ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 19 April 2007 – Commission v Spain

(Case C‑219/05)

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Directive 91/271/EEC – Pollution and nuisance – Treatment of urban waste water – Agglomeration of Sueca, its coastal districts and certain municipalities of La Ribera – Discharge in a sensitive area without treatment

1. Environment – Treatment of urban waste water – Directive 91/271 – Implementation by Member States (Art. 226 EC; Council Directive 91/271, Arts 3(1), second para., 4(4), and 5(2) (see paras 19-20, 23-28)

2. Actions for failure to fulfil obligations – Examination of 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. 22)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Infringement of Articles 3, 4 and 5(2) of Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning urban waste water treatment (OJ 1991 L 135, p. 40) – Urban waste water of Sueca, its coastal agglomerations and certain municipalities of La Ribera – Discharge in a sensitive area without adequate treatment.

Operative part

The Court:

Declares that, by failing to take the measures necessary to ensure that, by 31 December 1998, the urban waste water of the agglomeration of Sueca, its coastal districts (El Perelló, Les Palmeres, Mareny de Barrequetes, Playa del Rey and Boga de Mar) and also certain municipalities of the region of La Ribera (Benifaió, Sollano and Almussafes) is treated appropriately before being discharged in an area declared sensitive, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under the second paragraph of Article 3(1) and Article 5(2) of Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning urban waste water treatment, the latter provision being read together with Article 4(4) of that directive;
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Actions for failure to fulfil obligations

–

Examination of 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. 6

)

Subject of the case

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Failure to transpose within the prescribed period Directive 2002/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2002 on the supplementary supervision of credit institutions, insurance undertakings and investment firms in a financial conglomerate and amending Council Directives 73/239/EEC, 79/267/EEC, 92/49/EEC, 92/96/EEC, 93/6/EEC and 93/22/EEC, and Directives 98/78/EC and 2000/12/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ 2003 L 35, p. 1).

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed period, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2002/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2002 on the supplementary supervision of credit institutions, insurance undertakings and investment firms in a financial conglomerate and amending Council Directives 73/239/EEC, 79/267/EEC, 92/49/EEC, 92/96/EEC, 93/6/EEC and 93/22/EEC, and Directives 98/78/EC and 2000/12/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, the Kingdom of Sweden has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

2. Orders the Kingdom of Sweden to pay the costs.
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Actions for failure to fulfil obligations

–

Examination of 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. 8

)

Subject of the case

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Failure to have adopted, within the prescribed period, all the provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2003/51/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 June 2003 amending Council Directives 78/660/EEC, 83/349/EEC, 86/635/EEC and 91/674/EEC on the annual and consolidated accounts of certain types of companies, banks and other financial institutions and insurance undertakings (OJ 2003 L 178, p. 16).

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed period, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2003/51/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 June 2003 amending Council Directives 78/660/EEC, 83/349/EEC, 86/635/EEC and 91/674/EEC on the annual and consolidated accounts of certain types of companies, banks and other financial institutions and insurance undertakings, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

2. Orders the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to pay the costs.
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Member States – Obligations – Implementation of directives – Failure to fulfil obligations – Justification based on national considerations – Not permissible (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 12)

Subject of the case

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Failure to adopt, within the prescribed period, the measures necessary to comply with Commission Directive 2003/66/EC of 3 July 2003 amending Directive 94/2/EC implementing Council Directive 92/75/EEC with regard to energy labelling of household electric refrigerators, freezers and their combinations (OJ 2003 L 170, p. 10).

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed period, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Commission Directive 2003/66/EC of 3 July 2003 amending Directive 94/2/EC implementing Council Directive 92/75/EEC with regard to energy labelling of household electric refrigerators, freezers and their combinations, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

2. Orders the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to pay the costs.
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Actions for failure to fulfil obligations

–

Examination of 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. 7

)

Subject of the case

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Failure to adopt, within the period prescribed, as regards financial services other than private insurance, the provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2002 concerning the distance marketing of consumer financial services and amending Council Directive 90/619/EEC and Directives 97/7/EC and 98/27/EC (OJ 2002 L 271, p. 16).

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt, as regards financial services other than private insurance, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2002 concerning the distance marketing of consumer financial services and amending Council Directive 90/619/EEC and Directives 97/7/EC and 98/27/EC, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

2. Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Actions for failure to fulfil obligations

–

Examination of 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. 8

)

Subject of the case

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Failure to adopt within the prescribed period all measures necessary to comply with Directives 2002/96/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 January 2003 on waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) (OJ 2003 L 137, p. 24) and 2003/108/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 December 2003 amending Directive 2002/96/EC (OJ 2003 L 345, p. 106).

