ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . AGRICULTURE - COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKETS - WINE - PRIVATE-STORAGE AID IN RESPECT OF TABLE WINE - GRANT IN RESPECT OF QUALITY WINE PRODUCED IN SPECIFIED REGIONS - NOT PERMISSIBLE

( COUNCIL REGULATIONS NOS 816/70 AND 817/70 ; COMMISSION REGULATIONS NOS 1437/70 AND 2015/76 )

2.AGRICULTURE - COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKETS - WINE - PRIVATE-STORAGE AID IN RESPECT OF TABLE WINE - FINANCING BY THE EUROPEAN AGRICULTURAL GUIDANCE AND GUARANTEE FUND - CONDITIONS

( COMMISSION REGULATION NO 2206/77 AMENDING REGULATION NO 2015/76 )

Summary

1 . QUALITY WINES PRODUCED IN SPECIFIED REGIONS , WHATEVER THE TIME AT WHICH THAT APPELLATION WAS CONFERRED ON THEM UNDER THE RELEVANT NATIONAL LEGISLATION , ARE NOT ELIGIBLE FOR THE STORAGE AID PROVIDED FOR UNDER REGULATION NO 816/70 .

2.IN ORDER TO OBTAIN FINANCING FROM THE EUROPEAN AGRICULTURAL GUIDANCE AND GUARANTEE FUND FOR STORAGE AID PAID IN RESPECT OF TABLE WINE BEFORE REGULATION NO 2206/77 ENTERED INTO FORCE , THE GOVERNMENT OF THE MEMBER STATE CONCERNED HAD TO DEMONSTRATE NOT ONLY THAT THE WINE STORED WAS ACTUALLY TABLE WINE AT THE TIME WHEN THE STORAGE CONTRACTS WERE CONCLUDED , BUT ALSO THAT IT WAS NEVER RECOGNIZED AS QUALITY WINE PRODUCED IN A SPECIFIED REGION .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . QUESTIONS FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING - POWERS OF THE COURT - IDENTIFICATION OF THE SUBJECT-MATTER OF THE QUESTION

( EEC TREATY , ART . 177 )

2.COMMUNITY LAW - PRINCIPLES - EQUALITY OF TREATMENT - DISCRIMINATION ON GROUNDS OF NATIONALITY - MOTOR VEHICLE INSURANCE RATES - VEHICLES BEARING CUSTOMS REGISTRATION PLATES - REFUSAL OF NO-CLAIMS DISCOUNT - PERMISSIBILITY

( EEC TREATY , ARTS 7 , 48 , 59 AND 65 )

3.FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS - QUANTITATIVE RESTRICTIONS ON EXPORTS - MEASURES HAVING EQUIVALENT EFFECT - CONCEPT - MOTOR VEHICLE INSURANCE RATES - VEHICLES BEARING CUSTOMS REGISTRATION PLATES - REFERENCE TO PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCES OF USE - PERMISSIBILITY

( EEC TREATY , ART . 34 )

Summary

1 . ALTHOUGH IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT NATIONAL COURTS EXPLAIN THE REASONS WHY THEY CONSIDER THAT A REPLY TO THEIR QUESTIONS IS NECESSARY FOR THEIR DECISION IN THE MAIN PROCEEDINGS , AND DEFINE THE LEGAL CONTEXT OF THE REQUEST FOR INTERPRETATION , WHERE QUESTIONS ARE COUCHED IN IMPRECISE TERMS IT IS FOR THE COURT TO EXTRACT FROM ALL THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE NATIONAL COURT AND FROM THE DOCUMENTS CONCERNING THE MAIN PROCEEDINGS THE ELEMENTS OF COMMUNITY LAW THAT NEED TO BE INTERPRETED , HAVING REGARD TO THE SUBJECT-MATTER OF THE DISPUTE .

2.THE GENERAL PROHIBITION OF DISCRIMINATION LAID DOWN IN ARTICLE 7 AND THE IMPLEMENTING RULES IN ARTICLES 48 , 59 AND 65 ARE INTENDED TO ELIMINATE ALL MEASURES WHICH , IN THE FIELDS OF FREE MOVEMENT OF WORKERS AND FREEDOM TO PROVIDE SERVICES , TREAT A NATIONAL OF ANOTHER MEMBER STATE MORE SEVERELY OR PLACE HIM IN A SITUATION LESS ADVANTAGEOUS , FROM A LEGAL OR FACTUAL POINT OF VIEW , THAN THAT OF ONE OF THE MEMBER STATE ' S OWN NATIONALS IN THE SAME CIRCUMSTANCES .

