ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Acts of the institutions ° Directives ° Implementation by the Member States ° Clear and precise transposition required

(EC Treaty, Art. 189, third para.)

Summary

In order to ensure that directives are fully applied in fact as well as in law, Member States must provide a precise legal framework in the field in question, by adopting rules of law capable of creating a situation which is sufficiently precise, clear and transparent to allow individuals to know their rights and rely on them before the national courts.

Even supposing that the "General Conditions for Telecommunications Services" adopted and published by the public postal and telecommunications undertaking of a Member State have a content which complies with Directive 92/44 on the application of open network provision to leased lines, they cannot be regarded as ensuring an adequate transposition of that directive where it is apparent that that Member State has not adopted within the prescribed period the provisions needed to oblige that undertaking to comply with the requirements of the directive and to put individuals in a position to know the full extent of their rights under the directive and rely on them, if necessary, before the national courts.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Tax provisions ° Harmonization of laws ° Turnover tax ° Common system of value added tax ° Deduction of input tax ° Tax on services supplied for the purpose of an exempt transaction ° No right to deduct ° Exempt transaction intended for the carrying out of a taxable transaction ° No effect

(Council Directives 67/227, Art. 2 and 77/388, Art. 17)

Summary

Article 2 of the First Directive 67/227 and Article 17 of the Sixth Directive 77/388 on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes are to be interpreted as meaning that, except in the cases expressly provided for by those directives, where a taxable person supplies services to another taxable person who uses them for an exempt transaction, the latter person is not entitled to deduct the input value added tax paid, even if the ultimate purpose of the exempt transaction is the carrying out of a taxable transaction. The wording of those provisions shows that to give rise to the right to deduct, the goods or services in question must have a direct and immediate link with the taxable transactions, and that the ultimate aim pursued by the taxable person is irrelevant in this respect.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1. Agriculture ° Common organization of the markets ° Export refunds ° Conditions governing grant ° Proper export declaration ° Documents containing no date of acceptance by the customs authorities ° Excluded

(Commission Regulation No 3665/87, Art. 30)

2. Agriculture ° Common agricultural policy ° Financing by the EAGGF ° Principles ° Export refunds paid in a Member State despite non-compliance with an essential formality ° Disallowance of 2% of the expenditure concerned ° Not excessive and disproportionate

(Council Regulation No 729/70)

Summary

1. Documents that do not include a date of acceptance, that is to say the date on which the customs authority accepts the export declaration in which it is stated that a refund will be applied for, cannot constitute a proper export declaration for the purposes of Article 30 of Regulation No 3665/87 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of export refunds.

2. Regulation No 729/70 on the financing of the common agricultural policy requires the Member States to take the measures necessary not only to satisfy themselves that transactions financed by the EAGGF are actually carried out and are executed correctly, but also to facilitate the supervision which the Commission may consider it necessary to undertake. By failing to require traders to produce a document that is indispensable for the proper application of the rules concerning export refunds, in the absence of which it is not possible to exclude the risk of error or fraud to the detriment of the Community budget, a Member State is in breach of an essential, not merely subsidiary, formality. In view of the essential nature of the formalities which were not complied with, the fact that the Commission disallowed 2% of the expenditure involved cannot be regarded as excessive and disproportionate.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Agriculture ° Common organization of the markets ° Sugar ° Power to adjust the quotas of undertakings, conferred on the Member States by Article 25(2) of Regulation No 1785/81 ° Conditions of exercise ° Exercise after the time-limit of 1 March for the marketing year starting on 1 July ° Excluded ° Exercise at the same time as an adjustment of quotas following a transfer of undertakings or factories ° Whether permissible ° Conditions ° Scope ° Reduction of the A and B quotas by 10% each ° Basis of calculation ° A and B quotas allocated by the Member State to the undertaking under Article 24 of the regulation ° Restructuring plans permitting adjustments exceeding 10% in Italy ° Definition

(Council Regulations No 1785/81, Arts 24 and 25(2), and No 193/82, Art. 2)

Summary

Member States may not, for the marketing year starting on 1 July, exercise the power to adjust the quotas of undertakings, conferred on them by Article 25(2) of Regulation No 1785/81 on the common organization of the markets in the sugar sector, after the date of 1 March set by Regulation No 193/82 laying down general rules for transfers of quotas in the sugar sector, even if the Council regulation fixing the quotas and stating that power to be applicable has been adopted after 1 March, since no Community legislation expressly derogating from that time-limit has been enacted.

