ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . OFFICIALS - APPLICATIONS TO THE COURT - INTEREST IN BRINGING PROCEEDINGS - APPLICATION FOR ANNULMENT OF AN OFFICIAL ' S PROMOTION LODGED BY A SERVANT WHO IS NOT AN OFFICIAL - ADMISSIBILITY

( STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS , ARTS . 90 AND 91 )

2 . OFFICIALS - RECRUITMENT - PROCEDURE - PROMOTION OR TRANSFER - DUTY OF THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY - LIMITS - EXAMINATION OF THE RESPECTIVE MERITS OF OFFICIALS ELIGIBLE FOR PROMOTION OR TRANSFER COMPARED TO THE MERITS OF POTENTIAL APPLICANTS IN A FUTURE INTERNAL COMPETITION - NOT COMPULSORY

( STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS , ART . 29 ( 1 ) ( A ))

3 . OFFICIALS - RECRUITMENT - PROCEDURE - ASSESSMENT OF THE MERITS AND ABILITIES OF THE OFFICIAL APPOINTED - JUDICIAL REVIEW - LIMITS

( STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS , ART . 29 )

4 . OFFICIALS - RECRUITMENT - PROCEDURE - PROMISES OF ESTABLISHMENT GIVEN TO A TEMPORARY SERVANT DULY WARNED OF THE TEMPORARY NATURE OF HIS POST - NO EFFECT ON THE POSITION OF THE PERSON CONCERNED WITH REGARD TO THE RECRUITMENT PROCEDURE

( STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS , ART . 29 )

Summary

1 . COMPETITIONS INTERNAL TO THE INSTITUTIONS ARE OPEN TO ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED BY THE INSTITUTION , IN WHATEVER CAPACITY . IT FOLLOWS THAT A SERVANT WHO IS NOT AN OFFICIAL HAS AN INTEREST IN BRINGING PROCEEDINGS AGAINST A DECISION FILLING A POST BY THE PROMOTION OF AN OFFICIAL BECAUSE IF THAT DECISION IS ANNULLED THIS MAKES IT POSSIBLE FOR HIM TO ENTER AN INTERNAL COMPETITION .

2 . AT THE TIME WHEN THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY ADOPTS THE DECISION TO FILL A POST BY PROMOTING OR TRANSFERRING AN OFFICIAL IT IS NOT UNDER THE DUTY TO COMPARE THE RESPECTIVE MERITS AND ABILITIES OF OFFICIALS ELIGIBLE FOR PROMOTION OR TRANSFER AND OF OTHER SERVANTS , WHO THOUGH NOT ELIGIBLE FOR PROMOTION OR TRANSFER COULD ENTER THE INTERNAL COMPETITION IF IT WAS ORGANIZED .

3 . IT IS NOT FOR THE COURT TO EVALUATE THE DEGREE OF SPECIALIZATION REQUIRED BY A POST IF NEITHER THE MATERIAL IN THE FILE ON THE CASE NOR THE APPLICANT ' S CONTENTIONS ADVANCED AGAINST THE DECISION MAKING THE APPOINTMENT TO THAT POST SHOW THAT THE COMMISSION MADE A MANIFEST ERROR OR MISUSED ITS POWERS WHEN ASSESSING THE MERITS AND ABILITIES OF THE OFFICIAL APPOINTED .

4 . PROMISES MADE TO A TEMPORARY SERVANT AS TO HIS ESTABLISHMENT AND AN AGREEMENT TO THAT EFFECT BETWEEN THE EMPLOYING INSTITUTION AND THE ADMINISTRATION FROM WHICH THAT SERVANT CAME CANNOT , EVEN IF PROVED , HAVE THE EFFECT OF PLACING THE PERSON CONCERNED , DULY WARNED OF THE TEMPORARY NATURE OF HIS POST , IN A SPECIAL POSITION AS REGARDS THE RECRUITMENT PROCEDURE TO A VACANT POST .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . OFFICIALS - CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT OF OTHER SERVANTS OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES - TEMPORARY STAFF - AUXILIARY STAFF - DIFFERENCE - WHETHER OR NOT POST IS PERMANENT - PRECARIOUS NATURE OF CONTRACTS FOR THE EMPLOYMENT OF AUXILIARY STAFF

( CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT OF OTHER SERVANTS OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES , ARTS 2 AND 3 )

2.OFFICIALS - PENSIONS - CALCULATION OF YEARS OF PENSIONABLE SERVICE - INCLUSION OF PERIODS OF SERVICE COMPLETED AS A MEMBER OF THE AUXILIARY STAFF - CONDITIONS - ONUS OF PROOF

( STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS , ANNEX VIII , ART . 3 ( C ); CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT OF OTHER SERVANTS OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES , ART . 2 ( A ) AND ( B ))

Summary

1 . THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AUXILIARY STAFF AND TEMPORARY STAFF LIES IN THE FACT THAT A MEMBER OF THE TEMPORARY STAFF FILLS A PERMANENT POST INCLUDED IN THE LIST OF POSTS WHEREAS , EXCEPT IN THE CASE OF A TEMPORARY REPLACEMENT OF AN OFFICIAL , A MEMBER OF THE AUXILIARY STAFF PERFORMS ADMINISTRATIVE WORK WITHOUT BEING ASSIGNED TO A POST INCLUDED IN THE LISTS OF POSTS .

