ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Actions for failure to fulfil obligations – Examination of merits by the Court – Situation to be taken into consideration – Situation on expiry of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 8)

2. Member States – Obligations – Implementation of directives – Failure to fulfil obligations – Justification imputing the failure to decentralised authorities – Not permissible (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 9)

Subject of the case

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Failure to adopt, within the prescribed time-limit, all the measures necessary to comply with Council Directive 2003/9/EC of 27 January 2003 laying down minimum standards for the reception of asylum seekers (OJ 2003 L 31, p. 18).

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 2003/9/EC of 27 January 2003 laying down minimum standards for the reception of asylum seekers, the Republic of Austria has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

2. Orders the Republic of Austria is pay the costs.
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Freedom of movement for persons

–

Freedom of establishment

–

Freedom to provide services

–

Architects

–

Recognition of diplomas and other evidence of formal qualifications (Council Directive 85/384, Arts 2 and 10) (see para. 31, operative part

)

Subject of the case

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations – Infringement of Articles 2 and 10 of Council Directive 85/384/EEC of 10 June 1985 on the mutual recognition of diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications in architecture, including measures to facilitate the effective exercise of the right of establishment and freedom to provide services (OJ 1985 L 223, p. 15) – Requirement to pass an entrance exam for the institute of architects in the host State, in order to carry on the profession of architect, for architects from other Member States who are not enrolled with their respective national institute of architects.

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

1. Declares that, by requiring holders of professional qualifications in architecture conferred by other Member States to sit an entrance exam for the Portuguese Institute of Architects if they were not enrolled in the institute of architects in another Member State, the Republic of Portugal has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 2 and 10 of Council Directive 85/384/EEC of 10 June 1985 on the mutual recognition of diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications in architecture, including measures to facilitate the effective exercise of the right of establishment and freedom to provide services, as amended by Directive 2001/19/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 14 May 2001;

2. Orders the Republic of Portugal to pay the costs.
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Actions for failure to fulfil obligations

–

Examination of merits by the Court

–

Situation to be taken into consideration

–

Situation on expiry of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 7

)

Subject of the case

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Failure to adopt, within the period prescribed, all the measures necessary to comply with Directive 2002/14/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2002 establishing a general framework for informing and consulting employees in the European Community – Joint declaration of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on employee representation (OJ 2002 L 80, p. 29).

Operative part

Operative part

1. By failing, within the period prescribed, to adopt all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2002/14/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2002 establishing a general framework for informing and consulting employees in the European Community, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive.

2. The Kingdom of Belgium is ordered to pay the costs.
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Actions for failure to fulfil obligations – Examination of merits by the Court – Situation to be taken into consideration – Situation on expiry of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 10)

2. Member States – Obligations – Implementation of directives – Failure to fulfil obligations – National system pleaded as justification – Not permissible (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 11)

Subject of the case

Re:

Failure of Member State to fulfil obligations – Failure to take within the prescribed period the necessary measures to comply with Directive 2002/15/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2002 on the organisation of the working time of persons performing mobile road transport activities (OJ 2002 L 80, p. 35).

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt within the period prescribed all the laws regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2002/15/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2002 on the organisation of the working time of persons performing mobile road transport activities, the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

2. Orders the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Preliminary rulings – Jurisdiction of the Court – Limits

(Art. 234 EC)

2. Approximation of laws – Electronic communications networks and services – Directives 2002/19 and 2002/21 – Transitional provisions

(European Parliament and Council Directives 97/33, 2002/19 and 2002/21)

Summary

1. Provided that questions referred for preliminary ruling concern the interpretation of Community law, the Court gives its ruling without, generally, having to look into the circumstances in which national courts were prompted to submit the questions and envisage applying the provision of Community law which they have asked the Court to interpret.

The matter would be different only if the provision of Community law which was submitted for interpretation by the Court was not applicable to the facts of the main proceedings, which had occurred before the accession of a new Member State to the European Union or if such provision was manifestly incapable of applying.

