ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1. Freedom of movement for persons ° Freedom of establishment ° Workers ° Equal treatment ° Social advantages ° Payment of childbirth and maternity allowances made conditional upon residence requirements on the territory of the Member State concerned ° Not permissible ° Justification on public health grounds ° None

(EEC Treaty, Art. 52; Council Regulation No 1612/68, Art. 7(2))

2. Social security for migrant workers ° Community rules ° Material scope ° Benefits covered and benefits excluded ° Distinguishing criteria ° Maternity allowance granted on the basis of objective and legally defined criteria ° Included ° Non-contributory benefit ° Not legally relevant ° Periods of residence completed in another Member State to be taken into account

(Council Regulation No 1408/71, Arts 4(1)(a), 4(2), and 18(1))

Summary

1. A Member State discriminates against nationals of other Member States if it makes the payment of childbirth and maternity allowances conditional upon requirements of prior residence on its territory, because such requirements are more easily met by its own nationals. When granting allowances which, for employed workers, constitute social advantages, such discrimination is in breach of Article 7(2) of Regulation No 1612/68. It is also in breach of Article 52 of the Treaty because, in the case of self-employed workers, even if not practised in the context of specific rules on the pursuit of occupational activities, it nevertheless hinders the pursuit of such activities by nationals of other Member States.

Regarding childbirth allowance, public health considerations do not justify the residence requirement, because the obligation to undergo various medical examinations (which is also a condition for the grant of the allowance) may be dissociated from those considerations.

2. The distinction between benefits excluded from the scope of Regulation No 1408/71 and those which fall within its scope is based essentially on the constituent elements of the particular benefit, in particular its purposes and the conditions on which it is granted, and not on whether it is classified as a social security benefit by national legislation.

A maternity allowance must be regarded as a social security benefit falling within the material scope of Regulation No 1408/71, with the rules on aggregation of residence periods contained in Article 18 of the regulation applying to it as such, where it is granted on the basis of a legally defined position, without any individual and discretionary assessment of personal needs, and because maternity benefits are expressly mentioned in Article 4(1)(a) of the regulation. The fact that grant of the benefit is not made conditional on any contribution requirement is irrelevant, because Article 4(2) of Regulation No 1408/71 provides that the regulation also applies to non-contributory schemes.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1. Privileges and Immunities of the European Communities ° Officials and servants of the Communities ° Imposition of income tax in the State in which an official has his domicile for tax purposes ° Taxation on the basis of the rental value of a home purchased and occupied by an official in another Member State ° Permissibility

(Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Communities, Art. 14, first para.)

2. Privileges and Immunities of the European Communities ° Officials and servants of the Communities ° Exemption from national taxes on salaries paid by the Communities ° Scope ° Taxation by the State in which an official has his domicile for tax purposes of the income corresponding to the rental value of a home purchased by an official in another Member State ° Permissibility

(Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Communities, Art. 13, second para.)

Summary

1. The first paragraph of Article 14 of the Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Communities must be interpreted as meaning that officials and other servants of the Communities who are covered by that provision may be liable to pay income tax in their country of domicile for tax purposes on the rental value of the home which is occupied and owned by them in another Member State.

2. The second paragraph of Article 13 of the Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Communities precludes any national tax, regardless of its nature and the manner in which it is levied, which is imposed directly or indirectly on officials or other servants of the Communities by reason of the fact that they are in receipt of remuneration paid by the Communities, even if the tax in question is not calculated by reference to the amount of that remuneration.

Income tax levied by the State in which an official has his domicile for tax purposes on the basis of the rental value of the home purchased in another Member State does not constitute indirect taxation of remuneration. Such a tax, which is charged on an objective basis connected with a form of investment chosen by the official concerned, has no legal connection with the salaries, wages and emoluments paid by the Communities. The ownership of immovable property, like the ownership of other property, must be regarded as a separate source of income, irrespective of the origin of the funds used to purchase it.
Keywords



Keywords

++++

Actions against Member States for failure to fulfil obligations ° Judgment of the Court declaring failure ° Non-compliance ° Failure to fulfil obligations not contested

(EEC Treaty, Art. 171)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1. International agreements ° EEC-Austria Agreement ° Scope ° Reimportation into the Community, from Austria, of products of Community origin ° Included

(Agreement EEC-Austria, Art. 2)

2. International agreements ° EEC-Austria Agreement ° Prohibition of quantitative restrictions on imports and measures having equivalent effect ° Parallel importation, from Austria, of medicine already marketed on the domestic market ° Grant of marketing authorization made subject to the production by the importer of documents already supplied to the competent national authority by the manufacturer ° Not permissible

(Agreement EEC-Austria, Arts 13 and 20)

Summary

1. The scope of the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Austria which, by virtue of Article 2 thereof, applies to products "originating in the Community or Austria" is not limited to Community products exported to Austria and, conversely, Austrian products exported to the Community, but also extends to products originating in Community Member States which, after simply passing through Austrian territory, are reimported into the Community.

