ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1.Common commercial policy - Export restrictions - Arrangement between the Community and the United States of America concerning trade in steel pipes and tubes - Export licence arrangements - New producers - Concept - Right to be awarded an adequate share of the available export licences

( Council Regulation No 60/85, Art . 5(2 ) )

2.Common commercial policy - Export restrictions - Arrangement between the Community and the United States of America concerning trade in steel pipes and tubes - Export licence arrangements - Grant of licences - Special treatment accorded by a Member State to an undertaking due to its special situation - Permissibility

( Council Regulation No 60/85 )

Summary

1.Article 5 of Regulation No 60/85 on the restriction of exports of steel pipes and tubes to the United States of America must be interpreted as meaning that the expression "new producers of pipes and tubes" includes undertakings which have previously produced steel pipes and tubes but which, while maintaining their legal form and company name, undergo a change in economic terms which results in the construction of new facilities with a high production capacity, in particular when they are used to manufacture a new product which has not been previously manufactured by the undertaking .

An undertaking which is recognized as a "new producer" within the meaning of Article 5(2 ) of Regulation No 60/85 must be allowed an adequate share of the available export licences, having regard to the criteria contained in that provision . In particular, the authorities of the Member States given the task of determining the importance of each of the various criteria are required to take account of the production capacity of the new producer and its export potential and to afford it genuine access to the American pipes and tubes market .

2.Since the special situation of an undertaking established in a Member State was taken into account, owing to the fact that it supplied semi-finished products to its American subsidiary, both during the negotiations between the Community and the United States of America which preceded the conclusion of the arrangement concerning trade in steel pipes and tubes between the Community and that non-member country, in order to fix the Community export quota, and when the authorized export quota was shared out among the Member States, in order to fix the subquota of the Member State in which the undertaking is located, it must be concluded that, even though Regulation No 60/85 makes no reference to the special situation of the undertaking in question, it authorized the national authorities, but did not require them, to allocate to the undertaking in question a special quantity of pipes and tubes to be deducted from the national export quota, having regard to the criteria for allocation established in that regulation .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . Preliminary rulings - Jurisdiction of the Court - Measures adopted by the institutions - Recommendations

( EEC Treaty, Art . 177 )

2.Measures adopted by the institutions - Legal nature - To be assessed on the basis of the content of the measure - Recommendation characterized by the absence of any intention to produce binding effects

( EEC Treaty, Art . 189 )

3.Measures adopted by the institutions - Recommendations - Direct effect - None - Consideration by the national court - Obligation - Scope

( EEC Treaty, Art . 189, fifth paragraph )

Summary

1.Unlike Article 173 of the EEC Treaty, which excludes review by the Court of acts in the nature of recommendations, Article 177 confers on the Court jurisdiction to give a preliminary ruling on the validity and interpretation of all acts of the institutions of the Community without exception . It therefore has jurisdiction to rule on the interpretation of recommendations adopted on the basis of the Treaty .

2 . Since the choice of form cannot alter the nature of a measure, the court required to interpret a measure described as a recommendation in order to determine its scope must ascertain whether the measure is not in fact, in view of its content, intended to produce binding effects .

3.Recommendations which, according to the fifth paragraph of Article 189 of the Treaty, are not binding are generally adopted by the institutions of the Community when they do not have the power under the Treaty to adopt binding measures or when they consider that it is not appropriate to adopt more mandatory rules . Since they are measures which, even as regards the persons to whom they are addressed, are not intended to produce binding effects, they cannot create rights upon which individuals may rely before a national court .

However, since recommendations cannot be regarded as having no legal effect at all, the national courts are bound to take them into consideration in order to decide disputes submitted to them, in particular where they cast light on the interpretation of national measures adopted in order to implement them or where they are designed to supplement binding Community provisions .
Keywords

Operative part



Keywords

++++

1.Member States - Obligations - Implementation of directives - Failure to fulfil obligations - Justification - Unwarrantable

( EEC Treaty, Art . 169 )

2.Action for failure to fulfil obligations - Right of action of the Commission - Discretionary exercise

( EEC Treaty, Art . 169, second paragraph )

Operative part

( 1 ) Declares that, by failing to adopt within the prescribed period the measures necessary to implement Council Directive 84/450/EEC of 10 September 1984 relating to the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning misleading advertising, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under the EEC Treaty;

( 2 ) Orders the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . Free movement of goods - Quantitative restrictions - Measures having equivalent effect - Concept - Restrictions on cross-frontier advertising

( EEC Treaty, Arts 30, 31 and 36 )

2 . Free movement of goods - Quantitative restrictions - Measures having equivalent effect - Prohibition against referring, in advertisements for a special purchase offer, to the duration of the offer or the price previously charged - Application to advertising lawfully distributed in another Member State - Not permissible - Justification - Consumer protection - Not justifiable

( EEC Treaty, Arts 30 and 36 )

Summary

1 . Legislation which restricts or prohibits certain forms of advertising and certain means of sales promotion may, although it does not directly affect trade, be such as to restrict the volume of trade because it affects marketing opportunities .

