ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Actions for annulment – Subject-matter – Partial annulment

(Art. 230 EC; Council Regulation No 1954/2003, Arts 3, 4 and 6)

Summary

Partial annulment of a Community act is possible only if the elements the annulment of which is sought may be severed from the remainder of the act. That requirement of severability is not satisfied in the case where the partial annulment of an act would have the effect of altering its substance. The question whether partial annulment would alter the substance of the contested measure is an objective criterion, and not a subjective criterion linked to the political intention of the authority which adopted the measure at issue.

Therefore, an action brought by a Member State for the annulment of Articles 3, 4 and 6 of Chapter II of Regulation No 1954/2003 on the management of the fishing effort relating to certain Community fishing areas and resources is inadmissible.

Those provisions, which constitute the core of that regulation, lay down the decisive factors concerning the management of fishing effort while the other provisions of Chapter II are of a technical nature, their application being linked to the articles in respect of which annulment is sought. Chapter III establishes a control regime to ensure compliance with the management of the fishing effort and consequently only makes sense if the contested provisions already exist.

(see paras 12-14, 16, 19, 21)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Preliminary rulings – Reference to the Court – National court for the purposes of Article 234 EC – Definition

(Art. 234 EC)

Summary

It is clear from Article 234 EC that a national court may refer a question to the Court only if there is a case pending before it and if it is called upon to give judgment in proceedings intended to lead to a decision of a judicial nature.

Therefore, when it exercises administrative authority, without at the same time being called on to decide a dispute, the Amtsgericht (Germany), as Familiengericht, cannot be regarded as exercising a judicial function.

That is the case where it is called upon to transfer the right to determine the child’s surname to one of the parents where parents who do not use a married name but who jointly exercise custody of a child have not chosen, by declaration before a Registry Office official, either the father’s or the mother’s name as the birth name of that child, since the Familiengericht is required to adopt a decision without the Registry Office official which brought the action having taken, or been able to take, an earlier decision on the matter, since the dispute between the parents and the administration as to the possibility of registering the double-barrelled name consisting of the parents’ surnames was settled at last instance by another Court and is not the subject of the proceedings before the Amtsgericht and since there is no dispute between the parents, because they are in agreement about the name they wish to give to their child, namely the double-barrelled name composed of their respective surnames.

(see paras 13-19)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Agriculture – Common organisation of the markets – Milk and milk products – Import arrangements and opening tariff quotas

Summary

Article 35(2) of Regulation No 2535/2001 laying down detailed rules for applying Council Regulation No 1255/1999 as regards the import arrangements for milk and milk products and opening tariff quotas is invalid inasmuch as it provides that applications for import licences for New Zealand butter at reduced duty may be lodged solely with the competent authorities of the United Kingdom. The position of the importers of New Zealand butter established in the United Kingdom is comparable to that of importers established in another Member State. By requiring the latter to lodge applications for import licences in a Member State other than that in which they are established, Article 35(2) of Regulation No 2535/2001 leads to a difference in treatment between these potential importers and those established in the United Kingdom.

Similarly, Articles 25 and 32 of Regulation No 2535/2001, read in conjunction with Annexes III, IV and XII to that regulation, are invalid since they permit discrimination in the issue of import licences for New Zealand butter at reduced duty. In that regard, by entrusting the New Zealand authorities with the issuing of IMA 1 (Inward Monitoring Arrangement) certificates, necessary for the issue of import certificates, whilst the New Zealand law instituting an export monopoly was in force, the Commission failed to take the necessary steps to prevent discrimination in the issue of import licences, whereas such an obligation had been imposed on it pursuant to Article 29(2) of Regulation No 1255/1999 on the common organisation of the market in milk and milk products.