2. Articles 13 and 20 of the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Austria, concerning the prohibition of quantitative restrictions on imports and measures having equivalent effect, must be interpreted as precluding the health authority of a Member State from making the grant of marketing authorization, sought by a parallel importer, for a medicine from Austria which is identical in all respects to a medicine already authorized by that health authority subject to the condition that the parallel importer produce documents which were already supplied to that authority by the manufacturer of the medicine at the time when marketing authorization was first applied for.

In circumstances where the health authority already possesses all the necessary information about the medicine and there is no dispute that the imported medicine and the authorized medicine are identical, to hold that Articles 13 and 20 of the Agreement do not preclude such requirements would be to deprive those articles of much of their effectiveness.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1. Competition ° Community rules ° Obligations of the Member States ° Rules intended to reinforce existing agreements, decisions or concerted practices ° Definition

(EEC Treaty, Arts 5 and 85)

2. Competition ° Community rules ° Obligations of the Member States ° Rules preventing insurance companies and brokers from granting financial advantages to policyholders or beneficiaries of policies ° Compatibility

(EEC Treaty, Art. 3(f), second para. of Art. 5 and Art. 85)

Summary

1. Although Article 85 of the Treaty, in itself, relates only to the conduct of undertakings and does not cover legislative measures or regulations adopted by Member States, the fact nevertheless remains that that article, read in conjunction with Article 5 of the Treaty, requires the Member States not to introduce or maintain in force measures, even of a legislative or regulatory nature, which may render ineffective the competition rules applicable to undertakings. Such would be the case where a Member State required or favoured the adoption of agreements, decisions or concerted practices contrary to Article 85 or reinforced their effects or deprived its own legislation of its official character by delegating to private traders responsibility for taking economic decisions affecting the economic sphere.

2. Article 3(f), the second paragraph of Article 5 and Article 85 of the Treaty do not, in the absence of any conduct of the kind referred to in Article 85(1) of the Treaty on the part of undertakings, preclude State rules which prohibit insurance companies, whether or not they operate through brokers, and brokers themselves from granting financial advantages to policyholders or the beneficiaries of policies.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Freedom of movement for persons ° Workers ° Equal treatment ° Conditions of employment ° One-year limit on contracts of employment applicable only to foreign-language assistants in universities ° Covert discrimination ° Measure generally unjustified by fluctuating teaching needs ° Not permissible

(EEC Treaty, Art. 48(2))

Summary

The principle of equal treatment, of which Article 48(2) of the Treaty is one embodiment and which prohibits not only overt discrimination based on nationality but all covert forms of discrimination which, by applying other distinguishing criteria, in fact achieve the same result, precludes the legislation of a Member State from limiting the employment contracts of foreign-language assistants in universities in any event to one year, with the possibility of renewal, where in principle no such limit exists with regard to other teachers.

Although the provisions of the Treaty do not preclude the adoption by the Member States of measures which are applicable without distinction, which are intended to ensure the proper management of their universities and which could affect, in particular, the nationals of other Member States, such measures must respect the principle of proportionality and must be appropriate and necessary to attain the objective pursued. Community law does not prevent the conclusion of contracts of employment of foreign-language assistants for a limited period if it appears, at the time of the appointment, that the teaching requirement will not exceed that period. However, contracts which are intended to meet continuous needs for teaching must be concluded for an indeterminate period in the same way as the employment relationship of other teachers fulfilling such needs. If changes are necessary, surplus foreign-language assistants could be dismissed in order to adjust staff numbers to the new conditions, as such a measure would be less restrictive of the freedom of movement of workers than the limit on the duration of their contracts.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1. Appeals ° Intervention ° Retention in the proceedings before the Court of Justice of the capacity of intervener acquired during the proceedings before the Court of First Instance

(EEC Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 49)

2. Officials ° Social security ° Sickness insurance ° Sickness expenses ° Reimbursement ceilings ° Permissibility

(Staff Regulations of Officials, Art. 72(1))

3. Appeals ° Pleas in law ° Plea directed against a ground of the judgment not necessary as a basis for its operative part ° Nugatory

Summary

1. It follows from Article 49 of the EEC Statute of the Court of Justice that interveners before the Court of First Instance are regarded as parties before that court. Accordingly, where an appeal is brought against the judgment of the Court of First Instance, Article 115(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice applies to those interveners, and they are therefore not required to submit a fresh application for leave to intervene before the Court of Justice in accordance with Articles 93 and 123 of the Rules of Procedure.

