ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 Tax provisions - Harmonization of laws - Turnover taxes - Common system of value added tax - Supply of services for consideration - Definition - Transport provided for employees to their place of work by the employer free of charge in the absence of any real connection either with the work performed or the wages received - Excluded

(Council Directive 77/388, Art. 2(1))

2 Tax provisions - Harmonization of laws - Turnover taxes - Common system of value added tax - Supply of services for consideration - Definition - Private use of business goods - Included - Limits

(Council Directive 77/388, Art. 6(2))

Summary

3 Article 2(1) of the Sixth Directive 77/388 on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes is to be interpreted as meaning that an employer who provides transport for employees free of charge from their homes to the workplace where they are more than a specified distance apart, in the absence of any real connection either with the work performed or the wages received, does not effect a supply of services for consideration within the meaning of that provision.

4 Article 6(2) of the Sixth Directive 77/388 is to be interpreted as meaning that transport provided for employees free of charge by the employer between their homes and the workplace in a company vehicle serves, in principle, the employees' private purposes and thus serves purposes other than those of the business. However, that provision does not apply when, having regard to certain circumstances, such as the difficulty of finding other suitable means of transport and changes in the place of work, the requirements of the business make it necessary for the employer to provide transport for employees, in which case the supply of those transport services is not effected for purposes other than those of the business. The fact that the employer does not convey the employees in its own vehicles but commissions one of its employees to provide the transport using his own private vehicle is not relevant in that respect.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Tax provisions - Internal taxation - Special consumer tax and flat-rate added special duty on cars - Calculation of the basis of assessment to and rate of tax operating to the detriment of imported used cars as opposed to those already registered and purchased on the domestic market - Not permissible

(EC Treaty, Art. 95)

Summary

National legislation which, as regards the application of a special consumer tax and flat-rate added special duty, determines the taxable value of imported used cars by reducing the price of equivalent new cars by 5% for each year of age of the vehicles concerned, the maximum reduction allowed as a rule being 20%, is contrary to Article 95 of the Treaty. Since the annual depreciation in the value of cars is in general considerably more than 5%, that depreciation is not linear, especially in the first years when it is much more marked than subsequently and since, finally, vehicles continue to depreciate more than four years after being put into circulation, the taxable value resulting from those detailed rules for calculating taxation does not correspond to the value resulting from the actual wear and tear undergone by used cars, as a result of which the special consumer tax and flat-rate added special duty imposed on imported used cars are usually higher than the proportion of those taxes still incorporated in the value of used cars already registered and purchased on the domestic market.

Similarly, national legislation which excludes anti-pollution technology cars from the benefit of the reduced rates of special consumer tax applicable to that type of vehicle is contrary to Article 95.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 Agriculture - EAGGF - Clearance of accounts - Refusal to charge to the EAGGF expenditure arising from irregularities in the application of the Community rules - Introduction of differentiation, in such a refusal, according to the degree of risk posed to the EAGGF by different levels of defective supervision - Disputed by the Member State concerned - Burden of proof

2 Agriculture - Common agricultural policy - Financing by the EAGGF - Decision relating to the clearance of accounts - Decision subject to reservations - Whether permissible - Conditions

(Council Regulation No 729/70, Art. 5(2)(b))

3 Agriculture - EAGGF - Clearance of accounts - Definitive refusal to charge certain expenditure to the EAGGF - Need for a prior procedure giving effect to the audi alteram partem rule - Decision adopted on the basis of a report reaching the Member State concerned after the decision was adopted - Unlawful

Summary

4 If, in its function of clearing the accounts, the Commission, instead of refusing the entire expenditure, endeavours to draw up rules to differentiate according to the degree of risk posed to the EAGGF by different levels of defective supervision, the Member State must show that those criteria are arbitrary and unfair.

5 Although, in accordance with Article 5(2)(b) of Regulation No 729/70 on the financing of the common agricultural policy, the Commission, after consulting the EAGGF Committee, is to make up the accounts of the authorities and bodies, before the end of the following year, on the basis of the annual accounts, if the information that should be supplied by the Member States and the checks that it considers necessary to undertake do not lead to any definite results, the Commission is entitled to draw up the accounts on the basis of the information obtained during the clearance procedure, reserving to itself the possibility of correcting that decision in a subsequent clearance of accounts.