(see paras 22-23)

2. In accordance with the transitional provisions of Directive 2002/19 on access to, and interconnection of, electronic communications networks and associated facilities, and of Directive 2002/21 on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services, the telecommunications regulatory authority of a Member State which joined the European Union on 1 May 2004 is entitled to consider the obligation, on the part of a telecommunications company with significant market power within the meaning of Directive 97/33 on interconnection in telecommunications with regard to ensuring universal service and interoperability through application of the principles of Open Network Provision (ONP), as amended by Directive 98/61, to conclude a contract for the interconnection of its networks with that of another operator, subsequent to the accession date of the Member State concerned, within the context of the provisions of Directive 97/33, as amended.

(see para. 28, operative part)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Tax provisions – Internal taxation – Tax on the registration of imported second-hand vehicles

(Art. 90, first indent, EC)

2. Tax provisions – Internal taxation – Tax on the registration of imported second-hand vehicles

(Art. 90, first indent, EC)

Summary

1. By applying a single criterion of depreciation, based on the age of the vehicles, for the purpose of determining the taxable value of second-hand vehicles imported from another Member State into national territory in order to establish the registration tax, and by adopting a reduction in value of 7% for vehicles between 6 and 12 months old or 14% for vehicles more than a year old, which does not ensure that the tax due does not exceed, even if only in certain cases, the amount of the residual tax incorporated in the value of similar second-hand vehicles already registered in the national territory, a Member State fails to fulfil its obligations under Article 90 EC.

(see paras 40, 59, 61, operative part 1)

2. A Member State does not fail to fulfil its obligations under Article 90 EC by applying to second-hand vehicles imported from other Member States a system of taxation under which the actual depreciation of the vehicles is defined in a general and abstract way on the basis of criteria laid down by national law, in so far as: (1) the criteria on which the fixed method of calculating the depreciation of vehicles is based are made known to the public; and (2) the owner of a second-hand vehicle imported from another Member State is able to challenge the application of such a fixed method of calculation to the vehicle in order to demonstrate that it leads to taxation exceeding the amount of the residual tax incorporated in the value of similar used vehicles already registered in the national territory.

(see paras 46, 50, 60)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Tax provisions – Harmonisation of laws – Taxation of energy products and electricity – Directive 2003/96

(Council Directives 92/12, Art. 3(1) and (3), and 2003/96, Art. 2(1)(b) and (4)(b))

Summary

Directive 2003/96 restructuring the Community framework for the taxation of energy products and electricity must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation which provides for the levying of a tax on the consumption of lubricating oils, where they are intended for use, offered for sale or used other than as motor fuels or as heating fuels. Even though lubricating oils used other than as motor fuels or as heating fuels fall within the definition of ‘energy products’ for the purposes of Article 2(1)(b) of Directive 2003/96, they are explicitly excluded from the scope of that directive by the first indent of Article 2(4)(b) thereof and therefore are not covered by the harmonised excise duty arrangements. In those circumstances it should be held that the lubricating oils in question, which are not subject to harmonised excise duty, are products other than those referred to in the first indent of Article 3(1) of Directive 92/12 on the general arrangements for products subject to excise duty and on the holding, movement and monitoring of such products, so that, in accordance with the first subparagraph of Article 3(3) thereof, Member States are to retain the right to introduce or maintain taxes which are levied on those products provided that those taxes do not give rise to border-crossing formalities in trade between Member States.

(see paras 43-45, operative part)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Preliminary rulings – Reference to the Court – Court or tribunal of a Member State within the meaning of Article 234 EC – Definition

(Art. 234 EC)

2. Freedom to provide services – Television broadcasting activities – Directive 89/552 – Definition of ‘teleshopping’

(Council Directive 89/552, Art. 1(f))

3. Freedom to provide services – Television broadcasting activities – Directive 89/552 – Definition of ‘television advertising’

(Council Directive 89/552, Art. 1(c))

Summary

1. The Bundeskommunikationssenat, which meets the criteria on establishment by law, permanence, compulsory jurisdiction and inter partes procedure, and which applies rules of law, must be regarded as a court or tribunal within the meaning of Article 234 EC.