Free movement of goods concerns not only traders but also individuals . it requires, particularly in frontier areas, that consumers resident in one Member State may travel freely to the territory of another Member State to shop under the same conditions as the local population . That freedom for consumers is compromised if they are deprived of access to advertising available in the country where purchases are made . Consequently a prohibition against distributing such advertising must be examined in the light of Articles 30, 31 and 36 of the EEC Treaty .

2 . Under Articles 30 and 36 of the Treaty, advertising lawfully distributed in another Member State cannot be made subject to national legislation prohibiting the inclusion, in advertisements relating to a special purchase offer, of a statement showing the duration of the offer or the previous price .

Since Community law regards the provision of information to the consumer as one of the principal requirements with regard to consumer protection, Article 30 of the Treaty cannot be interpreted as meaning that national legislation which denies the consumer access to certain kinds of information may be justified by mandatory requirements concerning consumer protection .
Keywords

Operative part



Keywords

++++

1.Officials - Posting - Regrading of post - Reclassification of official - Absence of applicable provisions

2.Officials - Recruitment - Notice of vacant post - Subject-matter

( Staff Regulations, Arts 4 and 29 )

3.Officials - Action - Interest in bringing proceedings - None - Provisional recruitment arrangements applicable to Spanish and Portuguese nationals - Official not eligible to occupy the post on account of his nationality

( Staff Regulations, Art . 91; Council Regulation No 3517/85 )

Operative part

( 1)Dismisses the application;

( 2 ) Orders each party to bear its own costs .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . Action for annulment - Action against a measure based on the EEC Treaty - Submissions - Infringement of the EAEC or ECSC Treaties - Admissibility

( EEC Treaty, Art . 173, first paragraph )

2 . Measures adopted by institutions - Choice of legal basis - Criteria

3 . Measures adopted by institutions - Statement of the reasons on which they are based - Obligation - Scope

( EEC Treaty, Art . 190 )

4 . Common commercial policy - Scope - Importation of agricultural products - Determination of maximum permitted levels of radioactive contamination - Inclusion

( EEC Treaty, Art . 113; Council Regulation No 3955/87 )

Summary

1 . The need for a complete and consistent review of legality requires the first paragraph of Article 173 to be construed as not depriving the Court of jurisdiction to consider, in proceedings for the annulment of a measure based on a provision of the EEC Treaty, a submission concerning the infringement of a rule of the EAEC or ECSC Treaties .

2 . In the context of the organization of the powers of the Community, the choice of the legal basis for a measure, which may influence its content in so far as it determines the procedure to be followed for its adoption, must be based on objective factors which are amenable to judicial review .

3 . Although Article 190 of the Treaty compels a reference to the Commission' s proposal in measures which may be adopted only on a proposal from the Commission, it does not thereby impose the obligation to indicate whether or not the measure in question is in conformity with that proposal .

4 . By subjecting the release for free circulation of certain agricultural products originating in non-member countries to compliance with maximum permitted levels of radioactive contamination, Regulation No 3955/87 pursues the aim of ensuring that agricultural products and processed agricultural products intended for human consumption and likely to be contaminated are introduced into the Community only according to common arrangements which safeguard the health of consumers, maintain, without having unduly adverse effects on trade between the Community and non-member countries, the unified nature of the market and prevent deflections of trade . It follows that, according to its objective and its content, the regulation seeks to regulate trade between the Community and non-member countries; accordingly it comes within the common commercial policy within the meaning of Article 113 of the EEC Treaty .
Keywords

Operative part



Keywords

++++

1 . Member States - Obligations - Implementation of directives - Failure not contested

( EEC Treaty, Art . 169 )

2 . Environment - Conservation of wild birds - Directive 79/409 - Implementation by the Member States - Obligation to prohibit the means of hunting and methods of destruction banned by the directive - Derogations from the prohibitions laid down by the directive - Conditions for granting

( Council Directive 79/409, Arts 5, 8 and 9, Annex IV )

Operative part

( 1 ) Declares that the Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its obligations under the EEC Treaty by not adopting all the measures necessary to implement Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds;

( 2 ) Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . Measures adopted by the Community institutions - Regulations - Regulation laying down less stringent rules than earlier legislation - Effect on the scope of earlier legislation - None

2 . Member States - Obligations - Failure to comply with obligations -Justification - None permissible

( EEC Treaty, Art . 169 )

Summary

1 . The scope and binding nature of a regulation cannot be affected, during the period of its validity, by the adoption of a subsequent regulation which has the same objectives and which imposes less stringent requirements on Member States .