6 The final and conclusive decision on the annual clearance of accounts is taken at the conclusion of the specific procedure giving effect to the audi alteram partem rule, during which the Member States concerned are provided with all the guarantees necessary for them to present their point of view.

A Commission decision, based on the results of an inquiry summarised in an inspection visit report, definitively refusing to charge to the EAGGF certain expenditure incurred by a Member State, where the report in question reached the authorities of the Member State concerned, who were not aware of the report before it was distributed, only after the contested decision had been adopted, so that the Member State was not able to discuss the results of the inquiry before the final decision, must be annulled for breach of the audi alteram partem rule.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Freedom of movement for persons - Workers - Freedom of establishment - Recognition of higher-education diplomas awarded on completion of professional education and training of at least three years' duration - Directive 89/48 - Not applicable in a situation purely internal to a Member State

(Council Directive 89/48)

Summary

The Treaty rules governing freedom of movement for persons and acts adopted to implement them cannot be applied to activities which have no factor linking them with any of the situations governed by Community law and which are confined in all respects within a single Member State.

It follows that persons who have neither worked nor studied nor obtained a diploma on completion of university or professional education in a Member State of the Community other than their country of origin may not rely on the rights conferred by Directive 89/48 on a general system for the recognition of higher-education diplomas awarded on completion of professional education and training of at least three years' duration.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 Procedure - Interpretation of judgments - Conditions governing the admissibility of applications

(EC Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 40)

2 Procedure - Interpretation of judgments - Application submitted by an intervener - Whether permissible

(EC Statute of the Court of Justice, Arts 37 and 40)

Summary

1 An application for interpretation is admissible where it seeks clarification of the meaning of a specific point in the operative part of the judgment in question.

2 An intervener must be allowed to submit an application for interpretation even if the party which it supports has not done so.
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Fifth Chamber)

28 March 1996

((Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations – Non-transposition of Directive 91/156/EEC – Waste))

In Case C-160/95,

applicant,

v

defendant,

THE COURT (Fifth Chamber),,

having regard to the report of the Judge-Rapporteur,

after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 1 February 1996,
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Member States - Obligations - Implementation of directives - Failure to fulfil obligations - Justification - Not permissible

(EC Treaty, Art. 169)

Summary

A Member State may not plead provisions, practices or circumstances existing in its internal legal system in order to justify a failure to comply with the obligations and time-limits laid down by a directive.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Approximation of laws - Labelling and presentation of foodstuffs - Directive 79/112 - Obligation to state details of one of the traders responsible for the manufacture or marketing of the foodstuff - Obligation to indicate details of a trader established within the Community applicable to the seller only

(Council Directive 79/112, Art. 3(1)(6))

Summary

It is apparent from the different language versions of Article 3(1)(6) of Directive 79/112 on the labelling and presentation of foodstuffs, which provides that indication of `the name or business name and address of the manufacturer or packager, or of a seller established within the Community' is compulsory on the labelling of foodstuffs, and from the purpose and general scheme of the directive in question that the expression `established within the Community' refers only to the seller and not to the producer or packager, details of either of whom may be indicated, whether established within the Community or outside.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 Free movement of goods - Quantitative restrictions - Measures having equivalent effect - Prohibition - Scope

(EC Treaty, Art. 30)

2 Approximation of laws - Measures to promote the completion of the internal market - Statistics on trading in goods between Member States - Regulation No 3330/91 - Obligation on undertakings to make a detailed declaration of their intra-Community imports and exports - Justified barrier to the free movement of goods - Lawfulness - Breach of the principle of proportionality - None

(Council Regulation No 3330/91)

Summary

3 The prohibition of quantitative restrictions and of all measures having equivalent effect applies not only to national measures but also to measures adopted by the Community institutions.

4 Regulation No 3330/91 on the statistics relating to the trading of goods between Member States, which imposes on undertakings an obligation to make a detailed declaration of their intra-Community imports and exports which applies in both the Member State of dispatch and that of destination of the goods, pursues a justified aim, and its restrictive effects with respect to the free movement of goods are commensurate with that aim. The aim of the regulation is to promote completion of the internal market by establishing a satisfactory level of information on the trading of goods between Member States by means not involving checks at internal frontiers. Barriers to the free movement of goods may be accepted if they are essential in order to obtain reasonably complete and accurate information on movements of goods within the Community.

