ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . Agriculture - Common organization of the markets - Milk and milk products - Additional levy on milk - Determination of reference quantities exempt from the levy - Special rules in favour of producers who have adopted milk production development plans - Allocation of a single fixed quantity - Not permissible - Exclusion of producers who have exceeded a given ceiling of deliveries - Permissible

( Council Regulation No 857/84, Art . 3 ( 1 ) )

2 . Agriculture - Common organization of the markets - Milk and milk products - Additional levy on milk - Choice of formula B - Producers who have adopted milk production development plans - Allocation of a specific reference quantity - Re-allocation by the purchaser to certain of his affiliated producers of quantities freed by others - Permissible - Conditions

( EEC Treaty, Art . 40 ( 3 ), second subparagraph; Council Regulation No 857/84, Art . 3 ( 1 ) )

3 . Agriculture - Common organization of the markets - Milk and milk products - Additional levy on milk - Determination of reference quantities exempt from the levy - Producers who have adopted milk production development plans - Subject to a general reduction of reference quantities - Infringement of the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations - None

( Council Regulations Nos 856/84 and 857/84 )

Summary

1 . The first indent of Article 3 ( 1 ) of Regulation No 857/84, enabling producers who have adopted a milk production development plan to be allocated a special reference quantity exempt from the additional levy on milk, precludes national rules implementing that provision in such a way that all the producers covered by that provision obtain a single fixed quantity, regardless of the production objective laid down in their plans .

However, that provision does not preclude national rules from providing that only producers whose deliveries of milk do not exceed a specified ceiling may obtain a special reference quantity .

2 . Regulation No 857/84, interpreted in the light of the prohibition of discrimination laid down in Article 40 ( 3 ) of the Treaty, does not preclude national rules allowing purchasers, in the context of formula B, provisionally to re-allocate to certain producers affiliated to them all or part of the individual reference quantities freed by others, provided that if necessary such re-allocations are adjusted subsequently in order to neutralize any differences in treatment between producers affiliated to different purchasers .

3 . The principle of the protection of legitimate expectations does not preclude national rules implementing the Community scheme relating to an additional levy on milk in such a way that producers having a milk production development plan approved before the entry into force of the levy scheme obtain in respect of the second year of the scheme' s application reference quantities fixed at a level lower than that applicable to the preceding marketing year, unless the reductions relate specifically to the reference quantities of the producers having such a plan .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1.Measures adopted by the institutions - Obligation to state reasons - Scope - Decision on the clearance of accounts relating to expenditure financed by the EAGGF

( EEC Treaty, Art . 190 )

2.Agriculture - Common organization of the markets - Fruit and vegetables - Producers' organizations - Start-up aid - Stipulation by the Commission of a payment period - Conditions - Member States' obligations

( EEC Treaty, Art . 5; Council Regulations Nos 729/70, Arts 7 and 11, and 1035/72, Arts 14(1 ) and 36 )

3.Agriculture - Common organization of the markets - Fruit and vegetables - Producers' organizations - EAGGF financing - Conditions laid down by Community law - Recognition of organizations by national authorities - Irrelevant

( Council Regulation No 1035/72 )

4.Member States - Obligations - Failure to fulfil - Justification - None permissible

Summary

1.A decision on the clearance of accounts relating to expenditure financed by the EAGGF is not required to contain a detailed statement of reasons where the government concerned was closely involved in the process by which the decision came about and is therefore aware of the reason for which the Commission considers that the disputed sum may not be charged to the EAGGF .

2.The fact that Article 14(1 ) of Regulation No 1035/72 does not stipulate any period for the payment of start-up aid which may be granted to fruit and vegetable producers' organizations does not preclude the Commission, provided that it proceeds on the basis of general instructions drawn up in consultation with those concerned and communicated to them in time, from exercising the powers conferred on it as administrator of the EAGGF to stipulate such a period, so that the aforementioned aid may meet the purpose of start-up aid for which it is intended .

Once a short, but none the less reasonable and not arbitrary, period has been stipulated in order to facilitate the attainment of the objective pursued by the Community rules, the national authorities, in accordance with the principle of genuine cooperation between themselves and the Community authorities laid down in Article 5 of the EEC Treaty, are obliged to observe that principle so as to ensure the correct implementation of Community law in the interests of the traders concerned .

3.In the context of the financing by the EAGGF of fruit and vegetable producers' organizations pursuant to Regulation No 1035/72 the decision by a Member State to arrange for formal national recognition by national authorities of the organizations concerned, and entry of the recognized organizations on a list, is not a decision capable of affecting the application of Community law .