THEY DO NOT , HOWEVER , PRECLUDE THE APPLICATION IN MOTOR-VEHICLE INSURANCE CONTRACTS OF TARIFF CONDITIONS BASED ON OBJECTIVE ACTUARIAL FACTORS UNDER WHICH NO-CLAIMS BONUSES ARE NOT GRANTED IN RESPECT OF VEHICLES REGISTERED UNDER CUSTOMS PLATES .

3.ARTICLE 34 OF THE TREATY APPLIES ONLY TO NATIONAL MEASURES WHICH HAVE AS THEIR SPECIFIC OBJECT OR EFFECT THE RESTRICTION OF PATTERNS OF EXPORTS AND THEREBY THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A DIFFERENCE IN TREATMENT BETWEEN THE DOMESTIC TRADE OF A MEMBER STATE AND ITS EXPORT TRADE , IN SUCH A WAY AS TO PROVIDE A SPECIAL ADVANTAGE FOR NATIONAL PRODUCTS OR FOR THE DOMESTIC MARKET OF THE STATE CONCERNED .

NATIONAL RULES DO NOT FALL WITHIN THAT CATEGORY IF THEY MERELY AUTHORIZE INSURANCE COMPANIES TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT IN THEIR TARIFF CONDITIONS PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH VEHICLES ARE USED WHICH INCREASE OR DIMINISH THE INSURANCE RISK , SUCH AS , FOR EXAMPLE , THE USE OF VEHICLES REGISTERED UNDER CUSTOMS PLATES , IN RESPECT OF WHICH ARTICLE 34 DOES NOT PROHIBIT THE REFUSAL OF NO-CLAIMS BONUSES .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . COMMUNITY LAW - PRINCIPLES - FORCE MAJEURE - CONCEPT

2 . EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES ' OWN RESOURCES - REMISSION OF IMPORT DUTIES - ARTICLE 13 OF REGULATION NO 1430/79 - SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES - CONCEPT

( COUNCIL REGULATION NO 1430/79 , ART . 13 )

Summary

1 . RECOGNITION OF A CASE OF FORCE MAJEURE PRESUPPOSES THAT THE EXTERNAL CAUSE RELIED UPON HAS IRRESISTIBLE AND INEVITABLE CONSEQUENCES TO THE POINT OF MAKING IT OBJECTIVELY IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE PERSONS CONCERNED TO FULFIL THEIR OBLIGATIONS .

2 . A CUSTOMS AGENT , BY THE VERY NATURE OF HIS FUNCTIONS , RENDERS HIMSELF LIABLE BOTH FOR THE PAYMENT OF IMPORT DUTY AND FOR THE VALIDITY OF THE DOCUMENTS WHICH HE PRESENTS TO THE CUSTOMS AUTHORITIES . BEING FURNISHED WITH CERTIFICATES OF ORIGIN WHICH ARE INVALID , EVEN THOUGH ISSUED BY THE CUSTOMS AUTHORITIES OF THE COUNTRIES NAMED IN THEM , IS ONE OF THE PROFESSIONAL RISKS WHICH HE RUNS AND CANNOT CONSTITUTE A SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCE WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 13 OF COUNCIL REGULATION NO 1430/79 ON THE REPAYMENT OR REMISSION OF IMPORT OR EXPORT DUTIES .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . APPROXIMATION OF LAWS - DISPOSAL OF WASTE OILS - DIRECTIVE NO 75/439 - RESTRICTION OF FREEDOM OF TRADE AND OF COMPETITION - WHETHER PERMISSIBLE - CONDITIONS

( COUNCIL DIRECTIVE NO 75/439 )

2 . APPROXIMATION OF LAWS - DISPOSAL OF WASTE OILS - DIRECTIVE NO 75/439 - NATIONAL LEGISLATION ON BURNING - COMPATIBILITY - CRITERIA

( COUNCIL DIRECTIVE NO 75/439 )

Summary

1 . THE MEASURES PRESCRIBED BY DIRECTIVE NO 75/439 ON THE DISPOSAL OF WASTE OILS DO NOT CREATE BARRIERS TO INTRA-COMMUNITY TRADE AND SUCH MEASURES , IN PARTICULAR THE REQUIREMENT THAT PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED IN ADVANCE , MAY HAVE A RESTRICTIVE EFFECT ON FREEDOM OF TRADE AND OF COMPETITION , THEY MUST NEVERTHELESS NEITHER BE DISCRIMINATORY NOR GO BEYOND THE INEVITABLE RESTRICTIONS WHICH ARE JUSTIFIED BY THE PURSUIT OF THE OBJECTIVE OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION , WHICH IS IN THE GENERAL INTEREST .