That power may be exercised at the same time as an adjustment of quotas pursuant to Article 2 of Regulation No 193/82 following a transfer of undertakings or factories, provided that the specific conditions governing the application of each of those provisions are complied with. It permits Member States to reduce the A quota and the B quota of an undertaking by 10% each.

That 10% margin of manoeuvre relates to the A and B quotas allocated to an undertaking, within the framework of the quota system in force, by a national decision taken by the Member State on the basis of Article 24 of that regulation, sharing out among the undertakings operating in its territory the basic A and B quantities allocated to it.

In providing that in Italy that margin of manoeuvre is not confined to the 10% limit where it is used to transfer quotas on the basis of "restructuring plans", the second subparagraph of Article 25(2) of Regulation No 1785/81 refers to plans concerning the sugar sector as a whole at national or regional level.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1. Approximation of laws ° Labelling and presentation of foodstuffs ° Directive 79/112 ° Obligation to list ingredients on the labelling of products ° Member States wishing to require specific additional statements obliged to comply with an information procedure ° Obligation confined to measures concerning specific products and particular ingredients and not directed at general provisions

(Council Directive 79/112, Art. 6(6))

2. Free movement of goods ° Quantitative restrictions ° Measures having equivalent effect ° Consumer protection ° Fair trading ° Requirement that the trade description of certain foodstuffs be accompanied by an additional statement indicating the use of an ingredient which does not comply with the traditional national recipe ° Not permissible

(EC Treaty, Art. 30; Council Directive 79/112, Art. 6(6))

Summary

1. It is clear from Article 6(6) of Directive 79/112 on the labelling and presentation of foodstuffs that the information procedure to be followed by Member States which, in the absence of Community provisions, intend to require, in addition to the obligatory list of ingredients on the labelling, a statement in the trade description of foodstuffs indicating the use of a particular ingredient or ingredients only applies where the national measures concern specific foodstuffs and particular ingredients and does not, therefore, apply to general provisions of national law, even though their application may result in requiring that additional statements appear in the trade description.

2. Member States may not plead public interest objectives such as consumer protection and fair trading in order to justify an obstacle to the free movement of goods, prohibited under Article 30 of the Treaty, in the form of a requirement that certain foodstuffs containing an ingredient which is not in conformity with the traditional national recipe must, in order to be marketed on their territory, carry a trade description with an additional statement indicating that the ingredient in question has been used, even if such use is already clear from the list of ingredients referred to in Article 6 of Council Directive 79/112 on the labelling and presentation of foodstuffs.

A requirement of that nature is not necessary in order to attain those objectives. In the first place, consumers whose purchasing decisions depend on the composition of the products in question will first read the list of ingredients, the display of which is obligatory, so that the risk that they may nevertheless be misled remains minimal and cannot justify the obstacle in point. Secondly, it does not follow that, because consumers do not sufficiently distinguish between the various methods of manufacture, the competitive advantage which certain producers may derive from the use of less expensive products cannot be regarded as permissible, since, for consumers who are heedful of the composition of a product, sufficient information is available by way of the list of ingredients and, in any case, it is open to the other producers to draw the attention of consumers to the fact that they use traditional ingredients.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Common Customs Tariff ° Tariff headings ° Beverage of the "sangria" type consisting of more than 50% wine of fresh grapes, fruit extracts, water and sugar ° Classification under heading 2205 of the Combined Nomenclature

Summary

Heading 2205 (vermouth and other wine of fresh grapes flavoured with plants or aromatic substances) of the Combined Nomenclature for the Common Customs Tariff, in the version laid down by Regulation No 2658/87 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff and by Regulation No 3174/88 amending Annex I thereof, is to be interpreted as covering a beverage described as "sangria" consisting of more than 50% wine of fresh grapes together with water, sugar and fruit extracts. When added in reasonable quantities, water and sugar do not change the essential character of the beverage, conferred by aromatized wine.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1. Preliminary rulings ° Reference to the Court ° Need for a preliminary ruling ° Assessment by the national court

(EC Treaty, Art. 177)

2. Freedom of movement for persons ° Freedom of establishment ° Treaty provisions ° Not applicable to situations purely internal to a Member State

(EC Treaty, Arts 3(c), 52 and 53)

3. Competition ° Community rules ° Obligations of the Member States ° Free movement of goods ° Obligation on traders wishing to market their products in an island region of the national territory to ensure supplies to a certain number of islands ° Whether permissible

(EC Treaty, Arts 3(f), 5, second para., 30 and 85)

4. Approximation of laws ° Article 102(1) of the Treaty ° Direct effect ° None

(EC Treaty, Art. 102(1))

Summary

1. It is for the national courts alone, before which the proceedings are pending and which must assume responsibility for the judgment to be given, to determine, having regard to the particular features of each case, both the need for a preliminary ruling to enable them to give judgment and the relevance of the questions which they refer to the Court.

