ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Common Customs Tariff – Tariff headings – Flatbed vehicle with a sophisticated tipping system – Classification under subheading 8704 10 of the Combined Nomenclature

Summary

The fact that a flatbed vehicle is equipped with an intricate, versatile and precise tipping function does not exclude its classification as a dumper within the meaning of subheading 8704 10 of the Combined Nomenclature set out in Annex I to Regulation No 2658/87 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff, in the versions resulting from Regulations Nos 3115/94 and 3009/95.

It is clear from the descriptions of such vehicles in the explanatory notes on the Combined Nomenclature and the Harmonised System that an essential characteristic of dumpers is to have a tipping hopper or an opening bottom for the transport of rubble and various materials. There is, by contrast, no indication in those notes that the form or functioning of the tipping hoppers can constitute, by themselves, decisive criteria for the classification of a vehicle as a dumper.

(see paras 32, 37, operative part)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Transport – Maritime transport – Freedom to provide services – Restrictions – National measure making the provision of maritime cabotage services subject to production by Community ships entered in a second or international register of a certificate declaring that those ships are authorised to provide cabotage in the flag State – Whether permissible – Conditions – Burden of proof

(Council Regulation No 3577/92, Art. 1)

2. Transport – Maritime transport – Freedom to provide services – Maritime cabotage – Regulation No 3577/92 – Definition of ‘island’

(Council Regulation No 3577/92)

3. Transport – Maritime transport – Freedom to provide services – Maritime cabotage – Principle of the responsibility of the flag State for matters relating to manning – Scope – Cruise liners carrying out island cabotage – Included – Condition

(Council Regulation No 3577/92, Art. 3(1))

Summary

1. A national measure making the provision of maritime cabotage services subject to production by Community ships entered in a second or international register of a certificate issued by an authority of the flag State declaring that they are authorised to provide cabotage services constitutes a restriction on the freedom to provide those services.

Such a measure may nevertheless be justified by overriding reasons in the general interest provided that it is applicable to all persons and undertakings pursuing an activity in the territory of the host Member State, it is suitable for securing the attainment of the objective which it pursues and it does not go beyond what is necessary in order to attain that objective. As regards those latter conditions relating to the proportionality of the measure in question, the Commission, which has the burden of proof in proceedings for failure to fulfil obligations, by proposing alternative solutions which either do not serve fully to attain the objective sought or in practice turn out to be more complex or more restrictive of freedom to provide services than the certificate system, has not shown that there is a failure to fulfil obligations under Regulation No 3577/92 applying the principle of freedom to provide services to maritime transport within Member States (maritime cabotage).

(see paras 30-33, 35)

2. An island within the meaning of Regulation No 3577/92 applying the principle of freedom to provide services to maritime transport within Member States (maritime cabotage) is defined as an area of dry land elevated permanently from the sea.

An area of land which is separated from the rest of the mainland only by a man-made canal a few tens of metres wide cannot be classified as an island.

(see paras 42-43)

3. Article 3(1) of Regulation No 3577/92 applying the principle of freedom to provide services to maritime transport within Member States (maritime cabotage) applies to all cruise liners, irrespective of the nature of the cabotage they carry out. Therefore, as regards cruise liners exceeding 650 gt which carry out island cabotage, all matters relating to manning are the responsibility of the flag State.

(see paras 54, 56)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Officials – Staff of the European Central Bank – Nature of the employment relationship – Contractual and not governed by public law

2. Officials – Staff of the European Central Bank – Organisation of departments – Definition or redefinition of the duties assigned to staff – Discretion of the administration – Limits – Interests of the service – Due consideration to be given to grade and classification

Summary

1. The employment relationship between the European Central Bank and its staff is contractual rather than governed by public service regulations. However, the employment contract is concluded with a Community body, entrusted with public interest responsibilities and authorised to lay down, by regulation, provisions applicable to its staff. It follows that the consent of the parties to such a contract is necessarily circumscribed by all manner of obligations deriving from those particular responsibilities and incumbent upon both the management bodies of the Bank and its staff.

(see paras 33-34)

2. The Community institutions have a broad discretion to organise their departments to suit the tasks entrusted to them and to assign the staff available to them in the light of such tasks, provided such assignment is made in the interest of the service and conforms with the principle of assignment to an equivalent post. The European Central Bank must, similarly, have a wide discretion to organise its departments to suit the responsibilities entrusted to it, and, consequently, having regard to those responsibilities, to define or redefine the duties which are assigned to its staff, provided that that discretion is exercised solely in the interest of the service and giving due consideration to the grade and classification which each member of staff may claim under the Conditions of Employment.