2.INASMUCH AS MEMBER STATES ARE OBLIGED TO PROHIBIT ANY FORM OF WASTE-OIL DISPOSAL WHICH MIGHT HARM THE ENVIRONMENT , NATIONAL LEGISLATION PROHIBITING THE BURNING OF WASTE OILS OTHERWISE THAN IN SPECIAL PLANTS AND BY APPROVED OPERATORS IS NOT INCOMPATIBLE WITH DIRECTIVE NO 75/439 .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . OFFICIALS - RECRUITMENT - PROMOTION - CLASSIFICATION IN STEP - TWO SETS OF RULES FOR CLASSIFICATION - RESPECTIVE PURPOSES

( STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS , ARTS 32 AND 46 )

2 . OFFICIALS - PARTICIPATION IN AN OPEN COMPETITION - APPOINTMENT TO A NEW POST IN A HIGHER CAREER BRACKET FOLLOWING COMPETITION - CLASSIFICATION IN STEP - RULES APPLICABLE - RULES GOVERNING APPOINTMENT

( STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS , ARTS 5 ( 3 ), 27 , 32 , 45 AND 46 )

Summary

1 . THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE PROVISIONS GOVERNING CLASSIFICATION IN STEP FOLLOWING RECRUITMENT AND PROMOTION ARE EXPLAINED BY THE DIFFERENT AIMS OF ARTICLES 32 AND 46 . WHILST ARTICLE 32 APPLIES TO AN EMPLOYEE WHO ENTERS THE SERVICE OF THE COMMUNITY AND WHOSE TRAINING AND PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE MAY WITHIN CERTAIN FAIRLY STRICT LIMITS BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION , ARTICLE 46 IS INTENDED TO ENSURE THAT IN THE NORMAL COURSE OF AN OFFICIAL ' S CAREER HIS SENIORITY PROGRESSES WITH THE GREATEST POSSIBLE CONTINUITY .

2 . THE CRITERIA FOR CLASSIFICATION LAID DOWN IN THE PROVISIONS OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS GOVERNING RECRUITMENT APPLY TO THE CLASSIFICATION OF AN OFFICIAL APPOINTED TO A POST IN A HIGHER CAREER BRACKET FOLLOWING HIS PARTICIPATION IN AN OPEN COMPETITION , IF IT IS CLEAR IN THE LIGHT OF THE PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCES THAT THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN HIS PREVIOUS DUTIES AND THOSE ATTACHING TO THE POST IN THE HIGHER CAREER BRACKET ARE SUCH THAT HE IS ENTITLED TO DRAW ATTENTION TO HIS PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE IN THE FIELD IN QUESTION , AND IF THE OPEN COMPETITION , ORGANIZED SHORTLY AFTER HIS ENTRY INTO THE SERVICE , PLACED HIM IN DIRECT COMPETITION WITH EXTERNAL CANDIDATES RATHER THAN WITH COLLEAGUES ELIGIBLE FOR PROMOTION .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . COMPETITION - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE - INITIATION ON THE APPLICATION OF A NATURAL OR LEGAL PERSON - DECISION OF THE COMMISSION SUSPENDING THE PROCEDURE - REVIEW BY THE COURT IN THE CONTEXT OF AN APPLICATION TO HAVE A MEASURE DECLARED VOID - ELEMENTS TO BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION - ADMISSIBLE ARGUMENTS

( EEC TREATY , ART . 173 ; COUNCIL REGULATION NO 17 , ART . 3 ( 2 ) ( B ); COMMISSION REGULATION NO 99/63 , ART . 6 )

2.COMPETITION - COMMUNITY RULES - APPLICATION BY THE COMMISSION - FREEDOM OF ACTION WITH REGARD TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF SIMILAR NATIONAL RULES BY A NATIONAL AUTHORITY

( EEC TREATY , ARTS 85 AND 86 )

Summary

1 . WHERE A NATURAL OR LEGAL PERSON HAS MADE AN APPLICATION UNDER ARTICLE 3 ( 2 ) ( B ) OF REGULATION NO 17 AND SUBSEQUENTLY CONTESTS THE COMMISSION ' S DECISION SUSPENDING THE PROCEDURE WITH RESPECT TO THAT APPLICATION BY BRINGING AN ACTION BEFORE THE COURT IN WHICH HE SEEKS TO HAVE THAT DECISION DECLARED VOID , THE REVIEW OF THE LEGALITY OF THAT DECISION WHICH THE COURT MUST CARRY OUT IN CONNECTION WITH THAT ACTION MUST BE EFFECTED INTER ALIA IN THE LIGHT OF THE ELEMENTS OF LAW AND FACT THAT WERE BROUGHT TO THE COMMISSION ' S NOTICE BY THE APPLICANT AND WHICH THE COMMISSION WAS UNDER A DUTY TO EXAMINE IN ORDER TO DECIDE WHETHER THE COMPETITION RULES OF THE TREATY WERE INFRINGED .