2. Since the Treaty provisions on free movement of persons cannot apply to activities which are confined in all respects to a single Member State, Articles 3(c), 52 and 53 of the Treaty are not applicable where a company which has its head office in a Member State and pursues its activities there is required to comply with rules whereby the regional authorities of a Member State responsible for governing an archipelago forming part of the territory of that State require all petroleum product wholesalers wishing to extend their activities to that part of the national territory to supply a certain number of islands in the archipelago, having regard to the problems of supplying island regions.

3. Article 85, read in conjunction with the second paragraph of Article 5, and Article 30 of the Treaty do not preclude rules whereby the regional authorities of a Member State responsible for governing an archipelago forming part of the territory of that State require all petroleum product wholesalers wishing to extend their activities to that part of the national territory to supply a certain number of islands in the archipelago, having regard to the problems of supplying island regions.

Such rules do not appear liable to require or favour anti-competitive conduct or to reinforce the effects of an existing agreement, decision or concerted practice, and their effects on the free movement of goods between Member States are too uncertain and indirect for the obligation they lay down to be regarded as being capable of hindering trade between Member States.

4. Article 102(1) of the EC Treaty does not create individual rights which the national courts must protect.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Privileges and immunities of the European Communities — Fiscal immunity of the Communities — Article 3 of the Protocol — Scope — Additional motor insurance premiums contributing to the financing of public interest institutions levied regardless of membership — Included — Refund of indirect taxes or sales taxes on goods — Application to dues levied when services are provided — Contributions constituting payment for public utility services excluded from the exemption — Exclusion not applicable to the additional premiums in question — (Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Communities, Art. 3)

Summary

Article 3 of the Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the Communities, which provides for the Communities to be exempt from all direct taxes and for the remission or refund by the Member States of indirect taxes or sales taxes included in the price of substantial purchases made by the Communities for their official use, must be interpreted as covering compulsory charges, such as additional motor insurance premiums, intended to contribute to the financing of public interest institutions, in so far as those additional premiums are payable by all those who take out motor insurance, including those who are not covered in any respect by the recipient institutions, and are thus payable regardless of whether the person concerned is subject to or a member of, those bodies. The immunity granted to the Communities by Article 28 of the Merger Treaty, to which the Protocol is annexed, is defined in very broad terms and relates to all types of taxation, whether direct or indirect; it therefore extends to contributions or taxes of any type which constitute internal taxation under Community law, including the charges in question.

The second paragraph of that article must be interpreted as meaning that the remission or refund for which it provides applies to all types of purchase, including obtaining a supply of services, which are necessary for the accomplishment of the Communities ' task, and the amount of which exceeds the threshold laid down by the legislation in question.

The third paragraph of that article, which provides that no exemption is to be granted in respect of taxes and dues which amount merely to charges for public utility services, must be interpreted as not applicable to the abovementioned charges, inasmuch as they do not constitute consideration for a specific service.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Tax provisions ° Harmonization of laws ° Turnover taxes ° Common system of value added tax ° Deduction of input tax ° Goods and services used both for transactions in respect of which VAT is deductible and transactions in respect of which it is not deductible ° Deductible proportion ° Calculation ° Receipt by a company managing immovable property of interest on investments of sums paid by owners and lessees ° Included

(Council Directive 77/388, Art. 19(2))

Summary

By virtue of Article 19(1) of the Sixth Directive 77/388 on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes, an undertaking which uses goods and services in order to carry out both transactions in respect of which VAT is deductible and transactions in respect of which it is not deductible may deduct, from the VAT which it is liable to pay, a proportion of the amount of VAT which it has paid corresponding to a fraction having, as denominator, the total amount of turnover attributable to transactions in respect of which VAT is deductible and to transactions in respect of which it is not deductible, disregarding, pursuant to Article 19(2), the amount of turnover relating to transactions that are exempt by virtue of Article 13B(d) when those transactions are incidental.