(see paras 20, 22)

2. On a proper construction of Article 1 of Directive 89/552 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the pursuit of television broadcasting activities, as amended by Directive 97/36, a broadcast or part of a broadcast during which a television broadcaster offers viewers the opportunity to participate in a prize game by means of immediately dialling a premium rate telephone number, and thus in return for payment, is covered by the definition given by Article 1(f) of teleshopping if that broadcast or part of a broadcast represents a real offer of services having regard to the purpose of the broadcast of which the game forms part, the significance of the game within the broadcast in terms of time and of anticipated economic effects in relation to those expected in respect of that broadcast as a whole and also to the type of questions which the candidates are asked.

Such a game cannot, however, constitute ‘teleshopping’ within the meaning of Article 1(f) of Directive 89/552 unless it constitutes an actual economic activity in its own right involving the supply of services and is not restricted to a mere offer of entertainment within the broadcast.

(see paras 37, 47, operative part)

3. On a proper construction of Article 1 of Directive 89/552 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the pursuit of television broadcasting activities, as amended by Directive 97/36, a broadcast or part of a broadcast during which a television broadcaster offers viewers the opportunity to participate in a prize game by means of immediately dialling a premium rate telephone number, and thus in return for payment, is covered by the definition given by Article 1(c) of television advertising if, on the basis of the purpose and content of that game and the circumstances in which the prizes to be won are presented, the game consists of an announcement which seeks to encourage viewers to buy the goods and services presented as prizes to be won or seeks to promote the merits of the programmes of the broadcaster in question indirectly in the form of self-promotion.

(see para. 47, operative part)
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Actions for failure to fulfil obligations – Infringement terminated before the expiry of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion – Inadmissible (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 21)

2. Community law – Principles – Protection of legitimate expectations – Scope (Council Directive 71/305) (see para. 23)

Subject of the case

Re:

Failure of Member State to fulfil obligations – Infringement of Articles 3 and 12 of Council Directive 71/305/EEC of 26 July 1971 concerning the co-ordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts (OJ 1971 L 185, p. 5) – Award, after private negotiation and without publication of a notice of invitation to tender, of a works contract for the performance of works specified in resolution No 48 of the Municipal Council of Stintino of 14 December 1989, in particular: ‘the design and execution of works relating to the technical and structural modernisation, maintenance and completion of the water supply and drainage networks, the road network, and structures and facilities serving the centre of population, the external villages and the tourist zones of the territory of the commune of Stintino, and including the cleaning and decontamination of the coast and tourist centres of that commune’.

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

1. Declares that by allowing execution of at least one of the operations entrusted by the commune of Stintino to the company Maresar Soc. Cons arl under the Agreement No 7/91 signed on 2 October 1991 and additional measures subsequently agreed by the same parties, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Council Directive 71/305/EEC of 26 July 1971 concerning the co-ordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, and in particular Articles 3 and 12 thereof;

2. Orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs.
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Approximation of laws – Procedures for awarding public service contracts – Directive 92/50 – Scope (Council Directive 92/50) (see paras 34-52)

2. Actions for failure to fulfil obligations – Proof of failure – Burden of proof on the Commission (Art. 226 EC) (see paras 57, 65-66)

3. Approximation of laws – Procedures for awarding public service contracts – Directive 92/50 – Award of contracts (Arts 43 EC and 49 EC; Council Directive 92/50) (see paras 63-64)

Subject of the case

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Infringement of Articles 11, 15 and 17 of Council Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992 relating to the coordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts (OJ 1992 L 209, p. 1) – Award of a contract without publication of the appropriate notice – Award of the contract for healthcare transport services in Tuscany.

Operative part

Operative part

1. Action dismissed;

2. The Commission of the European Communities is ordered to pay the costs.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Tax provisions – Harmonisation of laws – Indirect taxes on the raising of capital – Capital duty charged on capital companies

(Council Directive 69/335, Art. 12(1)( a) and (c))

Summary

Directive 69/335 concerning indirect taxes on the raising of capital must be interpreted as meaning that Article 12(1)(c) does not apply to the charging of a duty, such as Finnish capital transfer tax, where securities are transferred as a contribution to a capital company which gives new shares of its own as consideration for that transfer. Article 12(1)(a) of the directive allows such a duty to be charged.

