ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . AGRICULTURE - COMMON AGRICULTURAL POLICY - FINANCE OUT OF THE EUROPEAN AGRICULTURAL GUIDANCE AND GUARANTEE FUND - EXPENDITURE INCURRED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE COMMUNITY RULES - MEASURES FOR THE CONSERVATION OF FISHERY RESOURCES

( EEC TREATY, ART . 38; REGULATION NO 729/70 OF THE COUNCIL, ARTS 2 AND 3 )

2 . MEMBER STATES - OBLIGATIONS - COMMISSION' S INITIATIVE IN ORDER TO MEET URGENT NEEDS - DUTIES OF ACTION AND ABSTENTION

( EEC TREATY, ART . 5 )

3 . FISHERIES - CONSERVATION OF MARITIME RESOURCES - COUNCIL' S FAILURE TO ACT - ADOPTION OF INTERIM CONSERVATION MEASURES - CONDITIONS - COOPERATION BETWEEN THE MEMBER STATES AND THE COMMISSION - PROPOSALS FOR QUOTAS ADOPTED UNILATERALLY BY THE COMMISSION - QUOTAS EXCEEDED - INTERVENTION MEASURES AND EXPORT REFUNDS - FINANCE OUT OF THE EUROPEAN AGRICULTURAL GUIDANCE AND GUARANTEE FUND - REFUSAL - UNLAWFULNESS

( COUNCIL REGULATION NO 729/70, ARTS 2 AND 3 )

4 . COMMUNITY LAW - PRINCIPLES - LEGAL CERTAINTY - RULES WHICH MAY HAVE FINANCIAL CONSEQUENCES

Summary

1 . FISHERY CONSERVATION MEASURES ARE PART OF THE COMMUNITY RULES FOR THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE AGRICULTURAL MARKETS WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLES 2 AND 3 OF REGULATION NO 729/70 ON THE FINANCING OF THE COMMON AGRICULTURAL POLICY, SINCE ACCORDING TO ARTICLE 38 OF THE EEC TREATY AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS INCLUDE FISHERY PRODUCTS . ACCORDINGLY, REFUNDS GRANTED AND INTERVENTION UNDERTAKEN IN BREACH OF COMMUNITY CONSERVATION MEASURES CANNOT BE CHARGED TO THE FUND .

2 . ARTICLE 5 OF THE EEC TREATY IMPOSES ON MEMBER STATES SPECIAL DUTIES OF ACTION AND ABSTENTION WHERE THE COMMISSION, IN ORDER TO MEET URGENT FISHERY CONSERVATION NEEDS, HAS SUBMITTED TO THE COUNCIL PROPOSALS WHICH, ALTHOUGH THEY HAVE NOT BEEN ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL, REPRESENT A BASIS FOR CONCERTED COMMUNITY ACTION .

3 . WHERE THE COUNCIL HAS FAILED TO ADOPT THE CONSERVATION MEASURES NECESSARY TO PROTECT FISH STOCKS SUCH MEASURES, DESIGNED TO ANSWER URGENT NEEDS, MAY BE AGREED UPON BY MEANS OF A PROCESS OF COOPERATION BETWEEN THE MEMBER STATES AND THE COMMISSION IN ORDER TO ENABLE THE COMMUNITY TO MEET ITS RESPONSIBILITIES . IN THE ABSENCE OF SUCH COOPERATION, PROPOSALS UNILATERALLY MADE BY THE COMMISSION IN RELATION TO THE FISHING QUOTAS TO BE ALLOCATED TO A MEMBER STATE CANNOT BE REGARDED AS COMMUNITY RULES WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLES 2 AND 3 OF REGULATION NO 729/70 OF THE COUNCIL ON THE FINANCING OF THE COMMON AGRICULTURAL POLICY, DISREGARD OF WHICH COULD JUSTIFY THE COMMISSION' S REFUSAL TO CHARGE TO THE EUROPEAN AGRICULTURAL GUIDANCE AND GUARANTEE FUND EXPENDITURE INCURRED IN THE FORM OF INTERVENTION MEASURES AND EXPORT REFUNDS BY THE MEMBER STATE IN RELATION TO CATCHES IN EXCESS OF THE SAID QUOTAS .