4.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 obligations and time-limits resulting from Community rules .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Officials - Remuneration - Expatriation allowance - Object - Concept of expatriation - Habitual residence in the place of employment before taking up duties - Residence as student - Circumstance having no determining effect

( Staff Regulations of Officials, Annex VII, Art . 4(1 ) )

Summary

The object of granting an expatriation allowance, which is independent of the fixing of the place of origin of the person concerned, is to compensate officials for the extra expense and inconvenience of taking up employment with the Communities and being thereby obliged to change their residence and move to the country of employment and to integrate themselves in their new environment . Furthermore, the concept of expatriation also depends on the personal position of an official, that is to say on the extent to which he is integrated in his new environment, which is demonstrated, for example, by habitual residence or by the main occupation pursued .

Consequently, the fact that an official was in the country of employment merely as a student during the first part of the reference period referred to in Article 4(1)(a ) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations is not sufficient to preclude his having habitually resided there, if, already being there at the start of that period, he has continued to reside there almost without interruption throughout, and even after the end of, that period .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1.Officials - Action - Right of action - Persons claiming the status of officials or of employees other than local staff

2.Officials - Status of official - Conditions not fulfilled

3.Community law - Principles - Fundamental rights - Freedom of expression - To be respected notwithstanding the duty of allegiance to the Communities imposed on officials

Summary

1.It is not only persons who have the status of officials or of employees other than local staff who may bring an action before the Court to contest a decision adversely affecting them, but also persons claiming that status .

2.The staff of an international association governed by the law of a Member State, which, whatever its relations with the Commission, cannot be regarded as an administrative unit thereof, cannot be considered to have the status of officials or employees of the Communities .

3.The duty of allegiance to the Communities imposed on officials in the Staff Regulations cannot be interpreted in such a way as to conflict with freedom of expression, a fundamental right which the Court must ensure is respected in Community law .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1.Community law - Principles - Equal treatment - Discrimination by reason of nationality - Prohibition - Covert discrimination - Included

( EEC Treaty, Arts 52 and 59 )

2.Freedom of movement - Freedom of establishment - Freedom to provide services - Derogations - Activities connected with the exercise of official authority - Technical activities in the field of data processing carried out for the public authorities - Excluded

( EEC Treaty, Arts 52, 55, 1st paragraph, 59 and 66 )

3.Freedom of movement - Freedom of establishment - Freedom to provide services - Procedures for the award of public supply contracts - National legislation giving companies controlled by the national public sector exclusive rights to supply goods in the field of data processing - Not permissible

( EEC Treaty, Arts 52 and 59; Council Directive 77/62 )

Summary

1.The principle of equal treatment, of which Articles 52 and 59 of the Treaty embody specific instances, prohibits not only overt discrimination by reason of nationality but also all covert forms of discrimination which, by the application of other criteria of differentiation, lead in fact to the same result .

2.The exception to freedom of establishment and freedom to provide services provided for by the first paragraph of Article 55 and by Article 66 of the EEC Treaty must be restricted to those of the activities referred to in Articles 52 and 59 which in themselves involve a direct and specific connection with the exercise of official authority . That is not the case in respect of activities concerning the design, programming and operation of data-processing systems for the public authorities, since they are of a technical nature and thus unrelated to the exercise of official authority .

3.A Member State which provides that only companies in which all or a majority of the shares are either directly or indirectly in public or State ownership may conclude agreements for the development of data-processing systems for the public authorities thereby fails to fulfil its obligations under Articles 52 and 59 of the Treaty and Directive 77/62 coordinating procedures for the award of public supply contracts .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Convention on jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments - Special jurisdictions - Jurisdiction in tort, delict or quasi-delict - Place where the harmful event occurred - Place where the damage occurred - Concept - Place of occurrence of damage suffered by a third party through damage sustained by the immediate victim - Exclusion

( Convention of 27 September 1968, Article 5(3 ) )

Summary

The expression "place where the harmful event occurred" contained in Article 5(3 ) of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters may refer to the place where the damage occurred, but the latter concept can be understood only as indicating the place where the event giving rise to the damage, and causing tortious, delictual or quasi-delictual liability to be incurred, directly produced its harmful effects upon the person who is the victim of that event .

Accordingly, the rule on jurisdiction laid down in that article cannot be interpreted as permitting a plaintiff pleading damage which he claims to be the consequence of the harm suffered by other persons who were direct victims of the harmful act to bring proceedings against the perpetrator of that act before the courts in the place in which he himself ascertained the damage to his assets .
Keywords

Operative part



Keywords

++++

Common Customs Tariff - Tariff headings - Classification of decorative stud earrings and ear-piercing instruments

Operative part

( 1 ) Subheading 71.16 A of the Common Customs Tariff must be interpreted as including, even before the entry into force of Commission Regulation No 3558/81 of 8 December 1981 on the classification of goods falling within subheading 76.16 A of the Common Customs Tariff, stud earrings of the kind referred to in that regulation .

