ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 1 October 2009 – Commission v Spain

(Case C‑502/08)

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Directive 2005/60/EC – Prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering and terrorist financing – Failure to transpose completely – Failure to communicate the measures to transpose the directive

1. Acts of the institutions – Directives – Implementation by Member States (Art. 249, third para., EC) (see para. 21)

2. Member States – Obligations – Implementation of directives – Failure to fulfil obligations – National system pleaded as justification – Not permissible (Art. 226 EC) (see paras 24-25)

3. 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 in the reasoned opinion (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 27)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Failure to adopt, within the period prescribed, the measures necessary to comply with Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2005 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering and terrorist financing (OJ 2005 L 309, p. 15).

Operative part

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed period, all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2005 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering and terrorist financing, and by failing to communicate to the Commission of the European Communities, the provisions of national law intended to contribute to ensuring such compliance, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 45 of that directive;
Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 29 October 2009 – Commission v Italy

(Case C‑249/08)

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Common fisheries policy – Conservation of resources – Control system in the fisheries sector – Regulation (EC) No 894/97 – Article 11 – Regulation (EEC) No 2241/87 – Article 1(1) and (2) – Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 – Articles 2(1) and 31(1) and (2) – Prohibition of driftnets – Lack of an effective system of monitoring to ensure compliance with that prohibition

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 in the reasoned opinion (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 28)

2. Fisheries – Conservation of the resources of the sea – Control measures – Obligations of the Member States (Art. 10 EC; Council Regulations No 2241/87, Art. 1(1), and No 2847/93, Arts 1, 2 and 31(1) and (2)) (see paras 30-33)

3. Actions for failure to fulfil obligations – Proof of failure – Burden of proof on Commission – Production of evidence showing failure – Incumbent on Member State concerned to refute evidence (Art. 226 EC) (see paras 45-46)

4. Fisheries – Conservation of the resources of the sea – Control measures – Member States’ duty to take penal or administrative action (Council Regulations No 2241/87, Art. 1(2), and No 2847/93, Art. 31(1) and (2)) (see paras 59-64, 70-72, 77)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Infringement of Article 1(1) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2241/87 of 23 July 1987 establishing certain control measures for fishing activities (OJ 1987 L 207, p. 1) and of Articles 2 and 31(1) and (2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 of 12 October 1993 establishing a control system applicable to the common fisheries policy (OJ 1993 L 261, p. 1) – Inspection and control of fishing vessels and their activities – Measures to be taken in the case of non-compliance with the rules in force – Provisions relating to the retention on board or use of driftnets.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Declares that by failing to control, inspect and survey in a satisfactory manner fishing activities within its territory and within the waters subject to its sovereignty or jurisdiction, in particular with regard to compliance with the provisions governing the retention on board and use of driftnets, and by not ensuring in a satisfactory manner that appropriate measures are taken against those responsible for infringements of the Community rules on the retention on board and use of driftnets, in particular by the imposition of dissuasive penalties on those persons, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 1(1) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2241/87 of 23 July 1987 establishing certain control measures for fishing activities and Articles 2(1) and 31(1) and (2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 of 12 October 1993 establishing a control system applicable to the common fisheries policy, as amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 2846/98 of 17 December 1998;
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 10 December 2009 – Commission v Greece

(Case C-460/08)

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Article 39 EC – Employment in the public service – Captain and officer (chief mate) on vessels – Conferment of powers of public authority on board – Requirement that they be nationals of the Member State whose flag the vessels fly

1. Freedom of movement for persons – Exceptions – Posts in the public service (Art. 39(4) EC) (see paras 30-31, 33-34 and operative part)

2. 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 in the reasoned opinion (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 35)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Infringement of Article 39 of the EC Treaty – National legislation which reserves for Greek nationals access to the posts of captain and officer (chief mate) on all commercial and fishing vessels flying the Greek flag.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Declares that, by requiring in its legislation Greek nationality for access to the posts of captain and officer (chief mate) on all vessels flying the Greek flag, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 39 EC;
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 12 November 2009 – Commission v Spain