4 . COMMUNITY LEGISLATION MUST BE CERTAIN AND ITS APPLICATION FORESEEABLE BY THOSE SUBJECT TO IT . THAT REQUIREMENT OF LEGAL CERTAINTY MUST BE OBSERVED ALL THE MORE STRICTLY IN THE CASE OF RULES LIABLE TO ENTAIL FINANCIAL CONSEQUENCES, IN ORDER THAT THOSE CONCERNED MAY KNOW PRECISELY THE EXTENT OF THE OBLIGATIONS WHICH THEY IMPOSE ON THEM .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS - INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL PROPERTY - PATENT RIGHTS - PATENT ENDORSED "LICENCES OF RIGHT" - PROTECTION AGAINST INFRINGEMENT - GREATER MEASURE OF PROTECTION IN RESPECT OF IMPORTS - GRANT OF LICENCES SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS IMPEDING IMPORTS - NOT PERMISSIBLE

( EEC TREATY, ARTS 30 AND 36 )

2 . FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS - QUANTITATIVE RESTRICTIONS - MEASURES HAVING EQUIVALENT EFFECT - PROVISIONS NECESSARY TO SATISFY IMPERATIVE REQUIREMENTS - PERMISSIBILITY - CONDITIONS - BAN ON IMPORTATION BASED ON LEGISLATION NOT APPLICABLE WITHOUT DISTINCTION TO BOTH DOMESTIC AND IMPORTED PRODUCTS - NOT PERMISSIBLE

( EEC TREATY, ART . 30 )

Summary

1 . ARTICLES 30 AND 36 OF THE TREATY PRECLUDE THE COURTS OF A MEMBER STATE FROM ISSUING AN INJUNCTION PROHIBITING THE IMPORTATION FROM ANOTHER MEMBER STATE OF A PRODUCT WHICH INFRINGES A PATENT ENDORSED "LICENCES OF RIGHT" AGAINST AN IMPORTER WHO HAS UNDERTAKEN TO TAKE A LICENCE ON THE TERMS PRESCRIBED BY LAW WHERE NO SUCH INJUNCTION MAY BE ISSUED IN THE SAME CIRCUMSTANCES AGAINST AN INFRINGER WHO MANUFACTURES THE PRODUCT IN THE NATIONAL TERRITORY .

THOSE PROVISIONS PROHIBIT THE COMPETENT ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITIES FROM IMPOSING ON A LICENSEE TERMS IMPEDING THE IMPORTATION FROM OTHER MEMBER STATES OF A PRODUCT COVERED BY A PATENT ENDORSED "LICENCES OF RIGHT" WHERE THOSE AUTHORITIES MAY NOT REFUSE TO GRANT A LICENCE TO AN UNDERTAKING WHICH WOULD MANUFACTURE THE PRODUCT IN THE NATIONAL TERRITORY AND MARKET IT THERE .

THE FACT IS WHOLLY IMMATERIAL THAT THE PRODUCT IN QUESTION IS A PHARMACEUTICAL PRODUCT AND COMES FROM A MEMBER STATE WHERE IT IS NOT PATENTABLE .

2 . IT IS ONLY WHERE THEY APPLY WITHOUT DISTINCTION TO BOTH DOMESTIC AND IMPORTED PRODUCTS THAT NATIONAL RULES IMPEDING IMPORTS DO NOT FALL UNDER THE PROHIBITION LAID DOWN BY ARTICLE 30 OF THE TREATY IF THEY ARE NECESSARY IN ORDER TO SATISFY IMPERATIVE REQUIREMENTS RELATING IN PARTICULAR TO CONSUMER PROTECTION OR FAIR TRADING .

A PROHIBITION ON IMPORTATION CANNOT BE JUSTIFIED ON GROUNDS OF SUCH REQUIREMENTS WHERE THE NATIONAL LEGISLATION ON WHICH IT IS BASED IS NOT APPLICABLE WITHOUT DISTINCTION TO DOMESTIC AND IMPORTED PRODUCTS .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

AGRICULTURE - COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKETS - BEEF AND VEAL - PURCHASE OF MEAT FROM INTERVENTION AT A PRICE FIXED IN ECUS - CHANGE IN THE REPRESENTATIVE RATES AFTER THE CONCLUSION OF THE PURCHASE CONTRACT - FAILURE OF THE PURCHASER TO CARRY OUT THE CONTRACT - FORFEITURE OF SECURITY - PRINCIPLE OF PROPORTIONALITY - INFRINGEMENT - NONE

( COMMISSION REGULATION NO 2173/79, ART . 16*(2 )*)