( 2 ) Subheading 84.59 E II of the Common Customs Tariff must be interpreted as including ear-piercing instruments .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Privileges and immunities of the European Communities - Officials and other servants of the Communities - Exclusion from a national scheme granting a subsidy in respect of interest paid in the context of a mortgage loan - Permissibility

( EEC Treaty, Arts 5 and 7; Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Communities, Art . 13 )

Summary

The provisions of Articles 5 and 7 of the EEC Treaty and of Article 13 of the Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Communities must be interpreted as meaning that they do not preclude a Member State which subsidizes interest paid by individuals on loans taken out for the acquisition or improvement of their main residence situated in that State where the persons concerned have, in the State in question, less taxable income than the amount of interest paid from denying that advantage to persons who are officials or servants of the European Communities where the taxable income of such persons in the State in question is less than the amount of interest which they pay .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . Member States - Obligations - Federal structure of a Member State - Establishment of supervisory measures ensuring the application of Community law - Review by the Commission - Limits

2 . Agriculture - Common agricultural policy - EAGGF financing - Grant of premiums for the maintenance of the suckler cow herd and of premiums in favour of producers of sheepmeat - Member States' obligation to organize an effective system of administrative checks and on-the-spot inspections - Unreliable inspection procedures - Refusal to charge to the Fund

( EEC Treaty, Art . 5; Council Regulation No 729/70, Arts 8 and 9; Commission Regulation No 1244/82, Art . 4(1 ), and Commission Regulation No 3007/84, Art . 5 )

Summary

1 . It is for all the authorities of the Member States, whether it be the central authorities of the State or the authorities of a federated State, or other territorial authorities, to ensure observance of the rules of Community law within the sphere of their competence . However, it is not for the Commission to rule on the division of competences by the institutional rules proper to each Member State, or on the obligations which, in a State having a federal structure, may be imposed on the federal authorities and on the authorities of the federated States respectively . It may only verify whether the supervisory and inspection procedures established according to the arrangements within the national legal system are in their entirety sufficiently effective to enable the Community requirements to be correctly applied .

2 . It is clear from Articles 8 and 9 of Council Regulation ( EEC ) No 729/70 of 21 April 1970 on the financing of the common agricultural policy, in conjunction with Article 5 of Regulation No 3007/84 laying down detailed rules for the application of the premium for producers of sheepmeat and Article 4(1 ) of Regulation No 1244/82 laying down detailed rules implementing the system of premiums for maintaining suckler cows, viewed in the light of the obligation of faithful cooperation with the Commission laid down in Article 5 of the Treaty, and with particular regard to the correct utilization of Community resources, that Member States are required to set up comprehensive administrative checks and on-the-spot inspections guaranteeing the proper observance of the substantive and formal conditions for the grant of the premiums in question .

Where the Commission establishes that in a Member State no such comprehensive system of checks exists or if the system established is defective to the point of giving rise to doubts as to compliance with the conditions imposed on the grant of the premiums in question, the Commission is entitled to disallow certain expenditure incurred by that State .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Freedom of movement of persons - Workers - Equal treatment - Remuneration - Income tax - Repayment of tax overpaid in a system of deduction at source - Repayment conditional on residence for the entire year of assessment - Not permitted

( EEC Treaty, Art . 48(2 ) )

Summary

Article 48(2 ) of the Treaty precludes a Member State from providing in its tax legislation that sums deducted by way of tax from the salaries and wages of employed persons who are nationals of a Member State and are resident taxpayers for only part of the year because they take up residence in the country or leave it during the course of the tax year are to remain the property of the Treasury and are not repayable .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . Social security for migrant workers - Community legislation - Matters covered - Supplementary allowance paid to pensioners by a national solidarity fund - Inclusion

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

2 . Social security for migrant workers - Benefits - Residence clauses - Removal - Acquisition or maintenance of the right to benefits refused on account of residence in another Member State - Not permissible

( Regulation No 1408/71 of the Council, Art . 10(1 ) )

3 . Social security for migrant workers - Community legislation - Implementation compulsory notwithstanding practical difficulties - Possibility of referral to the Administrative Commission on Social Security for Migrant Workers

( Regulation No 1408/71 of the Council, Art . 81(d ) )

4 . Member States - Obligations - Not fulfilled - Proposal designed to terminate an infringement submitted to the Council - No effect

Summary

1 . The social security rules within the meaning of Regulation No 1408/71 cover a supplementary allowance paid by a national solidarity fund, financed out of tax revenue and granted to recipients of old-age, survivors' or invalidity pensions in order to provide them with the minimum means of subsistence, provided that the persons concerned have a legally protected right to the grant of such an allowance .