Moreover, having regard to the discretion enjoyed by the Community legislature in the framework of its powers of harmonization, the restrictive effects of the obligation to make declarations, which specifically affects cross-frontier trade and compliance with which takes time and involves expense, particularly for small and medium-sized undertakings, do not go beyond what is necessary to achieve the objective pursued, since, first, different thresholds have been established in order to take into account the interests of undertakings and not to impose a burden on them which is disproportionate to the results which users of the statistics are entitled to expect, and, second, the Community institutions have made modern data-processing tools available free of charge to undertakings.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 International agreements - EEC-Turkey Association Agreement - Freedom of movement for persons - Workers - Access for Turkish nationals to paid employment of their choice in one of the Member States and ancillary right of residence - Conditions - Previous engagement in legal employment - Definition

(Decision No 1/80 of the EEC-Turkey Association Council, Art. 6(1))

2 International agreements - EEC-Turkey Association Agreement - Freedom of movement for persons - Workers - Access for Turkish nationals to paid employment of their choice in one of the Member States and ancillary right of residence - Extension of the right of residence - Abuse - Conditions

(Decision No 1/80 of the EEC-Turkey Association Council, Art. 6(1))

Summary

3 Article 6(1) of Decision No 1/80 of the EEC-Turkey Association Council is to be interpreted as meaning that a Turkish national who has been lawfully employed in a Member State for an uninterrupted period of more than three years in a genuine and effective economic activity for the same employer and whose employment status is not objectively different to that of other employees employed by the same employer or in the sector concerned and exercising identical or comparable duties, is duly registered as belonging to the labour force of that State and is legally employed within the meaning of that provision. A Turkish national in that situation may therefore seek the renewal of his permit to reside in the host Member State notwithstanding the fact that he was permitted to take up paid employment there only temporarily with a specific employer for the purpose of acquainting himself with and preparing for employment in one of its subsidiaries in Turkey, and obtained work and residence permits for that purpose only.

4 The fact that a Turkish worker wishes to extend his stay in the host Member State, although he expressly accepted its restriction, does not constitute an abuse of rights. The fact that he declared his intention of returning to Turkey after having been employed in the Member State for the purpose of perfecting his vocational skills is not such as to deprive him of the rights deriving from Article 6(1) of Decision No 1/80 unless it is established by the national court that that declaration was made with the sole intention of improperly obtaining work and residence permits for the host Member State.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Preliminary rulings - Jurisdiction of the Court - Limits - Manifestly irrelevant questions and questions regarding hypothetical problems in a context which precludes any useful answer - Question referred in the course of criminal proceedings in which the application of Community law does not arise - Court's lack of jurisdiction

(EC Treaty, Arts 6 and 177)

Summary

The Court has no jurisdiction to give a preliminary ruling where it is quite obvious that the interpretation of Community law sought by the national court bears no relation to the facts or purpose of the main action, or where the problem is hypothetical and the Court does not have before it the factual or legal material necessary to give a useful answer to the questions submitted to it. Accordingly, the Court has no jurisdiction to answer a question on the interpretation of the prohibition of discrimination on grounds of nationality, laid down in Article 6 of the Treaty, where the national court has failed to provide it with any evidence to support the view that, in the context of proceedings which may lead to a criminal penalty being imposed for an offence related to a traffic accident, the court hearing the case may be required to apply provisions intended to ensure compliance with the rules of Community law in general or with the principle of workers' freedom of movement in particular.
Case C-325/96

Fábrica de Queijo Eru Portuguesa Ld. a

v

Subdirector-Geral das Alfândegas

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Supremo Tribunal Administrativo

‛Inward processing relief arrangements — Special arrangements for milk sector products — Extension of the time-limit for export’

Opinion of Advocate General Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer delivered on 17 September 1997 I-7251

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber), 16 December 1997 I-7260

Summary of the Judgment

Free movement of goods — Trade with nonmember countries — Inward processing relief arrangements — Time-limits for export of the compensating products — Time-limits applicable to agricultural products — Extension — Not permissible

(Council Regulations Nos 1999/85 and 3677/86, Art. 28; Commission ReguUtion No 2281/88)