Summary

WHERE, OWING TO A CHANGE IN THE GREEN RATE AFTER THE CONCLUSION OF A CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF BEEF AND VEAL FROM INTERVENTION STOCKS, THE PURCHASER FINDS IT ADVANTAGEOUS NOT TO PERFORM THE CONTRACT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS WHICH HE ACCEPTED, THE FORFEITURE UNDER ARTICLE 16*(2 ) OF REGULATION NO 2173/79 OF THE SECURITY DESIGNED TO GUARANTEE THE PERFORMANCE BY THE BUYER OF HIS CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A DISPROPORTIONATE CONSEQUENCE, A FORTIORI WHERE, WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE INTERVENTION AGENCY, THE PURCHASER OBTAINED A NEW CONTRACT RELATING TO THE SAME QUANTITY OF GOODS BUT AT THE MORE FAVOURABLE PRICE RESULTING FROM THE CHANGE IN THE GREEN RATE .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS - QUANTITATIVE RESTRICTIONS - MEASURES HAVING EQUIVALENT EFFECT - DIFFERENCE OF TREATMENT IN FAVOUR OF IMPORTED PRODUCTS - PERMISSIBLE

( EEC TREATY, ART . 30 )

2 . COMMUNITY LAW - PRINCIPLES - EQUAL TREATMENT - APPLICATION BY A MEMBER STATE OF OBLIGATIONS ARISING FROM A HARMONIZING DIRECTIVE ONLY TO DOMESTICALLY-PRODUCED PRODUCTS - DISCRIMINATION WHICH MAY NOT BE RELIED ON BY TRADERS - COMMISSION' S OBLIGATION TO ACT

Summary

1 . THE PURPOSE OF ARTICLE 30 OF THE TREATY IS TO ELIMINATE OBSTACLES TO THE IMPORTATION OF GOODS AND NOT TO ENSURE THAT GOODS OF NATIONAL ORIGIN ALWAYS ENJOY THE SAME TREATMENT AS IMPORTED GOODS . A DIFFERENCE OF TREATMENT AS BETWEEN GOODS WHICH IS NOT CAPABLE OF RESTRICTING IMPORTS OR OF PREJUDGING THE MARKETING OF IMPORTED GOODS DOES NOT FALL WITHIN THE PROHIBITION CONTAINED IN THAT ARTICLE .

2 . TREATMENT WHICH WORKS TO THE DETRIMENT OF NATIONAL PRODUCTS AS COMPARED WITH IMPORTED PRODUCTS AND WHICH IS PUT INTO EFFECT BY A MEMBER STATE IN A SECTOR WHICH IS NOT SUBJECT TO COMMUNITY RULES OR IN RELATION TO WHICH THERE HAS BEEN NO HARMONIZATION OF NATIONAL LAWS DOES NOT COME WITHIN THE SCOPE OF COMMUNITY LAW . ON THE OTHER HAND, WHEN A HARMONIZING DIRECTIVE CREATES OBLIGATIONS CONCERNING ALL FOODSTUFFS MARKETED IN THE COMMUNITY, THE FACT THAT NATIONAL RULES IMPOSE THOSE OBLIGATIONS ONLY ON DOMESTIC PRODUCTS TO THE EXCLUSION OF PRODUCTS IMPORTED FROM OTHER MEMBER STATES GIVES RISE TO DISCRIMINATION AGAINST CERTAIN TRADERS CONTRARY TO COMMUNITY LAW . HOWEVER, SUCH A SITUATION DOES NOT GIVE THOSE TRADERS THE RIGHT TO SEEK EXEMPTION FROM THE OBLIGATIONS LAID DOWN IN THE DIRECTIVE . IT IS FOR THE COMMISSION TO ENSURE THAT THE NATIONAL AUTHORITIES PUT AN END TO THAT SITUATION BY EXTENDING THE SCOPE OF THE NATIONAL RULES TO ALL THE PRODUCTS COVERED BY THE DIRECTIVE .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . APPLICATION FOR A DECLARATION THAT A MEASURE IS VOID - NATIONAL OR LEGAL PERSONS - MEASURES OF DIRECT AND INDIVIDUAL CONCERN TO THEM - COMMISSION DECISION REFUSING TO CHARGE TO THE EAGGF A SUBSIDY IMPROPERLY GRANTED BY THE NATIONAL AUTHORITIES - ACTION BY THE RECIPIENT OF THE SUBSIDY WHO WAS OBLIGED TO REPAY IT TO THE NATIONAL AUTHORITIES - INADMISSIBILITY

( EEC TREATY, SECOND PARAGRAPH OF ART . 173 )

