foodstuffs of animal origin - Procedure for establishing limits - Regulation No 2377/90 - Possibility for the Commission to include references to the therapeutic indications permitted for clenbuterol

(Council Regulation No 2377/90, Annex III; Commission Regulation No 1312/96; Council Directive 96/22)

Summary

$$The references to the permitted therapeutic indications for clenbuterol which appear in Annex III to Regulation No 2377/90 laying down a Community procedure for the establishment of maximum residue limits of veterinary medicinal products in foodstuffs of animal origin, as amended by Regulation No 1312/96, must be regarded as merely declaratory, and not having, in themselves, the character of legislation.

In the first place, those references cannot be understood as having the object or effect of laying down a prohibition on the marketing and use of clenbuterol, subject to the therapeutic indications mentioned by them, which is independent of the prohibition laid down by Directive 96/22. Nor can those references be understood as having the object or effect of placing a limitation on the validity of the maximum residue limits (MRLs) established for clenbuterol in the context of Regulation No 2377/90. The Commission did not therefore need authorisation from Regulation No 2377/90 in order to be able to insert references to the permitted therapeutic indications for clenbuterol in Annex III to that regulation, as amended by Regulation No 1312/96, for the purposes of recalling the relevant provisions of Directive 96/22.

The Court of First Instance therefore erred in law by holding that the Commission could not lawfully base the limitation of the validity of the MRL established for clenbuterol on the provisions of Directive 96/22, when, first, the references to permitted therapeutic indications for clenbuterol did not have the object or effect of limiting the validity of the MRL established by Regulation No 1312/96, and, second, no provision prohibited the Commission from inserting in Annex III to Regulation No 2377/90, as amended by Regulation No 1312/96, a reminder of the effects of the provisions of Directive 96/22 in relation to the permitted therapeutic uses of clenbuterol.

( see paras 53-57 )