Whereas Article 12(1)(a) and (b) of Directive 69/335 concern specific categories of assets, namely securities on the one hand and immovable property and businesses on the other, Article 12(1)(c) applies to assets in general, that is ‘assets of any kind’ and, furthermore, makes the levy of transfer duties subject to the condition that such property is transferred ‘for a consideration other than shares in the company’. In those circumstances, according to the principle of effectiveness, the definition of ‘assets of any kind’ in Article 12(1)(c) of Directive 69/335 may extend only to assets of a kind other than those which are mentioned in Article 12(1)(a) and (b), that is ‘securities’ and ‘businesses or immovable property’ respectively. Interpreting Article 12(1)(c) of Directive 69/335 as referring to ‘assets of any kind’, including those covered in Article 12(1)(a) and (b), would have the effect of totally absorbing the content of those subparagraphs so that their existence would have no meaning or purpose.

(see paras 37-39, 43, operative part)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Free movement of goods – Community transit – External community transit – Repayment or remission of import or export duties – Amount legally owed

(Council Regulation No 2913/92, Art. 236(1), first para.; Commission Regulation No 2454/93, Art. 379(2))

Summary

The first subparagraph of Article 236(1) of Regulation No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code must be interpreted to mean that failure by the national customs authorities to determine, in accordance with Article 379 of Regulation No 2454/93 laying down provisions for the implementation of Regulation No 2913/92, the place where the customs debt was incurred does not have the effect of rendering the amount of the customs duties not legally owed.

Nevertheless, the Member State to which the office of departure belongs can proceed to recovery of import duties only if, pursuant to Article 379(2) of Regulation No 2454/93, it has first informed the principal that it has a period of three months in which to furnish proof of the place where the infringement or the irregularity was actually committed and such proof has not been provided within that period.

On the one hand, there is no provision in Chapter 2 of Title VII of the Customs Code, or anything in the scheme of the Code, which allows the conclusion that failure to determine the place where the customs debt was incurred precludes that debt from being incurred. The concept of ‘legally owed’ relates to the amount of import duty or export duty applicable to goods, determined on the basis of the rules of assessment appropriate to those goods at the time when the customs debt in respect of them is incurred. Therefore, as soon as an event giving rise to the customs debt occurs, the amount of duties legally owed can be determined by application of the Common Customs Tariff.

The fact remains, however, that notification to the principal of the three-month time-limit referred to in Article 379(2) of the implementing regulation for producing proof of the place where the infringement or irregularity was actually committed is a prerequisite for the recovery of that debt by the customs authorities.

(see paras 25, 27, 30, 35-36, operative part)
I-B-2  - 43JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Second Chamber)
6 December 2007
Case C-59/06  P
Luigi Marcuccio
v
Commission of the European Communities
(Appeals — Officials — Employment in a non-Member State —  
Reassignment of post and post holder — Duty to respect the rights of the 
defence — Scope — Burden of proof)
Full text in Italian .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . II-B-2 - 335
Appeal:  against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth 
Chamber) of 24 November 2005 in Case T-236/02 M arcuccio v 
Commission [2005] ECR-SC I-A-365 and II-1621, by which that 
Court dismissed the action of the appellant seeking annulment 
of the Commission decision reassigning the appellant’s post 
at the delegation of the Commission in Luanda (Angola) to the Commission’s headquarters in Brussels and a claim for damages
.
Held:  the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber) of 
24 November 2005 in Case T-236/02 Marcuccio v Commission is set aside
. The case is referred back to the Court of First Instance 
of the European Communities . Costs are reserved .
I-B-2  - 44SUMMARY — CASE C-59/06 P
Summary
Officials — Principles — Rights of the defence — Scope — Obligation to hear the person 
concerned before adopting a decision involving his reassignment against his wishes  — 
Burden of proof