2 . ACTION FOR COMPENSATION - PURPOSE - CLAIM FOR COMPENSATION BASED ON THE ALLEGATION THAT A DECISION ADOPTED BY A NATIONAL AGENCY IN IMPLEMENTATION OF COMMUNITY LEGISLATION IS UNLAWFUL - JURISDICTION OF THE COURT - CONDITIONS - ATTRIBUTABILITY TO A COMMUNITY INSTITUTION OF THE ALLEGED UNLAWFUL CONDUCT

( EEC TREATY, ART . 178 AND SECOND PARAGRAPH OF ART . 215; REGULATION NO 729/70 OF THE COUNCIL )

Summary

1 . A COMMISSION DECISION ADDRESSED TO A MEMBER STATE, REFUSING TO

RECOGNIZE AS CHARGEABLE TO THE EAGGF SUBSIDIES WHICH WERE

IMPROPERLY GRANTED BY THE NATIONAL AUTHORITIES TO A TRADER IS NOT

OF DIRECT AND INDIVIDUAL CONCERN TO THAT TRADER WITHIN THE MEANING

OF THE SECOND PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 173 OF THE TREATY . THE FACT

THAT THAT DECISION MAY HAVE PROMPTED THE NATIONAL AUTHORITIES TO

RECOVER THE SUMS IMPROPERLY GRANTED, AS THEY HAD RESERVED THE

RIGHT TO DO AS A PRECAUTION AGAINST SUCH AN EVENTUALITY, IS

IRRELEVANT .

2 . THE COMBINED PROVISIONS OF ARTICLES 178 AND 215 OF THE TREATY GIVE

JURISDICTION TO THE COURT ONLY TO AWARD COMPENSATION FOR DAMAGE

CAUSED BY THE COMMUNITY INSTITUTIONS OR BY THEIR SERVANTS IN THE

PERFORMANCE OF THEIR DUTIES OR, IN OTHER WORDS, FOR DAMAGE CAPABLE

OF GIVING RISE TO NON-CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY ON THE PART OF THE

COMMUNITY . DAMAGE CAUSED BY NATIONAL INSTITUTIONS, ON THE OTHER

HAND, CAN GIVE RISE TO LIABILITY ONLY ON THE PART OF THOSE

INSTITUTIONS AND THE NATIONAL COURTS RETAIN SOLE JURISDICTION TO

ORDER COMPENSATION FOR SUCH DAMAGE .

WHERE THE CONTESTED DECISION WAS ADOPTED BY A NATIONAL BODY ACTING

IN ORDER TO ENSURE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMMUNITY RULES IT IS

NECESSARY, IN ORDER TO ESTABLISH THE JURISDICTION OF THE COURT, TO

DETERMINE WHETHER THE UNLAWFUL CONDUCT ALLEGED IN SUPPORT OF THE

CLAIM FOR COMPENSATION IS IN FACT THE RESPONSIBILITY OF A

COMMUNITY INSTITUTION . THAT IS NOT THE CASE WHERE A NATIONAL

AGENCY, FOLLOWING A COMMISSION DECISION ON THE CLEARANCE OF EAGGF

ACCOUNTS, DECIDES ON ITS OWN INITIATIVE TO RECOVER THE IMPROPERLY

GRANTED SUBSIDIES, IN FULFILMENT OF THE GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPOSED

UPON IT BY REGULATION NO 729/70 ON THE FINANCING OF THE COMMON

AGRICULTURAL POLICY .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . OFFICIALS - RECRUITMENT - COMPETITIONS - COMPETITIONS ON THE BASIS OF TESTS - DISCRETION OF THE SELECTION BOARD - LIMITS - REVIEW BY THE COURT - SCOPE

2 . OFFICIALS - RECRUITMENT - COMPETITIONS - SELECTION BOARD - MARKING OF THE TESTS BY DIFFERENT EXAMINERS - RECOURSE TO EXAMINERS - WHETHER PERMISSIBLE - CONDITIONS

3 . OFFICIALS - RECRUITMENT - COMPETITIONS - SELECTION BOARD - SECRECY OF THE PROCEEDINGS - SCOPE

( STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS, ANNEX III, ART . 6 )

Summary

1 . IN ASSESSING THE RESULTS OF TESTS, SELECTION BOARDS FOR COMPETITIONS ENJOY A WIDE DISCRETION . HOWEVER, IT IS FOR THE COURT TO ASCERTAIN WHETHER THE EXERCISE OF THAT DISCRETION, WHICH MUST BE BASED ON OBJECTIVE CRITERIA, IS VITIATED BY A MANIFEST ERROR OR BY A MISUSE OF POWERS OR WHETHER THE SELECTION BOARD HAS MANIFESTLY EXCEEDED THE LIMITS OF ITS DISCRETION .