The fact that payment of such an allowance is linked to a specified economic and social environment cannot, under Community law as it now stands, constitute a ground for distinguishing it from the pension to which it is an automatic supplement .

2 . Article 10 of Regulation No 1408/71 must be interpreted as meaning that a person may not be precluded from acquiring or retaining entitlement to the benefits, pensions and allowances referred to in that provision on the sole ground that he does not reside within the territory of the Member State in which the institution responsible for payment is situated .

3 . The fact that the application of certain provisions of the Community legislation on social security may give rise to practical difficulties where the arrangements for the payment of certain categories of benefits have not been laid down cannot prejudice the rights which individuals derive from the principles of the social legislation of the Community . Furthermore the Administrative Commission on Social Security for Migrant Workers was specifically set up by Article 81(d ) of Regulation No 1408/71 to deal with any difficulties of that kind .

4 . The fact that a proposal is submitted to the Council whose adoption could terminate an infringement with which a Member State is charged cannot relieve that State of its obligation to comply with the provisions of Community law in force .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . Member States - Obligations - Breach - Justification - Not permitted

( EEC Treaty, Art . 169 )

2 . Actions against Member States for failure to fulfil obligations - Subject-matter of the action - Determined by the reasoned opinion - Time-limit allowed to Member State - Default subsequently remedied - Interest in pursuing the action - Possible liablity on the part of the Member State

( EEC Treaty, Art . 169 )

Summary

1 . 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 obligations and time-limits resulting from Community law .

2 . The subject-matter of an action brought under Article 169 of the Treaty is determined by the Commission' s reasoned opinion, and even when the default has been remedied after the time-limit prescribed by paragraph 2 of the said article has expired, there is still an interest in pursuing the action in order to establish the basis of liability which a Member State may incur as a result of its default towards other Member States, the Community or private parties .
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 28 June 1989. - Ministère public v J.-P. M. Rispal and others. - Reference for a preliminary ruling: Tribunal de grande instance de Paris - France. - Common Customs Tariff - Magic cubes. - Case 164/88.



European Court reports 1989 Page 02041

Pub.RJ Page Pub somm



Summary

Parties

Operative part



Keywords

++++

Common Customs Tariff - Tariff headings - "Other toys" within the meaning of heading 97.03 - Articles known as "magic cubes" - Included

Summary

Heading 97.03 of the Common Customs Tariff relating to "other toys" must be interpreted as including articles known as "magic cubes" and having six sides, each composed of nine squares, these having six different colours, the elements of each cube being capable of manipulation in each of its three dimensions, the object being to manipulate the cube so as to produce six uniform sides of a different colour .

This classification follows from the application of the decisive criterion for the classification of goods which, as the Court has consistently held ( see judgment of 8 December 1977 in Case 62/77 Carlsen-Verlag (( 1977 )) ECR 2343 ), is in general to be sought in their characteristics and objective properties as defined in the wording of the relevant heading of the Common Customs Tariff and of the notes to the sections or chapters . It is, moreover, in conformity with the explanatory notes of the Customs Cooperation Council which, as the Court has consistently held, constitute an important factor for the interpretation of the Common Customs Tariff ( see judgment of 28 February 1989 in Case 245/87 Blaupunkt (( 1989 )) ECR 573 ).

Parties

In Case 164/88

REFERENCE to the Court under Article 177 of the EEC Treaty by the Tribunal de grande instance ( Regional Court ), Paris, 31st Criminal Chamber, of a question for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between

Ministère public ( Public Prosecutor )

and

( 1 ) J-P . M . Rispal,

( 2 ) G . M . R . Vairon,

( 3 ) J . N . A . Cresson,

( 4 ) R . Bizot,

( 5 ) Sodetair SA, a company incorporated under French law, whose registered office is in Paris,

( 6 ) Fret et transit aérien SA, a company incorporated under French law, whose registered office is at Orly,

( 7 ) Frecom SA, a company incorporated under French law, whose registered office is in Paris,

on the tariff classification of goods known as "magic cubes" or "magicubes ".

THE COURT ( First Chamber )

composed of : R . Joliet, President of Chamber, Sir Gordon Slynn and G . C . Rodríguez Iglesias, Judges,

( the grounds of the judgment are not reproduced )

in answer to the question referred to it by the Tribunal de Grande Instance, Paris, 31st Criminal Chamber, by judgment of 15 January 1988, hereby rules :

Operative part

In March, April and May 1981, heading 97.03 of the Common Customs Tariff was to be interpreted as including goods known as "magic cubes ".