2. In providing that an official, his spouse and his dependants are insured against sickness up to 80% of the expenditure incurred subject to rules drawn up by agreement between the institutions of the Communities, and that that ceiling is increased to 85% for certain services, Article 72(1) of the Staff Regulations establishes the maximum rate of reimbursement to which those covered by the Joint Sickness Scheme are entitled. For the remainder, that provision leaves it to the institutions to fix the reimbursement ceilings by agreement between them in the context of those rules, without prescribing any minimum thresholds.

3. In an appeal, a plea in law directed against a superabundant ground of a judgment of the Court of First Instance, the operative part of which is sufficiently based on other grounds, must be rejected.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Acts of the institutions ° Directives ° Implementation by Member States ° Inadequacy of a mere administrative circular

(Euratom Treaty, Art. 161)

Summary

Each Member State must implement directives in a manner which fully meets the requirement of legal certainty and must consequently transpose their terms into national law as binding provisions.

Accordingly, a mere administrative circular which has never been officially published, which may be amended by the administration at will and contains only recommendations which have no binding force cannot be regarded as adequate implementation of a directive.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1. Freedom of movement for persons ° Workers ° Freedom of establishment ° Provisions of the Treaty ° Persons covered ° Nationals of a Member State holding a postgraduate academic title awarded in another Member State

(EEC Treaty, Arts 48 and 52)

2. Freedom of movement for persons ° Workers ° Freedom of establishment ° Regulations by a Member State, in the absence of specific Community rules, of the use by one of its nationals of a postgraduate academic title awarded in another Member State ° Permissibility ° Conditions

(EEC Treaty, Arts 48 and 52)

Summary

1. The situation of a Community national who holds a postgraduate academic title which, awarded in another Member State, facilitates access to a profession or, at least, the pursuit of an economic activity, is governed by Community law, even as regards the relations between that national and the Member State whose nationality he possesses.

Freedom of movement for workers and the right of establishment guaranteed by Articles 48 and 52 of the Treaty are fundamental rights in the Community system, and would not be fully realized if the Member States were able to refuse to grant the benefit of the provisions of Community law to those of their nationals who have taken advantage of its provisions to acquire vocational qualifications in a Member State other than that of which they were nationals.

2. Having regard to the fact that the need to protect a public which will not necessarily be alerted to abuse of academic titles not awarded according to the rules laid down in the country in which the holder of the title intends to make use of it constitutes a legitimate interest such as to justify a restriction, by the Member State in question, of the fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Treaty, which have been exercised by one of its nationals by going to another Member State in order to undergo additional education and training, and in the absence of harmonization of the conditions under which a person holding a postgraduate academic title may make use of it in Member States other than the one in which it was awarded, Articles 48 and 52 of the Treaty must be interpreted as meaning that they do not preclude a Member State from prohibiting one of its own nationals, who holds a postgraduate academic title awarded in another Member State, from using that title on its territory without having obtained an administrative authorization for that purpose.

The administrative procedure which the person concerned must follow for that purpose must be intended solely to verify whether the postgraduate academic title was properly awarded and it must be easily accessible and not call for the payment of excessive administrative fees; any decision refusing authorization must be capable of being subject to judicial proceedings, the person concerned must be able to ascertain the reasons for the decision and the penalties prescribed for non-compliance with the authorization procedure must not be disproportionate to the gravity of the offence.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Member States ° Obligations ° Implementation of directives ° Failure ° Justification ° Not permissible

(EEC Treaty, Art. 169)

Summary

A Member State may not rely on provisions, practices or circumstances in its internal legal system to justify its failure to comply with obligations and time-limits laid down in Community directives.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1. Agriculture ° Common organization of the markets ° Beef and veal ° Export refunds ° Products excluded ° "Thin flanks", including, in Germany, "Knochenduennung" ° Discrimination between producers or consumers ° None

(Council Regulation No 805/68, Art. 18; Commission Regulations Nos 2773/82, Art. 1 and Annex, 1315/84, Art. 1 and Annex, and 2891/84)