(see paras 42-43)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Social policy – Men and women – Equal pay – Pay – Concept – Bridging allowance provided for by a social plan and paid to dismissed workers – Included – Age at which entitlement to the allowance arises – Age different according to sex – Permitted

(Art. 141 EC; Council Directive 75/117, Art. 1)

Summary

A bridging allowance originating from a social plan which was the result of an agreement between management and labour as part of an operation to restructure an undertaking, owed by that undertaking to workers who have reached a certain age at the time of their dismissal, constitutes a benefit granted in connection with the employment relationship and therefore falls under the concept of ‘pay’ within the meaning of Article 141 EC and Article 1 of Directive 75/117 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the application of the principle of equal pay for men and women.

Those provisions do not preclude the application of a social plan providing for a difference in the treatment of male and female workers in terms of the age at which they are entitled to a bridging allowance, since, under the national statutory scheme governing early retirement pensions, they are in different situations with regard to the factors relevant to the grant of that allowance.

(see paras 38-39, 48, 51, operative part)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Environment – Waste – Directive 75/442, as amended by Directive 91/156 – Definition – Substance which is discarded – Subjection to disposal or recovery operations within the meaning of Annexes IIA and IIB – Insufficient

(Council Directive 75/442, as amended by Directive 91/156, Art. 1(a), first subpara., and Annexes IIA and IIB)

2. Environment – Waste – Directive 75/442, as amended by Directive 91/156 – Meaning – Possible inclusion of reused production or consumption residues

(Council Directive 75/442, as amended by Directive 91/156, Art. 1(a), first subpara.)

Summary

1. The definition of ‘waste’ in the first subparagraph of Article 1(a) of Directive 75/442 on waste, as amended by Directive 91/156 and by Decision 96/350, cannot be construed as covering exclusively substances or objects intended for, or subjected to, the disposal or recovery operations mentioned in Annexes IIA and IIB to that directive or in the equivalent lists, or to which their holder intends or is required to subject them.

(see para. 40, operative part 1)

2. The concept of ‘waste’ for the purposes of the first subparagraph of Article 1(a) of Directive 75/442 on waste, as amended by Directive 91/156 and by Decision 96/350, is not to be interpreted as excluding all production or consumption residues which can be or are reused in a cycle of production or consumption, either without prior treatment and without harm to the environment, or after undergoing prior treatment without, however, requiring a recovery operation within the meaning of Annex IIB to that directive.

(see para. 53, operative part 2)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Community law — Principles — Non-retroactivity — Exceptions — Conditions — Retroactivity required by purpose in the public interest — Whether the legitimate expectations of those concerned have been respected

2. Tax provisions — Harmonisation of laws — Turnover tax — Common system of value added tax – Deduction of input tax — Legislative amendment designed to combat contrived financial arrangements and reintroducing exemption of an economic transaction in respect of immovable property previously subject to tax and having the effect of revoking a tax adjustment — Retroactive effect — Whether permissible in the light of the principles of the protection of legitimate expectations and legal certainty — Conditions

Summary

1. Although in general the principle of legal certainty precludes a Community measure from taking effect from a point in time before its publication, it may exceptionally be otherwise where the purpose to be achieved so demands and where the legitimate expectations of those concerned are duly respected.

The same principle must be observed by the national legislature when it adopts legislation within the sphere of Community law.

(see paras 33-34)

2. The principles of the protection of legitimate expectations and legal certainty do not preclude a Member State, on an exceptional basis and in order to avoid the large-scale use, during the legislative process, of contrived financial arrangements intended to minimise the burden of value added tax that an amending law is specifically designed to combat, from giving that law retroactive effect where, inter alia, economic operators carrying out economic transactions such as those referred to by the law were warned of the impending adoption of that law and of the retroactive effect envisaged in a way that enabled them to understand the consequences of the legislative amendment planned for the transactions they carry out.

When that law exempts an economic transaction in respect of immovable property previously subject to value added tax, it may have the effect of revoking a value added tax adjustment made on account of the exercise, when immovable property was used for a transaction regarded at that time as taxable, of a right to deduct value added tax paid in respect of the supply of that immovable property.

(see para. 45, operative part)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Tax provisions – Harmonisation of laws – Turnover taxes – Common system of value added tax – Exemptions provided for by the Sixth Directive – Exemption for games of chance – National legislation excluding from the exemption the operation of such games by traders other than those running licensed public casinos – Not permissible – Individuals may rely on the relevant provision before the national court

(Council Directive 77/388, Art. 13B(f))

2. Preliminary rulings – Interpretation – Effect of interpretative judgments ratione temporis – Retroactive effect – Limits imposed by the Court – Significance for the Member State concerned of the financial consequences of the judgment – Not decisive

(Art. 234 EC)

Summary

1. Article 13B(f) of the Sixth Directive, according to which the operation of all games of chance and gaming machines is in principle to be exempted from value added tax while the Member States retain the power to lay down the conditions and limitations of that exemption, must be interpreted as meaning that it precludes national legislation which provides that the operation of all games of chance and gaming machines is exempt from VAT where it is carried out in licensed public casinos, while the operation of the same activity by traders other than those running casinos does not enjoy that exemption.