FOR THAT PURPOSE THE COURT MUST CONSIDER ITSELF TO BE SEISED OF ALL THE ELEMENTS OF FACT AND LAW WHICH , IN SO FAR AS THEY WERE CONTAINED IN THE APPLICATION TO THE COMMISSION OR IN THE COMMENTS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 6 OF REGULATION NO 99/63/EEC , WERE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT BY THE COMMISSION IN REACHING THE CONTESTED DECISION TO SUSPEND THE PROCEDURE .

IT FOLLOWS THAT IT IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR THE PURPOSES OF DETERMINING THEIR ADMISSIBILITY TO DRAW A DISTINCTION BETWEEN ARGUMENTS BASED ON INFORMATION CONTAINED SOLELY IN THE APPLICATION MADE TO THE COMMISSION AND ARGUMENTS RELATING TO INFORMATION EXPRESSLY MENTIONED IN THE COMMENTS SUBMITTED PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 6 OF REGULATION NO 99/63/EEC .

2.ANY SIMILARITY THERE MAY BE BETWEEN THE LEGISLATION OF A MEMBER STATE IN THE FIELD OF COMPETITION AND THE RULES LAID DOWN IN ARTICLES 85 AND 86 OF THE TREATY CERTAINLY CANNOT SERVE TO RESTRICT THE COMMISSION ' S FREEDOM OF ACTION IN APPLYING ARTICLES 85 AND 86 SO AS TO COMPEL IT TO ADOPT THE SAME ASSESSMENT AS THE AUTHORITIES RESPONSIBLE FOR IMPLEMENTING THE NATIONAL LEGISLATION .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . AGRICULTURE - COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKETS - INTERVENTION BY THE MEMBER STATES - INDIRECT TAXATION OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS - PERMISSIBILITY - CONDITIONS

2 . AGRICULTURE - COMMON AGRICULTURAL POLICY - FINANCING BY THE EUROPEAN AGRICULTURAL GUIDANCE AND GUARANTEE FUND - PRINCIPLES - AID GRANTED IN BREACH OF COMMUNITY RULES - FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH REQUIREMENT OF FORMAL EVIDENCE - CHARGE OF EXPENDITURE TO THE FUND - NOT PERMISSIBLE - EQUALITY OF TREATMENT OF TRADERS

( REGULATION NO 729/70 OF THE COUNCIL , ART . 8 , AND COUNCIL REGULATION NO 567/76 , ARTS 2 ( 3 ) AND ( 5 ) AND 6 ( 3 ) )

Summary

1 . AT THE PRESENT STAGE OF DEVELOPMENT OF COMMUNITY LAW , CHARACTERIZED BY ONLY PARTIAL HARMONIZATION IN THE AREA OF TAXATION , THE MEMBER STATES HAVE RETAINED EXTENSIVE POWERS IN THAT AREA , IN PARTICULAR THE POWER TO LEVY INDIRECT TAXES ON FOODSTUFFS . THE MEMBER STATES MUST NEVERTHELESS , IN EXERCISING THOSE POWERS , COMPLY WITH THE RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF THE TREATY . IN AGRICULTURAL MATTERS THE MEMBER STATES MUST , IN EXERCISING THEIR OWN FISCAL POWERS , COMPLY IN PARTICULAR WITH THE BASIC RULE THAT THEY MUST REFRAIN FROM ADOPTING ANY MEASURE CAPABLE OF INTERFERING WITH THE FUNCTIONING OF THE MACHINERY ESTABLISHED BY THE COMMON ORGANIZATIONS OF THE MARKET .

2 . WHERE THE COMMUNITY RULES ONLY AUTHORIZE PAYMENT OF AN AID ON CONDITION THAT CERTAIN FORMAL EVIDENCE IS SUPPLIED ON PAYMENT , AN AID PAID WITHOUT COMPLYING WITH THAT CONDITION IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH COMMUNITY LAW AND THE EXPENDITURE THEREBY INCURRED CANNOT THEREFORE BE CHARGED TO THE FUND ON THE CLEARANCE OF THE ACCOUNTS FOR THE YEAR IN QUESTION .