2 . A Member State may not plead internal circumstances, such as practical difficulties which appear at the stage when a Community measure is being put into effect, in order to justify its failure to comply with obligations and time-limits resulting from Community law .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . Action for annulment - Measures against which an action can be brought - Acts intended to have legal effects - Internal instructions intended to define the powers of the officials of an institution vis-à-vis third parties

( EEC Treaty, Art . 173 )

2 . Agriculture - Common agricultural policy - EAGGF financing - Conformity of expenditure with Community rules - Supervision - Powers vested primarily in the Member States - Additional action by the Commission - Limits

( Regulation No 729/70 of the Council, Arts 8(1 ) and 9 )

Summary

1 . An action for annulment is available in the case of any measures adopted by the institutions, whatever their nature or form, which are intended to have legal effects . That applies to internal instructions adopted by an institution in order to define the powers of its officials vis-à-vis third parties for the purpose of inspections designed to ensure compliance with Community rules .

2 . Pursuant to Article 8(1 ) of Council Regulation No 729/70 on the financing of the common agricultural policy, it is the responsibility of the Member States, in accordance with national provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action, to take the measures necessary inter alia to satisfy themselves that the transactions financed by the Fund are actually carried out and are executed correctly, the Commission exercising only a supplementary function .

Under the system of supervision provided for by Article 9 of that regulation, if the taking and analysis of samples prove necessary, those operations must be carried out not by the Commission but by the Member States, either on their own initiative by virtue of the supervisory duties attributed to them by Article 8(1 ) or at the request of the Commission pursuant to the third subparagraph of Article 9(2 ).

By adopting Internal instructions 88/C 264/03, conferring on its officials the power to take samples independently of the Member States and laying down detailed rules to be followed by those officials, the Commission did not confine itself to making the provisions in force more explicit; although it had no power to do so, it purported to add to those provisions . Accordingly, the said instructions must be annulled .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1. Social security for migrant workers - Legislation applicable - Community provision relating to the position of civil servants - Not applicable to a civil servant who has stopped work and settled in another Member State where he does not pursue an occupation - Consequences - Applicability of the residence requirements laid down for affiliation to the social security scheme of a Member State

(Council Regulation No 1408/71, Art. 13(2)(d) )

2. Social security for migrant workers - Affiliation to a social security scheme - Conferral of the status of a compulsorily insured person - Application of national legislation

Summary

1. Article 13(2)(d) of Regulation No 1408/71, which is designed to resolve conflicts of legislation which may arise where, over the same period, the place of residence and the place of employment are not situated in the same Member State, is not applicable to a person who has definitively stopped working for the administration of a Member State and has gone to reside with his spouse in another Member State in which he has no occupation and is not covered by a social security scheme in any other capacity.

In such a case, the residence requirements laid down by the legislation of a Member State for affiliation to a social security scheme may be applied, in the absence of any provision in that regulation whose application, whether directly or by analogy, would make it possible to set aside a residence requirement of that kind.

2. The question whether the fact that a person is in receipt of a benefit linked to the termination of his last employment confers on him the status of a compulsorily insured person, where he has definitively stopped work and gone to reside in another Member State in which he has no occupation and is not covered by a social security scheme in any other capacity, is governed by the conditions for affiliation to a social security scheme and, consequently, by the applicable national legislation.
Judgment of the Court of 11 May 1989. - Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Belgium. - Free movement of goods - Prohibition of the importation of meat-based products containing more than a given quantity of edible gelatine. - Case 52/88.



European Court reports 1989 Page 01137

Pub.RJ Page Pub somm



Summary

Parties

Operative part



Keywords

++++

Free movement of goods - Quantitative restrictions - Measures having equivalent effect - Prohibition on the marketing of foodstuffs containing more than a given quantity of a particular ingredient - Not permissible - Justification - Fairness of commercial transactions - Consumer protection - Conditions - Application of less restrictive measures

( EEC Treaty, Art . 30 )

Summary

A prohibition by a Member State on the marketing in its territory of certain foodstuffs containing more than a given quantity of a given ingredient and originating in another Member State where they were lawfully produced and marketed cannot be justified on the ground of mandatory requirements relating to the fairness of commercial transactions and consumer protection unless those objectives cannot be attained by means which restrict the free movement of goods less ( line of authority; see, most recently, judgment of 2 February 1989 in Case 274/87 Commission v Germany (( 1989 )) ECR 229 ).