Operative part

Operative part:

1. By failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with:

– Directive 2002/96/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 January 2003 on waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE), and

– Directive 2003/108/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 December 2003 amending Directive 2002/96,

the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under those Directives.

2. The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is ordered to pay the costs.
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Actions for failure to fulfil obligations

–

Examination of 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. 8

)

Subject of the case

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Failure to adopt, within the period prescribed, all the provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2002/14/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2002 establishing a general framework for informing and consulting employees in the European Community – Joint declaration of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on employee representation (OJ 2002 L 80, p. 29).

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the period prescribed, all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2002/14/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2002 establishing a general framework for informing and consulting employees in the European Community, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

2. Orders the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to pay the costs.
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Actions for failure to fulfil obligations

–

Examination of 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. 10

)

Subject of the case

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations – Failure to adopt, within the period prescribed, all the provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2001/45/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2001, amending Council Directive 89/655/EEC concerning the minimum safety and health requirements for the use of work equipment by workers at work (second individual Directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC) (OJ 1989 L 195, p. 46).

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the period prescribed, all the necessary laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2001/45/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2001, amending Council Directive 89/655/EEC concerning the minimum safety and health requirements for the use of work equipment by workers at work (second individual Directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC) regarding Burgenland and the Land of Carinthia, and with regard to the Land of Lower Austria, by not, at the very least, informing the Commission of the European Communities of those provisions within that period, the Republic of Austria has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

2. Orders the Republic of Austria to pay the costs.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Common Customs Tariff – Tariff headings – Pieces of frozen boned meat from the forequarter of the bovine animal

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 2204/1999, must be interpreted as meaning that pieces of frozen boned meat from the forequarter of the bovine animal come under subheading 0202 30 50 of the Combined Nomenclature.

A uniform interpretation of the various language versions of the wording of subheading 0202 30 50, some of which expressly refer to the forequarter of the bovine animal whereas others expressly refer to the various parts of the forequarter, leads to the finding that the Combined Nomenclature does not expressly require the frozen boned forequarter of the bovine animal to be presented at customs in a single piece.

Furthermore, the fact that the meat from the forequarter of the bovine animal is produced at customs in pieces does not affect its essential characteristics as indicated in subheading 0202 30 50, since the product content is the same as that described in the Additional Note relating to that subheading, even if it is produced in pieces.

The pieces of meat in question do not have to satisfy any other conditions, and, in particular, do not have to come from the same animal, in order to be classified under the said subheading.

(see paras 20-23, 30, operative part 1-2)
Staff case summary



Staff case summary

Summary

Officials – Principles – Protection of legitimate expectations

(Conditions of employment of other servants, Arts 47 to 50)

The fact that the amendment of a temporary servant’s contract created an ambiguous situation, which could have given the impression that the administration had restricted its power under Articles 47 to 50 of the Conditions of employment of other servants to terminate the contract, does not give rise to a legitimate expectation on the part of that temporary servant as to the duration of his contract. An uncertain contractual situation cannot form the basis of precise assurances on the part of the administration, which are necessary to give rise to legitimate expectations.

Nor, in that respect, is it possible to rely on the principle to the effect that the weaker party to an employment contract can expect vague provisions of the contract to be interpreted in his favour. Factors linked to a temporary servant’s contractual situation in relation to his employer cannot make up for the absence of one of the preconditions for establishing the existence of a legitimate expectation.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Community law – Principles – Fundamental rights – Compliance by Member States when implementing Community rules

2. European Union – Common foreign and security policy – Specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaida network and the Taliban

(Council Regulation No 881/2002, Arts 2(3) and 9)

Summary

1. The requirements flowing from the protection of fundamental rights within the Community legal order are also binding on Member States when they implement Community rules, and consequently they are bound, as far as possible, to apply the rules in accordance with those requirements.

(see para. 78)

2. On a proper interpretation of Article 2(3) of Regulation No 881/2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaida network and the Taliban, and repealing Regulation No 467/2001 prohibiting the export of certain goods and services to Afghanistan, strengthening the flight ban and extending the freeze of funds and other financial resources in respect of the Taliban of Afghanistan, as amended by Regulation No 561/2003, in a situation where both a contract for the sale of immovable property and the agreement on transfer of ownership of that property have been concluded before the date on which the buyer is included in the list in Annex I to Regulation No 881/2002, and where the sale price has also been paid before that date, the said Article 2(3) prohibits the final registration, in performance of that contract, of the transfer of ownership in the Land Register subsequent to that date.