2 . THERE IS NO RULE OR HIGHER PRINCIPLE OF LAW REQUIRING A SELECTION BOARD FOR A COMPETITION TO HAVE ALL THE CATEGORIES OF TEST PAPERS MARKED BY THE SAME EXAMINER . THERE IS NO IRREGULARITY IF THE METHODS OF MARKING DO NOT DIFFER FROM ONE TO ANOTHER CANDIDATE AND THE SELECTION BOARD RETAINS THE POWER TO MAKE THE FINAL ASSESSMENT .

3 . THE SECRECY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF SELECTION BOARDS FOR COMPETITIONS WAS INTRODUCED WITH A VIEW TO GUARANTEEING THE INDEPENDENCE OF SELECTION BOARDS AND THE OBJECTIVITY OF THEIR PROCEEDINGS, BY PROTECTING THEM FROM ALL EXTERNAL INTERFERENCE AND PRESSURES . CONSEQUENTLY, OBSERVANCE OF THIS SECRECY PRECLUDES THE DIVULGING OF THE ATTITUDES ADOPTED BY INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS OF SELECTION BOARDS AND ALSO THE DISCLOSURE OF ANY DETAILS RELATING TO INDIVIDUAL OR COMPARATIVE ASSESSMENTS OF CANDIDATES . HOWEVER, IT DOES NOT PRECLUDE THE MERE COMMUNICATION OF A PROCEDURAL DECISION CONCERNING THE ACTUAL WAY IN WHICH THE MARKING IS TO PROCEED, WHICH HAS NO EFFECT ON THE OBJECTIVE CONDUCT OF THE SELECTION BOARD' S PROCEEDINGS .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . FREE MOVEMENT OF PERSONS - FREEDOM OF ESTABLISHMENT - AIM - PROHIBITION OF DISCRIMINATION ON GROUNDS OF NATIONALITY - NATIONAL RULES GOVERNING COMMERCIAL DISTRIBUTION - WHETHER PERMISSIBLE - CONDITIONS - COMPLIANCE WITH THE PRINCIPLE OF EQUAL TREATMENT

( EEC TREATY, ART . 52 )

2 . FREE MOVEMENT OF PERSONS - FREEDOM OF ESTABLISHMENT - DIRECTIVE 64/223 - DEFINITION OF WHOLESALE TRADE ACTIVITIES - INAPPLICABLE OUTSIDE THE CONTEXT OF FREEDOM OF ESTABLISHMENT

( COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 64/223, ART . 2 ( 2 )*)

Summary

1 . ARTICLE 52 OF THE TREATY IS INTENDED TO ENSURE THAT ALL NATIONALS OF MEMBER STATES WHO ESTABLISH THEMSELVES IN ANOTHER MEMBER STATE, EVEN IF THAT ESTABLISHMENT IS ONLY SECONDARY, RECEIVE THE SAME TREATMENT AS NATIONALS IN THAT STATE AND IT PROHIBITS, AS A RESTRICTION ON FREEDOM OF ESTABLISHMENT, ANY DISCRIMINATION ON GROUNDS OF NATIONALITY .

CONSEQUENTLY, IN THE CASE OF COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES IN THE DISTRIBUTION SECTOR, FOR WHICH THERE ARE NO COMMON RULES, THE MEMBER STATES ARE AT LIBERTY, PROVIDED THAT THEY COMPLY WITH THAT OBLIGATION TO ACCORD EQUAL TREATMENT, TO ADOPT RULES GOVERNING WHOLESALE TRADE OR RETAIL TRADE AND TO LAY DOWN THE CRITERIA FOR DISTINGUISHING BETWEEN THOSE TWO FORMS OF DISTRIBUTION .

2 . ARTICLE 2*(2 ) OF DIRECTIVE 64/223 CONCERNING THE ATTAINMENT OF FREEDOM OF ESTABLISHMENT AND FREEDOM TO PROVIDE SERVICES IN RESPECT OF ACTIVITIES IN WHOLESALE TRADE DEFINES WHOLESALE TRADE ACTIVITIES SOLELY IN ORDER TO DEFINE THE MATTER COVERED BY THE OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE DIRECTIVE . IN VIEW OF ITS SPECIFIC FUNCTION IN THE CONTEXT OF DIRECTIVE 64/223/EEC, THAT ARTICLE CANNOT BE INTERPRETED AS BEING INTENDED TO PROVIDE A GENERAL COMMUNITY DEFINITION OF WHOLESALE TRADE ACTIVITIES WHICH CAN BE APPLIED IN CASES IN WHICH NO PROBLEM ARISES WITH REGARD TO FREEDOM OF ESTABLISHMENT . THEREFORE IT CANNOT BE RELIED UPON BY AN INDIVIDUAL BEFORE THE COURTS OF A MEMBER STATE IN ORDER TO OPPOSE THE APPLICATION TO HIM OF NATIONAL RULES GOVERNING THE PURSUIT OF RETAIL TRADE ACTIVITIES .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