REGULATION NO 729/70 OF THE COUNCIL OF 21 APRIL 1970 ON THE FINANCING OF THE COMMON AGRICULTURAL POLICY PERMITS THE COMMISSION TO CHARGE TO THE FUND ONLY SUMS PAID IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES LAID DOWN IN THE VARIOUS SECTORS OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION WHILE LEAVING THE MEMBER STATES TO BEAR THE BURDEN OF ANY OTHER SUM . A STRICT INTERPRETATION OF THE CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH EXPENDITURE IS TO BE BORNE BY THE FUND IS NECESSARY BECAUSE THE MANAGEMENT OF THE COMMON AGRICULTURAL POLICY IN CONDITIONS OF EQUALITY BETWEEN TRADERS IN THE MEMBER STATES REQUIRES THAT THE NATIONAL AUTHORITIES OF A MEMBER STATE SHOULD NOT , BY THE EXPEDIENT OF A WIDE INTERPRETATION OF A GIVEN PROVISION , FAVOUR OR TREAT UNFAVOURABLY TRADERS OF THAT STATE IN COMPARISON WITH THOSE OF OTHER MEMBER STATES .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

OFFICIALS - RECRUITMENT - EQUAL TREATMENT

( STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS , ARTICLE 5 ( 3 ))

Summary

THERE IS A BREACH OF THE PRINCIPLE OF EQUAL TREATMENT LAID DOWN IN ARTICLE 5 ( 3 ) OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS WHEN TWO CATEGORIES OF PERSONS WHOSE FACTUAL AND LEGAL POSITIONS ARE ESSENTIALLY THE SAME ARE TREATED DIFFERENTLY AT THE TIME OF THEIR RECRUITMENT .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . TAX PROVISIONS - INTERNAL TAXATION - GRANT OF TAX RELIEF IN RESPECT OF DOMESTIC PRODUCTS - PERMISSIBILITY - CONDITIONS - EXTENSION TO PRODUCTS IMPORTED FROM OTHER MEMBER STATES

( EEC TREATY , ART . 95 )

2 . TAX PROVISIONS - INTERNAL TAXATION - DISCRIMINATORY TAXATION UNDER A SYSTEM OF AID - APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 95 OF THE EEC TREATY

( EEC TREATY , ARTS 92 AND 95 )

3 . TAX PROVISIONS - INTERNAL TAXATION - DISCRIMINATION - PROHIBITION - LIMITED EFFECT OF DISCRIMINATION - NOT RELEVANT

( EEC TREATY , ART . 95 )

Summary

1 . HAVING REGARD TO THE STATE OF DEVELOPMENT OF COMMUNITY LAW , THE GRANT OF CERTAIN TAX EXEMPTIONS OR TAX CONCESSIONS BY WAY OF TAX RELIEF OR IN THE FORM OF A REDUCTION OF RATES OF TAX ON THE BASIS OF OBJECTIVE CRITERIA MUST BE PERMITTED ON CONDITION THAT THE BENEFIT OF SUCH MEASURES IS EXTENDED WITHOUT DISCRIMINATION TO IMPORTED PRODUCTS WHICH SATISFY THE SAME CONDITIONS .

2 . DISCRIMINATORY FISCAL PRACTICES ARE NOT EXEMPT FROM THE APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 95 ON THE GROUND THAT THEY MAY BE CLASSIFIED AT THE SAME TIME AS A METHOD OF FINANCING STATE AID .

3 . THE PURPOSE OF THE FIRST PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 95 , WHICH IS TO ELIMINATE ALL FORMS OF DIRECT OR INDIRECT DISCRIMINATION , COULD NOT BE ACHIEVED IF THE ADVANTAGES GRANTED IN RESPECT OF DOMESTIC PRODUCTS COULD ESCAPE THE PROHIBITION LAID DOWN BY ARTICLE 95 BY REASON OF THEIR PURPORTEDLY LIMITED EFFECT . ACCORDINGLY , EVEN A TAX RELIEF THE DISCRIMINATORY EFFECT OF WHICH IS SLIGHT FALLS WITHIN THE PROHIBITION IN ARTICLE 95 .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

ACTION AGAINST A MEMBER STATE FOR FAILURE TO FULFIL ITS OBLIGATIONS - JUDGMENT OF THE COURT DECLARING THAT A MEMBER STATE HAS FAILED TO FULFIL ITS OBLIGATIONS - EFFECTS - OBLIGATIONS OF THE MEMBER STATE AT FAULT - COMPLIANCE WITH THE JUDGMENT IN FULL - SPECIFIC CIRCUMSTANCES