In the first place, the said Article 2(3) applies to any mode of making available an economic resource and therefore also to any act which flows from the execution of a contract imposing mutual obligations and which has been agreed in exchange for payment of pecuniary consideration.

In addition, Article 9 of Regulation No 881/2002 must be understood as meaning that the measures laid down in that regulation, including the freezing of economic resources, preclude also the completion of acts which implement contracts concluded before the entry into force of that regulation.

(see paras 56, 62, 80, operative part)
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Actions for failure to fulfil obligations

–

Examination of 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. 7

)

Subject of the case

Re:

Failure of Member State to fulfil obligations – Failure to take within the prescribed period the measures necessary to comply with Directive 2003/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 May 2003 providing for public participation in respect of the drawing up of certain plans and programmes relating to the environment and amending with regard to public participation and access to justice Council Directives 85/337/EEC and 96/61/EC (OJ 2003 L 156, p. 17).

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

1. Declares that by failing to take in the prescribed period all the legislative regulatory and administrative measures necessary to comply with Directive 2003/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 May 2003 providing for public participation in respect of the drawing up of certain plans and programmes relating to the environment and amending with regard to public participation and access to justice Council Directives 85/337/EEC and 96/61/EC, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

2. Orders the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to pay the costs.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Customs union – Customs debt arising where preferential tariff treatment obtained in a non-member country

(Council Regulation No 2913/92, Arts 115(1)(b) and 216)

2. European Communities’ own resources – Post-clearance recovery of import or export duties

(Council Regulation No 2913/92, Arts 216 and 220(2)(b))

Summary

1. Article 216 of Regulation No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code, as amended by Regulation No 2700/2000, applies to the inward processing operations referred to in Article 115(1)(b) of that regulation in which the compensating products have been exported outside the European Community prior to importation of import goods (the ‘prior exportation’ or ‘EX/IM’ system).

(see para. 26, operative part 1)

2. Where, at the time of discharge of an inward processing operation (suspension system) with equivalent compensation and prior exportation, the competent authorities have not contested, on the basis of Article 216 of Regulation No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code, as amended by Regulation No 2700/2000, the exemption from import duties of the goods of non-member country origin, they must waive subsequent entry in the accounts of those import duties, pursuant to Art 220(2)(b) of that regulation, if three cumulative conditions are fulfilled. First, it is necessary that those duties were not levied as a result of an error on the part of the competent authorities themselves, secondly, that that error was such that it could not reasonably have been detected by a person liable for payment acting in good faith and, finally, that that person complied with all the provisions laid down by the legislation in force as regards the customs declaration. It is for the national court to assess whether that is the case in the circumstances, on the basis of all the concrete aspects of the case before it, and in particular the evidence adduced for that purpose by the taxable person concerned.

(see para. 35, operative part 2)
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 6 December 2007 — Marcuccio v Commission

(Case C-59/06 P)

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 6 December 2007 — Marcuccio v Commission

(Case C-59/06 P)

‛Appeal — Officials — Employment in a non-Member State — Reassignment of post and post holder — Duty to respect the rights of the defence — Scope — Burden of proof’

Officials — Principles — Rights of the defence — Scope — Obligation to hear the person concerned before adopting a decision involving his reassignment against his wishes — Burden of proof (see paras 45-48, 55-58, 67, 71)

Re:

APPEAL against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber) of 24 November 2005 in Case T-36/02 Marcuccio v Commission by which that Court dismissed an action seeking annulment of the Commission decision reassigning the appellants post at the delegation of the Commission in Luanda (Angola) to the Commission's headquarters in Brussels and a claim for damages.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Sets aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance of 24 November 2005 in Case T-236/02 Marcuccio v Commission;

2. Refers the case back to the Court of First Instance of the European Communities;

3. Reserves the costs.

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 6 December 2007 — Marcuccio v Commission

(Case C-59/06 P)

‛Appeal — Officials — Employment in a non-Member State — Reassignment of post and post holder — Duty to respect the rights of the defence — Scope — Burden of proof’

Officials — Principles — Rights of the defence — Scope — Obligation to hear the person concerned before adopting a decision involving his reassignment against his wishes — Burden of proof (see paras 45-48, 55-58, 67, 71)

Re:

APPEAL against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber) of 24 November 2005 in Case T-36/02 Marcuccio v Commission by which that Court dismissed an action seeking annulment of the Commission decision reassigning the appellants post at the delegation of the Commission in Luanda (Angola) to the Commission's headquarters in Brussels and a claim for damages.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Sets aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance of 24 November 2005 in Case T-236/02 Marcuccio v Commission;

2. Refers the case back to the Court of First Instance of the European Communities;