(Case C‑154/08)

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Sixth VAT Directive – Article 2 and Article 4(1), (2) and (5) – Harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes – Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment – Taxable persons – Activities or operations carried out by ‘registradores de la propiedad’ (land registrars) acting as settlement agents in charge of settlement offices of a mortgage district – Economic activities – Activity carried out independently – Public-law bodies carrying out activities in connection with their public duties – Infringement of Community law attributable to a national court

1. Actions for failure to fulfil obligations – Application initiating proceedings – Statement of subject-matter and pleas in law – Formal requirements – Unambiguous wording of the form of order sought by the applicant (Art. 226 EC, Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 21; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 38(1)(c)) (see paras 60, 63, 67)

2. Tax provisions – Harmonisation of laws – Turnover taxes – Common system of value added tax – Economic activities carried on independently for the purpose of Article 4 of the Sixth Directive (Council Directive 77/388, Arts 2 and 4(1) and (2)) (see paras 90, 93, 97, 103, 107, 109, 118, 127 and operative part)

3. Member States – Obligations – Failure to fulfil obligations – Liability (Art. 226 EC) (see paras 125-126)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Infringement of Articles 2 and 4(1) and (2) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes – Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1) – Taxable persons – Activities or operations carried out by ‘registradores de la propiedad’.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Declares that, by considering that the services supplied to an Autonomous Community by ‘registradores de la propiedad’ acting as settlement agents in charge of a settlement office of a mortgage district (‘oficina liquidadora de distrito hipotecario’) are not subject to value added tax, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 2 and Article 4(1) and (2) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes – Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment;
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Approximation of laws – Procedures for the award of public service contracts – Directive 92/50 – Failure to fulfil obligations (Council Directive 92/50) (see paras 15-18)

2. Approximation of laws – Review procedures in respect of the award of public supply and public works contracts – Directive 89/665 (Art. 226 EC; Council Directive 89/665) (see paras 22-23)

Subject of the case

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Infringement of Article 8 in conjunction with Titles III to VI 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) – Failure to organise a formal European award procedure before the conclusion of a contract for bio-waste and green waste disposal services between the city of Bonn and a private company.

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

1. Declares that the Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 8 and Titles III to VI of Council Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992 relating to the coordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts, on the grounds that the municipality of Bonn and the Müllverwertungsanlage Bonn GmbH awarded a public service contract on the disposal of bio-waste and green waste without carrying out a procedure for the award of public works including Europe-wide tendering;

2. Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs.
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

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 in the reasoned opinion (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 9

)

Subject of the case

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations – Failure to adopt or communicate, within the prescribed time-limit, the measures necessary to comply with Commission Directive 2006/86/EC of 24 October 2006 implementing Directive 2004/23/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards traceability requirements, notification of serious adverse reactions and events and certain technical requirements for the coding, processing, preservation, storage and distribution of human tissues and cells (OJ 2006 L 294, p. 32).

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

1. Declares that, by not adopting within the period prescribed in the first subparagraph of Article 11(1) of Commission Directive 2006/86/EC of 24 October 2006 implementing Directive 2004/23/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards traceability requirements, notification of serious adverse reactions and events and certain technical requirements for the coding, processing, preservation, storage and distribution of human tissues and cells all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with that directive, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

2. Orders the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Appeals – Grounds – Mistaken assessment of the facts – Inadmissibility

(Art. 225(1) EC; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.)

2. Agriculture – Uniform legislation – Community plant variety rights – Conditions for the grant of rights

(Council Regulation No 2100/94, Arts 7(1) and 73(2))

3. Appeals – Grounds – Criticism of grounds having no influence on the operative part of the judgment under appeal – Invalid plea in law

Summary

1. In accordance with Article 225(1) EC and the first paragraph of Article 58 of the Statute of the Court of Justice, an appeal lies on points of law only. The General Court has exclusive jurisdiction to find and appraise the relevant facts and to assess the evidence. The appraisal of those facts and the assessment of that evidence thus do not, save when they distort the facts or evidence, constitute a point of law which is subject, as such, to review by the Court of Justice on appeal.