Article 19(2) must be interpreted as meaning that the interest realized by a company managing immovable property on treasury placements made for its own account of funds paid by the owners or lessees is to be included in that denominator. Although that interest is a return for services subject to VAT that are exempt under Article 13B(d), the placements in question cannot be characterized as incidental transactions, since the receipt of interest from them constitutes the direct, permanent and necessary extension of the taxable activity of property management companies.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Social policy ° Approximation of laws ° Transfers of undertakings ° Safeguarding of employees' rights ° Directive 77/187 ° Automatic transfer of all contracts of employment and employment relationships to the transferee by the mere fact of the transfer of the undertaking ° Contrary intention of the transferor or transferee or refusal by the latter to fulfil his obligations ° No effect ° Date of coming into effect ° Date of the transfer

(Council Directive 77/187, Art. 3(1))

Summary

Article 3(1) of Directive 77/187 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the safeguarding of employees' rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of businesses is to be interpreted as meaning that the contracts of employment and employment relationships existing on the date of the transfer of an undertaking between the transferor and the workers employed in the undertaking transferred are automatically transferred from the transferor to the transferee by the mere fact of the transfer of the undertaking, despite the contrary intention of the transferor or transferee and despite the latter' s refusal to fulfil his obligations. In addition, the transfer of the contracts of employment and employment relationships necessarily takes place on the date of the transfer of the undertaking and cannot be postponed to another date at the will of the transferor or transferee. That all follows from the mandatory nature of the protection afforded to workers by the directive.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Procedure - Action brought before the Court under an arbitration clause - Jurisdiction to hear and determine a counterclaim - Conditions

(ECSC Treaty, Art. 42; EC Treaty, Art. 181; EAEC Treaty, Art. 153)

Summary

The jurisdiction of the Court, where it is based on an arbitration clause, derogates from the ordinary rules of law and must therefore be construed narrowly, so that the Court may hear and determine only claims arising from the contract containing the arbitration clause which was concluded with the Community, or claims that are directly connected with the obligations arising from that contract.

That requirement is met by a counterclaim seeking repayment of advances where the contract provides that, if a satisfactory demonstration of the software has not taken place after completion of the work, the Commission may request full or partial repayment of the advances together with interest on those amounts.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 Acts of the institutions - Statement of reasons - Obligation - Scope - Regulations

(EC Treaty, Art. 190)

2 Actions for annulment - Pleas in law - Allegation by a Member State of breach of traders' legitimate expectations - Admissibility

3 Common commercial policy - Regulated by the Community institutions - Discretion - No legitimate expectation on the part of traders that an existing situation would be maintained

(EC Treaty, Art. 113; Council Regulation No 519/94)

Summary

4 The scope of the obligation to provide reasons depends on the nature of the measure in question, and in the case of measures of general application the statement of reasons may be confined to indicating the general situation which led to its adoption, on the one hand, and the general objectives which it is intended to achieve, on the other. If the contested measure clearly discloses the essential objective pursued by the institution, it would be excessive to require a specific statement of reasons for the technical choices made.

In particular, in the light of the margin of discretion enjoyed by the Community institutions in their choice of the means needed to achieve the common commercial policy, the Council, having explained the objectives pursued in altering the import quotas fixed by an earlier regulation, is not required to justify the technical choices made, in particular the size of the increase in that quota.

5 There is nothing to prevent a Member State from claiming in an action for annulment that an act of the institutions frustrates the legitimate expectations of particular individuals.

6 Since the Community institutions enjoy a margin of discretion in the choice of the means needed to achieve the common commercial policy, traders cannot claim to have a legitimate expectation that an existing situation which is capable of being altered by decisions taken by those institutions within the limits of their discretionary power will be maintained.
Case C-275/94





Roger Van der Linden

v

Berufsgenossenschaft der Feinmechanik und Elektrotechnik





(Reference for a preliminary rulingfrom the Hof van Cassatie, Belgium)

«(Brussels Convention – Interpretation of Article 47(1) – Documents to be produced by a party applying for enforcement – Obligation to produce proof of service of the judgment delivered – Possibility of producing proof of service after the application has been made)»

Opinion of Advocate General Fennelly delivered on 30 January 1996

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber), 14 March 1996

Summary of the Judgment
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Sixth Chamber)

28 March 1996

((Social security for migrant workers – Family benefits – Article 74 of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71))

In Case C-243/94,

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 Mr Moreno, represented by Angel González Maeztu; the German Government, represented by Ernst Röder; the Spanish Government, represented by Gloria Calvo Díaz; the United Kingdom, represented by Philippa Watson, Barrister, and the Commission, represented by Maria Patakia and Horstpeter Kreppel, at the hearing on 5 October 1995,

after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 7 December 1995,