(see paras 34-35, 42, 57-58, operative part 1-2)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Actions for failure to fulfil obligations – Application initiating proceedings – Statement of complaints and submissions – Formal requirements

(Art. 226 EC; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 21; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 38(1)(c))

2. Freedom of movement for persons – Freedom to provide services – Restrictions

(Art. 49 EC)

3. Freedom of movement for persons – Freedom to provide services – Restrictions

(Art. 49 EC)

Summary

1. By virtue of Article 21 of the Statute of the Court of Justice and Article 38(1)(c) of the Rules of Procedure, the Commission must, in the heads of claim in an application made under Article 226 EC, indicate the specific complaints on which the Court is asked to rule. Those heads of claim must be set out unambiguously so that the Court does not rule ultra petita or indeed fail to rule on a complaint.

(see para. 24)

2. By making the grant of a licence to performing artists’ engagements agencies, established in another Member State, subject to the need to engage performers, a Member State fails to fulfil its obligations under Article 49 EC insofar as it fails to give any reason that could justify that restriction.

(see paras 29, 55, operative part)

3. By imposing the presumption of salaried status on performing artists who are service providers and established in their Member State of origin, where they usually provide similar services – a presumption which implies that the performing artists in question are subject to the social security scheme for employed persons and the scheme for paid annual leave – a Member State fails to fulfil its obligations under Article 49 EC.

The social protection of service providers may, in principle, be one of the overriding requirements of public interest which may justify a restriction on the freedom to provide services. However, there are Community measures in place for the coordination of the legislation applicable to the social security of such providers, under which the performing artists in question are entitled to the social security provided by their Member State of origin, so that the Member State in question is not entitled to subject those artists to its own social security system. A right to paid leave on the part of a service provider is difficult to reconcile with the concept of self-employment.

Moreover, the provision in question cannot be justified by the objective of combating concealed employment because the fact that performing artists are normally engaged on an intermittent basis and for short periods by different show organisers cannot, of itself, mean that a general assumption of concealed employment is well founded. That is particularly so where the performing artists in question are recognised as service providers, established in their Member State of origin, where they usually provide similar services.

(see paras 45, 47-49, 51-52, 55, operative part)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Tax provisions – Harmonisation of laws – Turnover taxes – Common system of value added tax – Deduction of input tax

(Council Directive 77/388, Art. 17)

Summary

Where a recipient of a supply of goods is a taxable person who did not and could not know that the transaction concerned was connected with a fraud committed by the seller, Article 17 of Sixth Directive 77/388 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover, as amended by Directive 95/7, must be interpreted as meaning that it precludes a rule of national law under which the fact that the contract of sale is void – by reason of a civil law provision which renders that contract incurably void as contrary to public policy on the ground that the basis of the contract is unlawful by reason of a matter which is attributable to the seller – causes that taxable person to lose the right to deduct the value added tax he has paid. It is irrelevant in this respect whether the fact that the contract is void is due to fraudulent evasion of value added tax or to other fraud.

By contrast, where it is ascertained, having regard to objective factors, that the supply is to a taxable person who knew or should have known that, by his purchase, he was participating in a transaction connected with fraudulent evasion of value added tax, it is for the national court to refuse that taxable person entitlement to the right to deduct.

(see paras 52, 59-61, operative part)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Environment – Conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora – Directive 92/43 – Authorisation for a plan or project on a protected site

(Council Directive 92/43, Art. 6(3))

2. Environment – Conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora – Directive 92/43 – Special protection areas

(Council Directive 92/43, Art. 6(3) and (4))

Summary

1. Article 6(3) of Directive 92/43 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora establishes a procedure intended to ensure, by means of a prior examination, that a plan or project which is not directly connected with or necessary to the management of a site concerned but likely to have a significant effect on it is authorised only to the extent that it will not adversely affect the integrity of that site. That authorisation can thus be granted only on the condition that the competent national authorities are certain, at the time they authorise the plan or project, that it will not have adverse effects on the integrity of the site concerned. The fact that, after its completion, the project may not have produced such effects is immaterial to that assessment. It is at the time of adoption of the decision authorising implementation of the project that there must be no reasonable scientific doubt remaining as to the absence of adverse effects on the integrity of the site in question

(see paras 19-20, 24)

2. Article 6(4) of Directive 92/43 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, which permits a plan or project which has given rise to a negative assessment under the first sentence of the same directive to be implemented on certain conditions, must, as a derogation from the criterion for authorisation laid down in the second sentence of Article 6(3), be interpreted strictly. Thus, the implementation of a plan or project under Article 6(4) of that directive is, inter alia, subject to the condition that the absence of alternative solutions be demonstrated.