FREE MOVEMENT OF PERSONS - FREEDOM OF ESTABLISHMENT - FREEDOM TO PROVIDE SERVICES - ACCESS TO PUBLIC AID FOR HOUSING - EXCLUSION OF NATIONALS OF THE OTHER MEMBER STATES - NOT PERMISSIBLE

( EEC TREATY, ARTS 52 AND 59 )

Summary

A NATIONAL OF A MEMBER STATE WHO WISHES TO PURSUE AN ACTIVITY AS A SELF-EMPLOYED PERSON IN ANOTHER MEMBER STATE MUST, IF COMPLETE EQUALITY OF COMPETITION WITH THE NATIONALS OF THE LATTER STATE IS TO BE ASSURED, BE ABLE TO OBTAIN HOUSING IN CONDITIONS EQUIVALENT TO THOSE ENJOYED BY SUCH NATIONALS . IN THIS RESPECT, EVEN THOUGH IN PRACTICE THE HOUSING NEEDS OF COMMUNITY NATIONALS WHO MAKE USE OF THE FREEDOMS CONFERRED BY THE TREATY ARE VARIABLE, IT IS NOT PERMISSIBLE, IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE OF NATIONAL TREATMENT, TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN DIFFERENT FORMS OF ESTABLISHMENT OR TO EXCLUDE PROVIDERS OF SERVICES .

THAT IS WHY THERE IS AN INFRINGEMENT OF ARTICLES 52 AND 59 OF THE TREATY WHERE A MEMBER STATE, UNDER VARIOUS PROVISIONS OF ITS LEGISLATION, PERMITS ONLY ITS OWN NATIONALS TO PURCHASE AND LEASE HOUSING BUILT OR RENOVATED WITH THE HELP OF PUBLIC FUNDS AND TO OBTAIN REDUCED-RATE MORTGAGE LOANS .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

OFFICIALS - SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL SERVICES - TRANSFER FROM CATEGORY B TO CATEGORY A - DISCRETION OF THE ADMINISTRATION REGARDING THE CHOICE OF PROCEDURE APPLICABLE

( ART . 45 ( 2 ) AND ART . 98 ( 2 ) OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS )

Summary

ALTHOUGH ARTICLE 45 ( 2 ) OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS, WHICH PROVIDES THAT AN OFFICIAL MAY BE TRANSFERRED FROM ONE SERVICE TO ANOTHER OR PROMOTED FROM ONE CATEGORY TO ANOTHER ONLY ON THE BASIS OF A COMPETITION, IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE SECOND PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 98, WHICH PROVIDES THAT THAT PRINCIPLE SHALL NOT APPLY TO OFFICIALS IN THE SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL SERVICES, ALLOW THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY TO PROMOTE SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL STAFF TO A HIGHER CATEGORY WITHOUT USING THE COMPETITION PROCEDURE, IT IS NEITHER THE PURPOSE NOR THE EFFECT OF THOSE PROVISIONS TO PROHIBIT THE USE OF SUCH A PROCEDURE .

IN VIEW OF THE DISCRETION WHICH THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY ENJOYS IN THE MATTER, IT MAY ALSO IMPLEMENT A SUI GENERIS PROCEDURE BASED ON THE COMPETITION PROCEDURE BUT DIFFERING FROM IT IN CERTAIN RESPECTS .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . AGRICULTURE - COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKETS - MILK AND MILK PRODUCTS - SKIMMED-MILK POWDER HELD BY INTERVENTION AGENCIES - COMPULSORY PURCHASE - SECURITY SCHEME ESTABLISHED BY REGULATION NO 563/76, DECLARED INVALID - ANNULMENT BY A NATIONAL COURT OF A DEMAND FOR THE PROVISION OF SECURITY - POWER TO DO SO

( COUNCIL REGULATION NO 563/76 )

2 . OWN RESOURCES OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES - AMOUNTS LEVIED BY THE MEMBER STATES - SECURITY LODGED PURSUANT TO REGULATION NO 563/76, DECLARED INVALID - REPAYMENT - DEPENDENT ON THE DATE THE RELEVANT COMMERCIAL TRANSACTIONS WERE CONCLUDED