Article 28 of Council Regulation No 3677/86 laying down provisions for the implementation of Regulation No 1999/85 on inward processing relief arrangements, as amended by Commission Regulation No 2281/88, must be interpreted as meaning that the time-limits for re-export laid down therein may not be extended. Both the terms employed in Article 28, which clearly show that, for agricultural products, the timelimits are specific and may not be extended, and the objective pursued by Regulations Nos 3677/86 and 1999/85, which is to make application of the inward processing relief arrangements to agricultural products more difficult because of the particular problems raised by the functioning of the common market in those products, preclude any extension of the time-limits by the national customs authorities.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 Social security for migrant workers - Community rules - Scope ratione materiae - Unemployment benefit - Definition - Benefit in the form of a single payment, the amount of which is determined solely by the age of the recipient and which must be repaid if the recipient is reemployed by his former employer - Excluded

(Council Regulation No 1408/71, Art. 4(1)(g))

2 Freedom of movement for persons - Workers - Equal treatment - Social advantages - Definition - Benefit in the form of a single payment to agricultural workers no longer employed as a result of the setting aside of land belonging to their former employer - Included

(Council Regulation No 1612/68, Art. 7(2))

3 Freedom of movement for persons - Workers - Equal treatment - Social advantages - National legislation making payment of a social advantage conditional on residence within the national territory - Not permissible

(Council Regulation No 1612/68, Art. 7(2))

Summary

4 Regulation No 1408/71, as amended and updated by Regulation No 2001/83, does not apply to a compensation scheme under which agricultural workers, whose contract of employment has been terminated as a result of the setting aside of land belonging to their former employer, receive a benefit, which is additional to unemployment benefits provided for under the national social security scheme, in the form of a single payment, the amount of which is determined solely by the age of the recipient and which must be repaid if the recipient is reemployed by his former employer within 12 months following the termination of his contract of employment. In order to be classified as an unemployment benefit within the meaning of Article 4(1)(g) of that regulation, a benefit must be intended to replace the remuneration lost by reason of unemployment and thereby provide for the maintenance of the unemployed person.

5 A benefit which takes the form of a single payment to agricultural workers whose contract of employment has been terminated as a result of the setting aside of land belonging to their former employer is to be classified as a social advantage within the meaning of Article 7(2) of Regulation No 1612/68 on freedom of movement for workers within the Community, since entitlement to the benefit is intrinsically linked to the recipients' objective status as workers.

6 A Member State may not make payment of a social advantage within the meaning of Article 7(2) of Regulation No 1612/68 dependent on the condition that recipients be resident within its territory. Unless it is objectively justified and proportionate to its aim, a provision of national law must be regarded as indirectly discriminatory if it is intrinsically liable to affect migrant workers more than national workers and if there is a consequent risk that it will place the former at a particular disadvantage. This is true of a residence condition which can be more easily met by national workers than by those from other Member States.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Association of the overseas countries and territories - Implementation by the Council - Economic and social development of the French overseas departments - Obligations of the institutions - Council Decision authorising temporary exemptions, subject to monitoring by the Commission, from the octroi de mer applied in the French overseas departments - Validity - Condition

(EC Treaty, Arts 9, 12, 13, 95, 226 and 227(2); Council Decision 89/688)

Summary

In so far it authorises a system, subject to monitoring by the Commission, of exemptions in favour of products from the French overseas departments from the charge termed octroi de mer, and provided that such exemptions are granted in accordance with the strict conditions which it lays down, Decision 89/688 concerning the dock dues (octroi de mer) in the French overseas departments is not incompatible with Articles 9, 12 and 13 of the Treaty, and the temporary derogations from Article 95 for which it provides are justified in accordance with Article 227(2), read in conjunction with Article 226, of the Treaty.

Under the third subparagraph of Article 227(2) of the Treaty, the institutions of the Community are required to make full use of the procedures provided for in the Treaty, in particular Article 226, in order to make the economic and social development of the French overseas departments possible. Article 226 specifies that urgent protective measures cannot be adopted unilaterally by the Member States but only with the intervention of the Community institutions, which may authorise only strictly necessary derogations for limited periods, giving priority to such measures as least disturb the functioning of the common market.

The imposition of the strict conditions laid down in Article 2(3) of Decision 89/688, interpreted in the light of the limits laid down in Article 226 of the Treaty for derogations from the provisions of the Treaty, is such as to ensure that the system of precisely determined exemptions is compatible with the Treaty.