It follows that, where a Member State implements a project notwithstanding the negative environmental impact assessment and without having demonstrated the absence of alternative solutions, it fails to fulfil its obligations under Article 6(4) of Directive 92/43.

(see paras 35-36, 40)
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Action 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. 13

)

Subject of the case

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Infringement of Article 11 of Council Directive 96/62/EC of 27 September 1996 concerning ambient air quality assessment and management (OJ 1996 L 296, p. 55), in conjunction with Article 4(1) of that directive and Directive 1999/30/EC of 22 April 1999 relating to limit values for sulphur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and oxides of nitrogen, particulate matter and lead in ambient air (OJ 1999 L 163, p. 41)

Operative part

Operative part:

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to forward to the Commission of the European Communities for 2001 all necessary information concerning the substances subject to Council Directive 1999/30/EC of 22 April 1999 relating to limit values for sulphur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and oxides of nitrogen, particulate matter and lead in ambient air, as required under Article 11(1)(a)(i) and (ii) and (b) of Council Directive 96/62/EC of 27 September 1996 concerning ambient air quality assessment and management, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 11 of Directive 96/62 in conjunction with Article 4(1) of that directive and with Directive 1999/30 and Article 1 of Commission Decision 2001/839/EC of 8 November 2001 laying down a questionnaire to be used for annual reporting on ambient air quality assessment under Directives 96/62 and 1999/30;

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

Summary



Keywords

Economic and social cohesion – Structural assistance – Community financing – Grant of EAGGF financial aid

(Council Regulation No 4253/88, Art. 21(3), second subpara., as amended by Regulation No 2082/93)

Summary

The second subparagraph of Article 21(3) of Regulation No 4253/88 laying down provisions for implementing Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88 as regards coordination of the activities of the different Structural Funds between themselves and with the operations of the European Investment Bank and the other existing financial instruments, as amended by Regulation No 2082/93, which provides that payments are to be made to the final beneficiaries without any deduction or retention which could reduce the amount of financial assistance to which they are entitled, prohibits the authorities in the Member States from making a deduction from the payments made or from demanding the payment of administrative fees charged for processing applications and having the effect of reducing the amount of the aid.

That prohibition covers the levying by the authority designated by a Member State as sole national interlocutor of the Guidance Section of the EAGGF of charges on beneficiaries corresponding to a percentage of the total amount of the project financed, and which thus proportionally reduce the amounts received by the beneficiaries by way of assistance granted by the Guidance Section of the EAGGF. The prohibition on any deduction extends to all charges which are directly and inseparably linked to the amounts disbursed to farmers, and not merely deductions which are actually made on the occasion of payments.

(see paras 33, 35-39)
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Failure of a Member State 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. 9)

2. Member States – Obligations – Implementation of directives – Failure to fulfil obligations – National system pleaded as justification – Not permissible (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 10)

Subject of the case

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Failure to transpose, within the prescribed period, Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector (Directive on privacy and electronic communications) (OJ 2002 L 201, p. 37).

Operative part

Operative part

The Court

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed period, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector (Directive on privacy and electronic communications), the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

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

Summary



Keywords

Tax provisions – Harmonisation of laws – Turnover taxes – Common system of value added tax – Economic activities within the meaning of Article 4(2) of the Sixth Directive

(Council Directive 77/388, Art. 4(2))

Summary

Article 4(2) of the Sixth Directive 77/388 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes must be interpreted as meaning that the allocation, by auction by the national regulatory authority responsible for spectrum assignment, of rights such as rights to use frequencies in the electromagnetic spectrum with the aim of providing the public with mobile telecommunications services does not constitute an economic activity within the meaning of that provision and, consequently, does not fall within the scope of that directive.

Such an activity constitutes a necessary precondition for the access of economic operators to the mobile telecommunications market and cannot constitute participation in that market by the competent national authority. Only those operators, who are the holders of the rights granted, operate on the relevant market by exploiting the property in question for the purpose of obtaining income therefrom on a continuing basis.