The General Court is the sole judge of any need to supplement the information available to it in respect of the cases before it. Whether or not the evidence before it is sufficient is a matter to be appraised by it alone and is not subject to review by the Court of Justice on appeal, except where that evidence has been distorted or the inaccuracy of the findings of the General Court is apparent from the documents in the case-file.

(see paras 69, 75)

2. Facts not submitted by the parties before the departments of the Community Plant Variety Office (CPVO) may not be submitted at the stage of the action brought before the General Court. The General Court is called upon to assess the legality of the decision of the Board of Appeal by reviewing the application of European Union law made by that board, particularly in the light of facts which were submitted to the latter, but that Court may not carry out such a review by taking into account matters of fact newly produced before it.

In addition, the European Union judicature, which has jurisdiction only within the limits set by Article 73(2) of Regulation No 2100/94 on Community plant variety rights, is not required to carry out a complete review in order to determine whether or not a plant variety lacks distinctiveness for the purposes of Article 7(1) of that regulation but is entitled, in the light of the scientific and technical complexity of that condition, compliance with which must be verified by means of a technical examination which, as is clear from Article 55 of Regulation No 1200/94, is to be entrusted by the CPVO to one of the competent national offices, to limit itself to a review of manifest errors of assessment.

(see paras 76-77)

3. The Court of Justice will reject outright complaints directed against grounds of a judgment of the General Court included purely for the sake of completeness since they cannot lead to the judgment’s being set aside and are therefore nugatory.

(see para. 122)
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

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 in the reasoned opinion (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 6

)

Subject of the case

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Failure to take or communicate, within the prescribed period, all the measures necessary to comply with Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2005 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering and terrorist financing (OJ 2005 L 309, p. 15).

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed period, all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2005 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering and terrorist financing, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

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

Summary



Keywords

Tax provisions – Harmonisation of laws – Turnover taxes – Common system of value added tax – Exemptions provided for in the Sixth Directive Exemption of supplies of human organs, blood and milk

(Council Directive 77/388, Art. 13(A)(1)(d))

Summary

Article 13(A)(1)(d) of Sixth Directive 77/388 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes, exempting ‘supplies of human organs, blood and milk’ from value added tax, must be interpreted as not applying to the activity of transporting, in a self‑employed capacity, human organs and samples for hospitals and laboratories.

If that activity merely involves physically moving the goods concerned from one place to another for various hospitals and laboratories, such activity cannot equate to a ‘supply of goods’ within the meaning of Article 5(1) of the Sixth Directive since it does not enable the other party actually to dispose of the goods at issue as if he were the owner.

(see paras 25, 29, operative part)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Transport – Air transport – Regulation No 2027/97 – Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air (Montreal Convention) – Liability of carriers in respect of checked baggage – Limit in case of destruction, loss, damage or delay of baggage

(Council Regulation No 2027/97, as amended by Regulation No 889/2002, Art. 3(1); Montreal Convention of 1999, Art. 22(2))

Summary

The term ‘damage’, which underpins Article 22(2) of the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air, concluded in Montreal on 28 May 1999, that sets the limit of an air carrier’s liability for the damage resulting, inter alia, from the loss of baggage, must be interpreted as including both material and non-material damage.

The various limitations of compensation referred to in Chapter III of the Montreal Convention, including that set in Article 22(2) of that convention, must be applied to the total damage caused, regardless of whether that damage is material or non‑material.