Parties

In Case 52/88

Commission of the European Communities, represented by René Barents, a member of its Legal Department, acting as Agent, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the office of Georgios Kremlis, also a member of its Legal Department, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg,

applicant,

v

Kingdom of Belgium, represented by the Minister for External Relations, represented by J . Devadder, conseiller adjoint, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Belgian Embassy,

defendant,

APPLICATION for a declaration that, by not permitting the sale in its territory of prepared meat and meat preparations containing more than a given quantity of edible gelatine which are lawfully produced and marketed in other Member States, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 30 of the EEC Treaty,

THE COURT

composed of : O . Due, President, T . Koopmans, R . Joliet and F . Grévisse ( Presidents of Chambers ), Sir Gordon Slynn, C . N . Kakouris, J . C . Moitinho de Almeida, G . C . Rodríguez Iglesias and M . Diéz de Velasco, Judges,

( the grounds of the judgment are not reproduced )

hereby :

Operative part

( 1)Declares that, by not permitting the sale in its territory of prepared meat and meat preparations containing more than a given quantity of edible gelatine which originate in another Member State where they were lawfully produced and marketed, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 30 of the EEC Treaty;

( 2 ) Orders the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs .
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 22 June 1989. - Claude Brus v Commission of the European Communities. - Officials - Annulment of a decision of appointment. - Case 104/88.



European Court reports 1989 Page 01873

Pub.RJ Page Pub somm



Summary

Parties

Operative part



Keywords

++++

1 . Officials - Promotion - Statement of reasons - Obligation - None

( Staff Regulations of Officials, Art . 45 )

2 . Officials - Promotion - Discretion of the administration - Review by the Court - Limits

( Staff Regulations of Officials, Art . 45 )

Summary

1 . The appointing authority is under no obligation to give reasons for a promotion decision either as regards the person to whom it is addressed or as regards the candidates who were not promoted and for whom a statement of the reasons for such a decision, taken in the light not only of the ability and professional aptitude of those concerned but also of certain aspects of their personality, might moreover prove to be prejudicial ( see judgment of 19 March 1964 in Case 27/63 Raponi v Commission (( 1964 )) ECR 129 ).

2 . As the Court has consistently held, the appointing authority has a wide discretion as regards promotion and the Court must restrict its review to consideration of the question whether the appointing authority has used its power in a manifestly incorrect way ( see judgment of 16 December 1987 in Case 111/86 Delauche v Commission (( 1987 )) ECR 5345 ).

The Court may not, in any event, substitute its assessment of the merits and qualifications of the candidates for that of the appointing authority ( see judgment of 21 April 1983 in Case 282/81 Ragusa v Commission (( 1983 )) ECR 1245 ).

Parties

In Case 104/88

Claude Brus, an official of the Commission of the European Communities, residing in Brussels, represented by G . Vandersanden, of the Brussels Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of A . Schmitt, 62 avenue Guillaume,

applicant,

v

Commission of the European Communities, represented by S . van Raepenbusch, a member of its Legal Department, acting as Agent, assisted by C . Verbraeken, of the Brussels Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the office of Georgios Kremlis, a member of the Commission' s Legal Department, Centre Wagner, Kirchberg,

defendant,

APPLICATION for the annulment of a decision of appointment,

THE COURT ( Third Chamber ),

composed of : F . Grévisse, President of Chamber, J . C . Moitinho de Almeida and M . Zuleeg, Judges,

( the grounds of the judgment are not reproduced )

hereby :

Operative part

( 1 ) Dismisses the application;

( 2 ) Orders the parties to bear their own costs .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Acts of the institutions - Directives - Implementation by Member States - Necessity of ensuring full application of national implementing measures regardless of non-implementation by other Member States

( EEC Treaty, Arts 169, 170 and 189, third paragraph )

Summary

The national law of a Member State giving effect to a Community directive must have full force, even if the directive in question has not yet been transposed and implemented in the legislation of other Member States .

A Member State may not rely on the fact that other Member States have also failed to perform their obligations in order to justify its own failure to fulfil its obligations under the Treaty, since in the legal order established by the Treaty, the implementation of Community law by the Member States cannot be made subject to a condition of reciprocity, and Articles 169 and 170 of the Treaty provide the appropriate remedies in cases where Member States fail to fulfil their obligations under the Treaty .