( EEC TREATY , ARTS 169 AND 171 )

Summary

A DECLARATION BY THE COURT , IN A JUDGMENT GIVEN IN PROCEEDINGS AGAINST A MEMBER STATE FOR FAILURE TO FULFIL ITS OBLIGATIONS , THAT ' BY RESTRICTING THE DESIGNATION ' ' VINEGAR ' ' TO WINE VINEGAR ' THE MEMBER STATE HAS FAILED TO FULFIL ITS OBLIGATIONS UNDER ARTICLE 30 ET SEQ . OF THE TREATY , OBLIGES THAT STATE TO ADOPT APPROPRIATE MEASURES TO ABOLISH IN THEIR ENTIRETY ANY RULES OR PRACTICES IN NATIONAL LAW RESTRICTING THE DESIGNATION IN QUESTION EXCLUSIVELY TO WINE VINEGAR .

A LEGISLATIVE AMENDMENT CANNOT BE REGARDED AS COMPLYING PRECISELY AND IN FULL WITH THE JUDGMENT IF , WHILST CREATING A NEW GENERIC DESIGNATION ( ' AGRO ' ), THE AMENDMENT CONTINUES TO RESTRICT THE TRADITIONAL DESIGNATION ( ' ACETO ' ) TO WINE VINEGAR , SO THAT OTHER CATEGORIES OF NATURAL VINEGARS MAY ONLY BE DESIGNATED BY TERMS WHICH ARE LESS WELL KNOWN TO , AND LESS APPRECIATED BY , NATIONAL CONSUMERS .
Keywords



Keywords

ECSC - PRODUCTION - STEEL PRODUCTION AND DELIVERY QUOTA SYSTEM - EXCEEDING OF A PRODUCTION QUOTA IN A GIVEN QUARTER - REFERENCE PRODUCTION INCORRECTLY DECLARED - REQUEST FOR RECTIFICATION OF THE QUOTA - BELATED RESPONSE BY THE COMMISSION - EXCESS PARTLY OFFSET IN THE FOLLOWING QUARTER - REDUCTION OF THE FINE

( ECSC TREATY , ART . 58 ; DECISIONS NO 2794/80 AND NO 1831/81 , ART . 12 )
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

TAX PROVISIONS - HARMONIZATION OF LAWS - TURNOVER TAXES - COMMON SYSTEM OF VALUE-ADDED TAX - BASIS OF THE CHARGE TO TAX - NATIONAL DEROGATING MEASURES - AMENDMENT OF A MEASURE IN FORCE - OBLIGATION TO NOTIFY THE COMMISSION - FAILURE TO NOTIFY - AMENDMENT MAY NOT BE RELIED UPON AS AGAINST INDIVIDUALS

( COUNCIL DIRECTIVE NO 77/388 , ART . 11 A 1 . ( A ) AND ART . 27 ( 1 ), ( 2 ) AND ( 5 ))

Summary

1 . WHERE NATIONAL LEGISLATION NOTIFIED UNDER ARTICLE 27 ( 5 ) OF THE SIXTH DIRECTIVE ON THE HARMONIZATION OF THE LAWS OF THE MEMBER STATES RELATING TO TURNOVER TAXES IS AMENDED IN SUCH A WAY AS TO OMIT THEREFROM THE ELEMENT WHICH LINKS IT TO THE DIRECTIVE , SUCH AN AMENDMENT , WHICH INTRODUCES A SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE IN THE PREVIOUS LEGISLATION , CONSTITUTES A ' SPECIAL MEASURE ' WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 27 ( 1 ) REQUIRING THE MEMBER STATE TO INFORM THE COMMISSION UNDER ARTICLE 27 ( 2 ).

2 . A MEMBER STATE WHICH HAS FAILED TO FULFIL ITS OBLIGATION UNDER ARTICLE 27 ( 2 ) OF THE SIXTH DIRECTIVE BY NOT INFORMING THE COMMISSION OF A SPECIAL MEASURE DEROGATING FROM THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 11 A 1 . ( A ) WHICH LAY DOWN THE BASIS FOR CHARGING VALUE ADDED TAX AND THUS REQUIRING THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE COUNCIL UNDER ARTICLE 27 ( 1 ) MAY NOT RELY ON THAT MEASURE AS AGAINST AN INDIVIDUAL SEEKING BEFORE THE NATIONAL COURTS THE APPLICATION OF PROVISIONS OF REVENUE LAW ADOPTED IN CONFORMITY WITH ARTICLE 11 A 1 . ( A ) OF THE DIRECTIVE .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