( COUNCIL REGULATION NO 563/76; COMMISSION REGULATION NO 677/76 )

Summary

1 . THERE IS NO RULE OF COMMUNITY LAW TO THE EFFECT THAT A DEMAND FOR THE PROVISION OF SECURITY MADE PURSUANT TO COUNCIL REGULATION NO 563/76 ON THE COMPULSORY PURCHASE OF SKIMMED-MILK POWDER HELD BY INTERVENTION AGENCIES FOR USE IN FEEDINGSTUFFS, WHICH WAS DECLARED INVALID BY THE JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF 13 MAY 1981 ( CONFIRMING ON THAT ISSUE THE JUDGMENT OF 5 JULY 1977 ), MAY NOT, IF CHALLENGED IN ACCORDANCE WITH NATIONAL LAW, BE ANNULLED .

2 . WHERE PROTEIN PRODUCTS ACQUIRED UNDER REGULATION NO 563/76 HAVE BEEN RESOLD ON THE BASIS OF CONTRACTS MADE BEFORE THAT REGULATION ENTERED INTO FORCE, THERE IS A RULE OF COMMUNITY LAW TO THE EFFECT THAT THE AMOUNT OF THE SECURITY LODGED PURSUANT TO A DEMAND MADE ON THE BASIS OF THAT REGULATION MAY NOT BE REPAID EVEN IF THE DEMAND WAS CHALLENGED IN ACCORDANCE WITH NATIONAL LAW AND ANNULLED ON THE GROUND THAT THE REGULATION WAS INVALID . WHERE, ON THE OTHER HAND, PROTEIN PRODUCTS BOUGHT SUBJECT TO THE PROVISION OF SECURITY HAVE BEEN RESOLD UNDER CONTRACTS MADE AFTER THE ENTRY INTO FORCE OF THE SAID REGULATION AND THE DEMAND FOR SECURITY WAS CHALLENGED IN ACCORDANCE WITH NATIONAL LAW AND ANNULLED ON THE GROUND THAT THE REGULATION WAS INVALID, NO RULE OF COMMUNITY LAW PREVENTS REPAYMENT OF THE SECURITY .

NEITHER THE FACT THAT SECURITY LODGED PURSUANT TO REGULATIONS NOS 563/76 AND 677/76 HAS BEEN DECLARED FORFEIT NOR THE TIME OF ITS FORFEITURE IS RELEVANT UNDER COMMUNITY LAW TO THE REPAYMENT OF THE SECURITY .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

AGRICULTURE - COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKETS - FRUIT AND VEGETABLES - QUALITY STANDARDS - EXHAUSTIVE NATURE - NATIONAL RULES EXTENDING THEIR SCOPE - NOT PERMISSIBLE

( REGULATIONS NOS 23/62 AND 1035/72 OF THE COUNCIL )

Summary

SINCE THE SYSTEM OF COMMON QUALITY STANDARDS ESTABLISHED BY THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKET IN FRUIT AND VEGETABLES IS EXHAUSTIVE IN NATURE, A MEMBER STATE HAS NO POWER TO EXTEND TO OTHER PRODUCTS PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS

WHICH, UNDER THE COMMUNITY RULES, APPLY ONLY TO CERTAIN VEGETABLES, NAMELY ONIONS, ARTICHOKES, CELERY AND HEADED CABBAGE . EVEN THOUGH THOSE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS CONCERN ONLY DOMESTIC PRODUCTS, THEY UNDERMINE THE COMMON CHARACTER OF THE QUALITY STANDARDS WHICH APPLY UNIFORMLY TO ALL PRODUCTS IN THE COMMUNITY .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . AGRICULTURE - COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKETS - EXPORT REFUNDS - ADVANCE FIXING - EXPORT CERTIFICATE ALSO RECORDING ADVANCE FIXING OF THE MONETARY COMPENSATORY AMOUNT - CERTIFICATE VALID IN ONLY ONE MEMBER STATE - EXPORT FROM ANOTHER MEMBER STATE - GRANT OF THE REFUND AT THE RATE FIXED IN ADVANCE - EXCLUDED

( COUNCIL REGULATION NO 2727/75, ART . 16 ( 4 ); COMMISSION REGULATION NO 243/78, ART . 2 ( 3 ) )