2. Acts of the institutions ° Temporal application ° Retroactivity of a substantive rule ° Conditions

Summary

1. Article 1 of Regulation No 2773/82 and Article 1 of Regulation No 1315/84 fixing the export refunds on beef and veal, read in conjunction with subheading ex 02.01 A II a) 4 ex bb) of the Common Customs Tariff, ("Boned or boneless (cuts), excluding the thin flanks (' Fleisch- und Knochenduennung' ), the shin and the shank, each piece individually wrapped"), as set out in the annexes to those provisions, must be interpreted as meaning that in Germany, before Regulation No 2891/84 (which is not retroactive) entered into force, "Knochenduennung" was not one of the cuts of beef qualifying for export refunds. Although the effect of those provisions, as thus interpreted, was that the cuts which were ineligible for the export refunds were not exactly the same in Germany as in other Member States, the provisions are not incompatible with the principle of equal treatment, implemented in the beef and veal sector by Article 18 of Regulation No 805/68, because, in the absence of harmonization or standardization of the cutting and boning methods in the Member States, differences in the content of the terms used are unavoidable, and have only limited consequences.

2. In order to ensure observance of the principles of legal certainty and the protection of legitimate expectations, the substantive rules of Community law must be interpreted as applying to situations existing before their entry into force only in so far as it clearly follows from their terms, objectives or general scheme that such effect must be given to them.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1. Tax provisions ° Harmonization of laws ° Turnover taxes ° Common system of value added tax ° Supply of services ° Determination of place of taxation ° "Advertising services" within the meaning of the Sixth Directive ° Definition ° Promotional activity

(Council Directive 77/388, Art. 9(2)(e))

2. Actions against Member States for failure to fulfil obligations ° Objective nature ° Whether account may be taken of incorrect interpretation of Community legislation ° Not permitted

(EEC Treaty, Art. 169)

Summary

1. The concept of "advertising services" within the meaning of Article 9(2)(e) of the Sixth Directive, relating to the place of taxation for certain supplies of services, is a Community concept which must be interpreted uniformly in order to avoid instances of double taxation or non-taxation which may result from conflicting interpretations.

That concept covers a promotional activity, such as the sale of goods at reduced prices, the free distribution of goods, the supply of services at reduced prices or free of charge, or the organization of a cocktail party or a banquet, if that activity involves conveying a message intended to inform the public of the existence and qualities of the product or service which is the subject-matter of that activity, with a view to increasing sales of that product or service.

2. An action for failure to fulfil obligations brought under Article 169 of the EEC Treaty is objective in nature. In the context of such an action, it is for the Court to decide whether or not the Member State in question has failed to fulfil its obligations as alleged, and the fact that such a failure results from a Member State' s incorrect interpretation of the Community-law provisions in question cannot preclude the Court from declaring that there has been such a failure.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1. EEC Treaty ° Single European Act ° Expiry of the period fixed for the establishment of the internal market ° Effects ° Obligation of Member States to amend conditions of affiliation to their social security scheme ° None in the absence of legislation from the Council

(EEC Treaty, Art. 8a)

2. Social security for migrant workers ° Voluntary or optional continued insurance ° Admission subject to condition of prior affiliation to the national scheme ° Obligation of a Member State to admit to affiliation to its scheme a person insured only under the legislation of another Member State ° None ° Affiliation allowed for nationals who previously worked in a non-member country ° No effect

(Council Regulation No 1408/71, Art. 9(2))

Summary

1. Article 8a of the Treaty, added by the Single European Act, which provides for the adoption of measures with the aim of progressively establishing the internal market by 31 December 1992, cannot be interpreted as meaning that, in the absence of measures adopted by the Council by that date requiring the Member States to admit persons who have been subject to compulsory insurance in another Member State to voluntary affiliation to their social security schemes, an obligation to that effect arises automatically by reason of the expiry of that deadline.

Indeed, such an obligation presupposes the harmonization of the social security legislation of the Member States and no such harmonization has been carried out as Community law stands at present.

2. Article 9(2) of Regulation No 1408/71 does not require a Member State to admit persons who have been subject to compulsory insurance in another Member State and who do not satisfy the conditions for affiliation to the scheme in the first Member State to be affiliated to its social security scheme. It is for the legislation of each Member State to lay down the conditions creating the right or the obligation to become affiliated to a social security scheme or to a particular branch under such a scheme, provided always that in this connection there is no discrimination between nationals of the host State and nationals of other Member States.

Furthermore, Community law does not require a Member State which allows its nationals who have worked in a non-member country to be so affiliated, to apply the same treatment to its nationals who have worked in another Member State.