(see paras 37, 39, operative part)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Freedom to provide services – Services – Definition

2. International agreements – EC-Switzerland Agreement on the free movement of persons – Freedom to provide services

(EC-Switzerland Agreement on the free movement of persons, Arts 1, 2 and 15 and Annexes I, II and III)

Summary

1. Where a contractual obligation consists in the making available to the parties, in return for payment and on certain conditions, of an area of land in a Member State in order to hunt there, the letting contract relates to a provision of services. It is also of a cross-border nature if the lessees are of Swiss nationality. Such lessees must be regarded as the recipients of a service which consists in the grant, in return for payment, of the exploitation of a right to hunt in that area of land for a limited time.

(see paras 31-33)

2. The provisions of the Agreement between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Swiss Confederation, of the other, on the free movement of persons do not preclude a national of one of the contracting parties from being subjected in the territory of the other contracting party, as a recipient of services, to different treatment from that reserved to persons whose principal residence is in that territory, citizens of the Union, and persons who are equated to those citizens under European Union law, with respect to the charging of a tax payable for the provision of services such as the making available of a right to hunt.

While Article 2 of the Agreement deals with the principle of non-discrimination, it imposes a general and absolute prohibition not on all discrimination against nationals of one of the contracting parties who are staying in the territory of the other party but only on discrimination on grounds of nationality where the situation of those nationals falls within the material scope of the provisions of Annexes I to III to the Agreement. The Agreement and its annexes do not contain any specific rule intended to allow recipients of services to benefit from the principle of non-discrimination in connection with the application of fiscal provisions relating to the commercial transactions whose subject is the provision of services. Moreover, since the Swiss Confederation has not joined the internal market of the Community, the aim of which is the removal of all obstacles to create an area of total freedom of movement analogous to that provided by a national market, which includes the freedom to provide services and the freedom of establishment, the interpretation given to the provisions of European Union law concerning the internal market cannot be automatically applied by analogy to the interpretation of the Agreement, unless there are express provisions to that effect laid down by the Agreement itself.

(see paras 39-43, operative part)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Social policy – Framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP – Directive 1999/70

(Council Directive 1999/70, Annex, clause 8(3))

2. Social policy – Framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP – Directive 1999/70

(Art. 288(3) TFEU; Council Directive 1999/70, Annex, clause 8(3))

Summary

1. Clause 8(3) of the framework agreement on fixed-term work, concluded on 18 March 1999 contained in the Annex to Directive 1999/70/EC concerning the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP, must be interpreted as not precluding domestic legislation that has abolished the requirement for the employer to indicate in fixed-term contracts concluded for the purpose of replacing absent workers the names of those workers and the reasons for their replacement, and that merely provides that such fixed-term contracts must be in writing and must indicate the reasons for the use of those contracts, in so far as those new conditions are offset by the adoption of other safeguards or protective measures or concern only a limited category of workers having entered into a fixed-term employment contract, which it is for the national court to ascertain.

In so far as the latter workers do not represent a significant proportion of workers employed for a fixed term in the Member State concerned, which it is for the national court to ascertain, the reduction in the protection afforded to that limited category of workers is not, in itself, likely to have an effect overall on the level of protection applicable under the domestic legal order to workers bound by fixed-term employment contracts.

What is more, the amendment of the domestic legislation at issue in the main proceedings must be assessed having regard to all the other safeguards it provides in order to protect workers employed under fixed-term contracts, such as measures to prevent the wrongful use of successive fixed-term contracts or those designed to prohibit discrimination against workers having concluded such contracts.

(see paras 44, 46, 48, operative part 1)

2. Because clause 8(3) of the framework agreement has no direct effect, it is for the national court, if it should be led to conclude that the national legislation at issue in the main proceedings is incompatible with European Union law, not to disapply it but, so far as possible, to give it an interpretation in conformity with Directive 1999/70 and with the objective pursued by the framework agreement.

The principle of giving an interpretation in conformity with Union law means that domestic law must be interpreted, so far as possible, in the light of the wording and purpose of the relevant directive, in order to achieve the objective pursued by the directive, by selecting an interpretation of the national legal provisions that best corresponds to that objective and consequently reaching a solution compatible with the provisions of that directive.

(see paras 53, 55, operative part 2)