2 . COMMUNITY LAW - PRINCIPLES - PROTECTION OF LEGITIMATE EXPECTATIONS - SCOPE - NATIONAL AUTHORITIES RESPONSIBLE FOR APPLYING COMMUNITY LAW - AUTHORITIES ACTING IN BREACH OF COMMUNITY RULES - NO LEGITIMATE EXPECTATIONS

( COMMISSION REGULATION NO 243/78, ART . 2 ( 3 ) )

Summary

1 . ARTICLE 2 ( 3 ) OF REGULATION NO 243/78 AND ARTICLE 16 ( 4 ) OF REGULATION NO 2727/75 MUST BE INTERPRETED AS MEANING THAT THE ADVANCE FIXING OF THE EXPORT REFUND NOTED ON AN EXPORT CERTIFICATE IN WHICH THE MONETARY COMPENSATORY AMOUNT IS ALSO FIXED IN ADVANCE CANNOT BE APPLIED WHERE THE GOODS ARE EXPORTED FROM A MEMBER STATE OTHER THAN THAT SPECIFIED IN THE CERTIFICATE .

2 . ALTHOUGH THE PRINCIPLE OF THE PROTECTION OF LEGITIMATE EXPECTATIONS, BEING A GENERAL PRINCIPLE OF COMMUNITY LAW, MUST BE OBSERVED BY ALL NATIONAL AUTHORITIES RESPONSIBLE FOR APPLYING COMMUNITY LAW, CONDUCT ON THE PART OF SUCH AN AUTHORITY WHICH IS CONTRARY TO A PRECISE PROVISION OF COMMUNITY LAW IS NOT CAPABLE OF GIVING RISE TO LEGITIMATE EXPECTATIONS ON THE PART OF AN ECONOMIC OPERATOR WHO BENEFITS FROM THE SITUATION THEREBY CREATED .

ACCORDINGLY, IN THE CASE OF AN EXPORT CERTIFICATE RECORDING THE ADVANCE FIXING OF THE EXPORT REFUND AND OF THE MONETARY COMPENSATORY AMOUNT AND EXPRESSLY INDICATING THAT IT IS VALID IN ONLY ONE MEMBER STATE, THE COMPLETION OF THE CUSTOMS FORMALITIES BY THE CUSTOMS AUTHORITIES OF ANOTHER MEMBER STATE CANNOT GIVE RISE TO LEGITIMATE EXPECTATIONS ON THE PART OF THE EXPORTER THAT THE EXPORT REFUND WILL BE GRANTED IN THE AMOUNT FIXED IN ADVANCE, IN BREACH OF ARTICLE 2 ( 3 ) OF REGULATION NO 243/78 .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

TAX PROVISIONS - HARMONIZATION OF LAWS - TURNOVER TAXES - COMMON SYSTEM OF VALUE-ADDED TAX - SUPPLY OF SERVICES EFFECTED FOR CONSIDERATION - CONCEPT - ACTIVITIES OF A NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT BODY FOR THE FRUIT INDUSTRY FINANCED BY MEANS OF A CHARGE LEVIED ON GROWERS - EXCLUSION

( COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 77/388, ART . 2 ( 1 ) )

Summary

THE EXERCISE BY A BODY GOVERNED BY PUBLIC LAW ENTRUSTED WITH DEVELOPMENT FUNCTIONS IN THE FRUIT-GROWING INDUSTRY OF ACTIVITIES CONCERNED WITH ADVERTISING, PROMOTION AND THE IMPROVEMENT OF PRODUCT QUALITY, AND THE IMPOSITION ON GROWERS OF A MANDATORY CHARGE TO FINANCE THOSE ACTIVITIES DO NOT CONSTITUTE "THE SUPPLY OF ... SERVICES EFFECTED FOR CONSIDERATION" WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE SIXTH DIRECTIVE ( 77/388/EEC ) ON THE HARMONIZATION OF THE LAWS OF THE MEMBER STATES RELATING TO TURNOVER TAXES .

THAT CONCEPT PRESUPPOSES THE EXISTENCE OF A DIRECT LINK BETWEEN THE SERVICE PROVIDED AND THE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED, AND NO SUCH LINK EXISTS WHERE THE FUNCTIONS OF THAT BODY RELATE TO THE COMMON INTERESTS OF THE GROWERS, AND THE INDIVIDUAL GROWERS, FROM WHOM THE CHARGES ARE RECOVERABLE REGARDLESS OF WHETHER OR NOT A GIVEN SERVICE CONFERS A BENEFIT ON THEM, RECEIVE ONLY INDIRECTLY THE BENEFITS ACCRUING GENERALLY TO THE INDUSTRY AS A WHOLE .