Therefore, in granting such authorisations, the competent national authority is not participating in the exploitation of property, consisting in the said user rights, for the purpose of obtaining income therefrom on a continuing basis. By means of that allocation procedure, that authority exclusively carries out the activity of controlling and regulating the use of the electromagnetic spectrum which has been expressly delegated to it.

Furthermore, the fact that the grant of the rights in question gives rise to a payment cannot affect the legal status of that activity.

(see paras 42, 44-45, 49, operative part)
Case C-101/04

Roger Noteboom

v

Rijksdienst voor Pensioenen

(Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeidsrechtbank Gent)

(Social security for migrant workers – Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 – Old-age pension – Holiday pay given to the recipient of a retirement pension – Unemployed cross-border worker receiving benefit of a pension scheme)

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber), 20 January 2005

Summary of the Judgment

1. Social security for migrant workers – Community legislation – Material scope – Services covered and services excluded – Distinguishing criteria – Holiday pay given to the recipient of a retirement pension – Benefit granted on the basis of objective criteria showing elements constituting an old-age benefit – Included

(Council Regulation No 1408/71, Art. 4(1))

2. Social security for migrant workers – Unemployment – Fully unemployed cross-border worker – Right to old-age pension from the Member State of residence – Taking into account of period of unemployment in accordance with the legislation of that State

(Council Regulation No 1408/71, Art. 45(1) and (6))

1. A benefit can be regarded as a social security benefit falling within the material scope of Regulation No 1408/71 only if, first, it is granted, without any individual and discretionary assessment of personal needs, to recipients on the basis of a legally defined position and, secondly, it relates to one of the risks expressly listed in Article 4(1) of that regulation. With regard to the second condition, the distinction between benefits excluded from the scope of that regulation and those which fall within it is based essentially on the constituent elements of each particular benefit, in particular its purposes and the conditions on which it is granted, and not on whether a benefit is classified as a social security benefit by national legislation.

It follows that a benefit, such as holiday pay granted to the recipient of a retirement pension, meets those two conditions if the provisions governing its grant confer on the recipients a legally defined right, that right is granted automatically to the persons meeting certain objective criteria and the elements constituting the benefit show that it may be considered an old-age pension.

(see paras 21, 23-24, operative part 1)

2. Article 45(6) of Regulation No 1408/71 must be interpreted as meaning that the competent institution of the Member State of residence is to take account, for the purposes of the grant of a benefit such as holiday pay granted to the recipient of a retirement pension, of a period of full unemployment during which the former employed worker received unemployment benefits under Article 71(1)(a)(ii) of that regulation, as if the legislation administered by that institution applied to that worker during his last employment.

(see paras 34, 36, operative part 2)
Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 16 March 2006 – Commission v Greece

(Case C-518/04)

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Directive 92/43/EEC – Conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora – Protection of species

1. 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. 12)

2. Environment – Conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora – Directive 92/43 (Council Directive 92/43, Art. 12(1)(b) and (d), and Annex IV, point (a)) (see paras 14-22)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Infringement of Article 12(1)(b) of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (OJ 1992 L 206, p. 7) – Protection of vipers Vipera Schweizeri on the island of Milos – Failure to adopt the measures necessary to prohibit disturbance of that species during the period of breeding and the deterioration or destruction of breeding sites

Operative part:

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed period, the measures necessary to establish and implement an effective system of strict protection for the viper Vipera schweizeri on the island of Milos prohibiting deliberate disturbance of that species, particularly during the period of breeding, rearing and hibernation and deterioration or destruction of breeding sites or resting places of that species, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 12(1)(b) and (d) of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora;
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Agriculture – Common organisation of the markets – Export refunds

(Commission Regulation No 800/1999, Arts 5(4) and 51(2))

Summary

The declaration made in an export declaration that the product in respect of which a refund is sought is of Community origin is information to which a penalty may attach under Article 51(2) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 800/1999 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of export refunds on agricultural products in conjunction with Article 5(4) thereof.

(see para. 35, operative part)