AGRICULTURE - COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKETS - WINE - COUPAGE OF RED AND ROSE TABLE WINES ORIGINATING IN MORE THAN ONE MEMBER STATE - MARKETING OF THE WINE , AFTER COUPAGE , UNDER THE DESCRIPTION ' ROSE TABLE WINE FROM VARIOUS COUNTRIES OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES ' - WHETHER PERMISSIBLE - CONDITIONS

( COUNCIL REGULATION NOS 337/79 , ARTS 43 AND 48 AND NO 355/79 , ARTS 2 AND 43 ; COMMISSION REGULATION NO 3282/73 , ART . 2 )

Summary

THE COMBINED PROVISIONS OF COUNCIL REGULATION NO 337/79 ON THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKET IN WINE , IN PARTICULAR ARTICLES 43 AND 48 THEREOF , OF COMMISSION REGULATION NO 3282/73 DEFINING THE TERMS ' COUPAGE ' AND ' THE TURNING INTO WINE ' , IN PARTICULAR ARTICLE 2 THEREOF , AND OF COUNCIL REGULATION NO 355/79 LAYING DOWN GENERAL RULES FOR THE DESCRIPTION AND PRESENTATION OF WINES AND GRAPE MUSTS , IN PARTICULAR ARTICLES 2 AND 43 THEREOF , AUTHORIZE THE COUPAGE OF A RED TABLE WINE WITH A ROSE TABLE WINE , WHERE THE TWO WINES CONCERNED ORIGINATE IN MORE THAN ONE MEMBER STATE , AND THE MARKETING OF THE RESULTANT MIXTURE WITHIN THE COMMUNITY UNDER THE DESCRIPTION ' ROSE TABLE WINE FROM VARIOUS COUNTRIES OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES ' IN SO FAR AS THE TERM ' ROSE ' IS NOT INCONSISTENT WITH AN OBJECTIVE CHARACTERISTIC OF THE WINE WHICH ENABLES IT TO BE DISTINGUISHED FROM RED WINE OR WHITE WINE SOLELY BY REASON OF ITS COLOUR .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . COMMUNITY LAW - INTERPRETATION - TEXTS IN SEVERAL LANGUAGES - DIVERGENCE BETWEEN THE VARIOUS LANGUAGE VERSIONS

2 . ORIGIN OF GOODS - DETERMINATION - FISH - JOINT FISHING OPERATION - VESSEL CARRYING OUT THE ESSENTIAL PART OF THE OPERATION OF CATCHING FISH

( COUNCIL REGULATION NO 802/68 , ART . 4 ( 2 ) ( F ))

Summary

1 . IN THE CASE OF DIVERGENCE BETWEEN THE LANGUAGE VERSIONS OF A COMMUNITY INSTRUMENT THE PROVISION IN QUESTION MUST BE INTERPRETED BY REFERENCE TO THE PURPOSE AND GENERAL SCHEME OF THE RULES OF WHICH IT FORMS A PART .

2 . FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 4 ( 2 ) ( F ) OF REGULATION NO 802/68 ON THE COMMON DEFINITION OF THE CONCEPT OF THE ORIGIN OF GOODS IN THE CASE OF A JOINT FISHING OPERATION CONDUCTED BY VESSELS FLYING DIFFERENT FLAGS OR REGISTERED IN DIFFERENT COUNTRIES , THE ORIGIN OF THE FISH MUST BE DETERMINED BY REFERENCE NOT TO THE FLAG FLOWN BY THE VESSEL WHICH MERELY RAISES THE NETS OUT OF THE WATER BUT TO THE FLAG FLOWN BY THE VESSEL WHICH CARRIES OUT THE ESSENTIAL PART OF THE OPERATION OF CATCHING FISH , THAT IS TO SAY , IN PARTICULAR , THE LOCATION OF THE FISH AND NETTING THEM SO THAT THEY CAN NO LONGER MOVE FREELY IN THE SEA .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . OFFICIALS - ACTIONS - ACTION BASED ON THE STAFF REGULATIONS - APPLICANT CLAIMING TO BE AN OFFICIAL OR OTHER SERVANT OF THE COMMUNITIES - ADMISSIBILITY

( STAFF REGULATIONS , ARTS 90 AND 91 )

2 . OFFICIALS - STAFF REGULATIONS - CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT OF OTHER SERVANTS - SCOPE - EXTENSION BY ANALOGY - EXCLUSION

( STAFF REGULATIONS ; CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT OF OTHER SERVANTS )

3 . OFFICIALS - CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT OF OTHER SERVANTS - SCOPE - FEE-PAID DOCTOR - CONTRACT EXCLUSIVELY GOVERNED BY NATIONAL LAW - ADMISSIBILITY

( CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT OF OTHER SERVANTS , ART . 1 )

Summary

1 . ARTICLES 90 AND 91 OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS , ON THE RIGHT OF APPEAL , MAY BE RELIED ON BEFORE THE COURT , NOT ONLY BY OFFICIALS OR OTHER SERVANTS OF THE COMMUNITIES , BUT ALSO BY PERSONS CLAIMING TO BE SUCH .