In exercising the powers conferred on them by that provision, the Member States must respect the principle of fiscal neutrality and cannot validly make that exemption dependent upon the identity of the operator of such games and machines.

Moreover, that provision has direct effect in the sense that it can be relied on by an operator of games of chance or gaming machines before national courts to prevent the application of rules of national law which are inconsistent with that provision. Where the conditions or limitations which a Member State imposes on the exemption from VAT for games of chance or gambling are contrary to the principle of fiscal neutrality, that Member State cannot rely on such conditions or limitations to refuse an operator of such games the exemption which he may legitimately claim under the Sixth Directive.

(see paras 23-24, 29-30, 37-38, operative part 1-2)

2. It is only exceptionally that, in application of a general principle of legal certainty which is inherent in the Community legal order, the Court may decide to restrict the right to rely upon a provision it has interpreted with a view to calling in question legal relations established in good faith. In that regard, the financial consequences which might ensue for a Member State from a preliminary ruling have never in themselves justified limiting the temporal effect of such a ruling

(see paras 42, 44)
Case C-22/02





Commission of the European Communities

v

Italian Republic





«(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Failure to implement Directive 1999/94/EC)»

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber), 11 September 2003

Summary of the Judgment

1.. Actions for failure to fulfil obligations – Examination of the merits by the Court – Situation to be taken into consideration – Situation on expiry of the period laid down by the reasoned opinion

(Art. 226 EC)
Case C-143/02





Commission of the European Communities

v

Italian Republic





«(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Directive 92/43/EEC – Conservation of natural habitats – Wild fauna and flora)»

Opinion of Advocate General Léger delivered on 9 January 2003 I - 0000

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber), 20 March 2003 I - 0000

Summary of the Judgment

1.. Actions for failure to fulfil obligations – Examination of the merits by the Court – Situation to be taken into consideration – Situation on expiry of the period laid down by the reasoned opinion

(Art. 226 EC)
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Second Chamber)

16 October 2003

((Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Directive 98/59/EC – Term Employer – National law which excludes non-profit-making activities from the scope of the directive – Incomplete transposition))

applicant,

v

defendant,

THE COURT (Second Chamber),,

having regard to the report of the Judge-Rapporteur,

having decided, after hearing the Advocate General, to proceed to judgment without an Opinion,
Case C-94/02 P





Établissements Biret et Cie SA

v

Council of the European Union





«(Appeal – Directives 81/602/EEC, 88/146/EEC and 96/22/EC – Prohibition on the use of certain substances having a hormonal action – Prohibition on the importation from third countries of meat from farm animals to which those substances have been administered – Application for damages – Direct effect of the WTO Agreement and the agreements annexed thereto – Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures – Recommendations and rulings of the WTO Dispute Settlement Body)»

Opinion of Advocate General Alber delivered on 15 May 2003

Judgment of the Court (Full Court), 30 September 2003

Summary of the Judgment
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Second Chamber)

22 January 2004

((Classification of goods for customs tariff purposes – Binding tariff information – Conditions for the revocation of an information))

and

and

THE COURT (Sixth Chamber),,

after considering the written observations submitted on behalf of:

─

─

having regard to the Report for the Hearing,

after hearing the oral observations of Timmermans Transport & Logistics BV and Hoogenboom Production Ltd, represented by R.G.A. Tusveld and D.L.L. van den Berg, belastingadviseurs, of the Netherlands Government, represented by S. Terstal, acting as Agent, and of the Commission, represented by H.M.H. Speyart at the hearing on 6 February 2003,

after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 11 September 2003,
Case C-145/02

Land Nordrhein-Westfalen

v

Denkavit Futtermittel GmbH

(Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht)

(Free movement of goods – Directive 70/524/EEC – Articles 28 EC and 30 EC – Additives – Harmonisation of national provisions relating to the vitamin D content of animal feedingstuffs – Legislation of a Member State prohibiting the importation of animal feedingstuffs which have been lawfully manufactured in another Member State and the vitamin D3 content of which exceeds that authorised in that first State)

Opinion of Advocate General Tizzano delivered on 4 March 2004

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber), 13 January 2005

Summary of the Judgment

Agriculture – Approximation of laws – Additives in animal feedingstuffs – Directive 70/524 – Vitamin content – National legislation prohibiting the marketing of a supplementary feedingstuff manufactured in accordance with the general rule but the vitamin D content of which exceeds that authorised in the Member State concerned – Not permissible

(Council Directive 70/524, Arts 12(1) and (2) and 19)

Article 12(1) of Directive 70/524 concerning additives in feedingstuffs provides, as a general rule, that supplementary feedingstuffs may not, in view of their specified dilution, contain levels of additives which exceed those fixed for complete feedingstuffs, although the derogation contained in Article 12(2) of that directive authorises Member States, in certain cases, to allow the vitamin D levels of supplementary feedingstuffs to exceed the maximum levels laid down for complete feedingstuffs. Under Article 19 of the directive, Member States are required to ensure that animal feedingstuffs which conform to that directive are subject only to the marketing restrictions provided for therein.

In that connection, neither the wording of the first subparagraph of Article 12(2) of the directive nor the contextual elements or purpose of that provision allow it to be established that recourse by a Member State to the possibility of laying down rules made available by that provision authorises that Member State to prohibit the importation of a supplementary feedingstuff which has been placed on the market in another Member State pursuant to Article 12(1) of the directive.

It follows that the combined provisions of Articles 12 and 19 of Directive 70/524 must be interpreted as precluding a measure by which a Member State prohibits the marketing within its territory of a supplementary animal feedingstuff, lawfully manufactured in another Member State in accordance with Article 12(1) of that directive, on grounds of its vitamin D content.

(see paras 33, 38, operative part)
Case C-334/02

Commission of the European Communities

v

French Republic

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Freedom to provide services – Free movement of capital – Tax on income arising from investments – Debtor not resident or established in France – Exclusion of the fixed levy as the rate – National legislation contrary to the terms of the Treaty)

Summary of the Judgment

Freedom to provide services – Free movement of capital – Restrictions – Tax legislation – Fixed levy on certain income arising from investments – Condition of residence or establishment of the debtor in the Member State concerned – Not permissible – Justification – Absence

(Arts 49 EC and 56 EC)

A Member State has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 49 and 59 EC where it excludes altogether the application of the rate of the fixed levy to income arising from certain investments where the debtor is not resident or established in that Member State.

Apart from having the effect of discouraging taxpayers who are resident in a Member State from entering into contracts generating such income with companies which are established in another Member State, such legislation also has a restrictive effect as regards those companies as it prevents them from raising capital in the Member State concerned.

The need to ensure payment of taxes and effective fiscal supervision does not justify such a restriction on the freedom to provide services and the free movement of capital. While the prevention of tax avoidance and the need for effective fiscal supervision may be relied upon to justify restrictions on the exercise of fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Treaty, a general presumption of tax avoidance or fraud is not, however, sufficient to justify a fiscal measure which compromises the objectives of the Treaty.

Furthermore, the restrictive measure in question does not comply with the principal of proportionality, in that it is not appropriate for securing the attainment of the objective it pursues and it goes beyond what is necessary to attain it.

(see paras 23-24, 27-28, 34, operative part)
Case C-320/02

Förvaltnings AB Stenholmen

v

Riksskatteverket

(Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Regeringsrätten (Sweden))

(Sixth VAT Directive – Article 26a – Special arrangements applicable to second-hand goods – The term ‘second-hand goods’ – Horse sold on after training)

Summary of the Judgment

Tax provisions – Harmonisation of laws – Turnover taxes – Common system of value added tax – Special arrangements for second-hand goods – ‘Second-hand goods’ – Live animals – Included – Horse bought from a private individual and sold on after training

(Council Directive 77/388, Art. 26a)

Article 26a of Sixth Council Directive 77/388 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes, which provides for special arrangements applicable to second-hand goods, which are defined as tangible movable property that is suitable for further use as it is or after repair, must be interpreted as meaning that live animals may be considered to be second-hand goods within the meaning of that provision.

Thus an animal bought from a private individual (other than the breeder) which is sold on after training for a specific use may be considered to be second-hand goods within the meaning of that provision. It is of little import that the increase in value of such an animal does not arise from a ‘repair’ in the strict meaning of the term, but from, for example, a biological process or the training of the animal. Furthermore, since the common system of value added tax aims in principle to tax the economic value added at different stages in the production and distribution process, until the phase of final use, by taxable persons acting as such, within the meaning of the Sixth Directive, it would run contrary to that system to tax the entire sale price asked by the taxable dealer instead of only the economic value added when the animal was in his possession.

(see paras 26-27, 29, operative part 1-2)