2 . THE PROVISIONS OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS EMPLOY PRECISE WORDING AND THERE IS NO REASON TO EXTEND THEIR SCOPE BY ANALOGY TO SITUATIONS TO WHICH THEY DO NOT EXPRESSLY REFER . THAT IS ALSO TRUE OF THE CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT OF OTHER SERVANTS .

3 . THE RECRUITMENT OF A PART-TIME , FEE-PAID DOCTOR ON THE BASIS OF A CONTRACT WHICH EXPRESSLY REFERS TO NATIONAL LAW AND UNDER WHICH HE IS TO PROVIDE HIS SERVICES ON THE PREMISES OF AN INSTITUTION MAY NOT BE REGARDED AS CONTRARY TO ARTICLE 1 OF THE CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT OF OTHER SERVANTS EXCEPT IN THE CASE OF A MISUSE OF PROCEDURE ESTABLISHED BY THE FACT THAT THE TERMS OF HIS EMPLOYMENT HAVE BEEN DETERMINED , NOT IN THE LIGHT OF THE NEEDS OF THE SERVICE , BUT WITH A VIEW TO AVOIDING THE APPLICATION OF THE SAID CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS - QUANTITATIVE RESTRICTIONS - MEASURES HAVING EQUIVALENT EFFECT - PRICE RULES - RETAIL SELLING PRICES OF PIGMEAT AND BEEF AND VEAL - FIXING OF A GROSS PROFIT MARGIN - INCORPORATION OF IMPORT AND SUPPLY COSTS - NOT PERMISSIBLE - INCOMPATIBILITY WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMMON ORGANIZATIONS OF THE MARKETS - INCORPORATION OF MARKETING COSTS - PERMISSIBILITY - CONDITIONS

( EEC TREATY , ART . 30 ; REGULATIONS OF THE COUNCIL NO 121/67 , ART . 19 , AND NO 805/68 , ART . 22 )

Summary

LEGISLATION OF A MEMBER STATE WHICH IS INTENDED TO CONTROL RETAIL PRICES OF BEEF , VEAL AND PIGMEAT AND WHICH PROHIBITS RETAILERS FROM SELLING THEIR PRODUCTS TO CONSUMERS AT A PRICE EXCEEDING THE WHOLESALE PRICE PLUS A MAXIMUM GROSS PROFIT MARGIN COVERING INTER ALIA ANY IMPORT COSTS WHICH MAY BE BORNE BY THE RETAILERS CONSTITUTES A MEASURE HAVING AN EFFECT EQUIVALENT TO A QUANTITATIVE RESTRICTION CONTRARY TO ARTICLE 30 OF THE EEC TREATY , ARTICLE 19 OF REGULATION NO 121/67 ON THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKET IN PIGMEAT AND ARTICLE 22 OF REGULATION NO 805/68 ON THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKET IN BEEF AND VEAL .

SUCH LEGISLATION IS ALSO INCOMPATIBLE WITH REGULATIONS NOS 121/67 AND 805/68 WHERE THE MAXIMUM GROSS PROFIT MARGIN INCORPORATES THE SUPPLY COSTS BORNE BY RETAILERS AND , AS A RESULT , IN CERTAIN REGIONS THE DISTRIBUTION NETWORK FOR BEEF , VEAL AND PIGMEAT IS AFFECTED .

COMMUNITY LAW DOES NOT PROHIBIT THE FIXING OF A GROSS PROFIT MARGIN WHICH INCORPORATES , IN ADDITION TO THE RETAILER ' S NET PROFIT , ONLY THE MARKETING COSTS BORNE BY RETAILERS AT THE STAGE OF SALE TO CONSUMERS , PROVIDED THAT THAT MARGIN IS NOT FIXED AT AN ARBITRARY LEVEL AND ALLOWS THE RETAILERS TO OBTAIN FAIR REMUNERATION FOR THEIR ACTIVITY .