AN IMPORTANT CHARACTERISTIC OF A CONTRACT FOR THE EMPLOYMENT OF AUXILIARY STAFF IS ITS PRECARIOUSNESS IN TIME , SINCE IT CAN BE USED ONLY TO EFFECT A TEMPORARY REPLACEMENT OR TO ALLOW THE PERFORMANCE OF ADMINISTRATIVE DUTIES WHICH ARE OF A TRANSITORY NATURE , WHICH FILL AN UR- GENT NEED OR WHICH ARE NOT CLEARLY DEFINED .

2.A PERIOD OF SERVICE WHICH AN OFFICIAL HAS COMPLETED IN THE CAPACITY OF A MEMBER OF THE AUXILIARY STAFF BEFORE HIS APPOINTMENT MUST BE REGARDED , FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE COMMUNITY PENSION SCHEME , AS A PERIOD OF SERVICE COMPLETED IN THE CAPACITY OF A MEMBER OF THE TEMPORARY STAFF IF THE PERSON CONCERNED IS ABLE TO PROVE THAT DURING THAT PERIOD HE PERFORMED WELL-DEFINED PERMANENT COMMUNITY PUBLIC SERVICE DUTIES FOR WHICH POSTS WERE GENERALLY AVAILABLE IN THE LIST OF POSTS APPENDED TO THE SECTION OF THE BUDGET RELATING TO THE INSTITUTION EMPLOYING HIM .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . OFFICIALS - TEMPORARY STAFF - TEMPORARY POSTING - TEMPORARY PERFORMANCE OF DUTIES OF A HIGHER LEVEL OF RESPONSIBILITY THAN PROVIDED FOR IN THE CONTRACT - RIGHT OF PERSON CONCERNED TO BE RE-GRADED - NONE

( STAFF REGULATIONS , ART . 7 ( 2 ); CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT OF OTHER SERVANTS , ART . 10 , FIRST PARA .)

2 . OFFICIALS - DUTY OF ASSISTANCE INCUMBENT UPON THE ADMINISTRATION - SCOPE

( STAFF REGULATIONS , ART . 24 )

3 . OFFICIALS - INDIVIDUAL DECISION - DECISION CHANGING AN OFFICIAL ' S DUTIES - DECISION WITHDRAWING AN ADVANTAGE ASSOCIATED WITH A POST - STATEMENT OF REASONS - OBLIGATION - NONE

( STAFF REGULATIONS , ART . 25 , SECOND PARA .)

Summary

1 . PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 7 ( 2 ) OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS , WHICH ALSO APPLIES TO TEMPORARY SERVANTS BY VIRTUE OF THE REFERENCE TO THAT PROVISION CONTAINED IN THE FIRST PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 10 OF THE CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT OF OTHER SERVANTS , AN OFFICIAL MAY BE CALLED UPON TO OCCUPY TEMPORARILY AND FOR A PERIOD NOT EXCEEDING ONE YEAR A POST IN A HIGHER CAREER BRACKET ; HE MAY NOT REFUSE SUCH A TEMPORARY POSTING OR THEREBY ACQUIRE ANY ENTITLEMENT TO RE-CLASSIFICATION .

A TEMPORARY SERVANT IS NOT ENTITLED THEREFORE TO INFER THAT HE HAS ANY RIGHT TO A CHANGE OF GRADE OR AN AMENDMENT OF THE DESCRIPTION OF HIS DUTIES IN HIS CONTRACT BY VIRTUE OF THE FACT THAT PREVIOUSLY , FOR A PERIOD OF SEVERAL MONTHS , HE PERFORMED DUTIES OF A HIGHER LEVEL OF RESPONSIBILITY WITHIN THE EMPLOYING INSTITUTION THAN THOSE ENTRUSTED TO HIM BY THAT CONTRACT .

2 . ARTICLE 24 OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS IS CONCERNED WITH THE DEFENCE OF OFFICIALS AGAINST THE ACTS OF THIRD PARTIES AND NOT AGAINST ACTS EMANATING FROM THE INSTITUTION ITSELF .

3 . IN VIEW OF THAT FACT THAT ACCREDITATION TO AN INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION IS GRANTED TO OFFICIALS AND OTHER SERVANTS TO ENABLE THEM TO PERFORM THEIR DUTIES MORE EFFECTIVELY , THE ADVANTAGES RESULTING THEREFROM ATTACH TO THE POST OCCUPIED BY THE OFFICIAL OR SERVANT CONCERNED AND NOT TO HIM PERSONALLY . THUS IT IS FOR THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY , WHICH IS VESTED WITH DISCRETIONARY POWERS IN THAT REGARD , TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT ACCREDITATION IS NECESSARY FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF CERTAIN DUTIES . IF THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY CONSIDERS THAT , FOLLOWING A LAWFUL CHANGE IN THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF AN OFFICIAL OR SERVANT , ACCREDITATION IS NO LONGER NECESSARY , ITS DECISION IS A DIRECT RESULT OF THAT CHANGE AND , ACCORDINGLY , THE GROUNDS ON WHICH THE DECISION IS BASED NEED NOT BE STATED .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . OFFICIALS - RECRUITMENT - PROCEDURES - CHOICE - DISCRETION OF THE ADMINISTRATION

( STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS , ART . 29 ( 1 ))

2 . OFFICIALS - PROMOTION - CONSIDERATION OF COMPARATIVE MERITS - CRITERIA - INTERESTS OF THE SERVICE - PERSONAL MERITS OF CANDIDATES - DISCRETION OF APPOINTING AUTHORITY - REVIEW BY THE COURT - LIMITS

( STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS , ART . 45 )

Summary

1 . ARTICLE 29 ( 1 ) OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS PROVIDES FOR VARIOUS POSSIBLE PROCEDURES FOR THE FILLING OF VACANT POSTS , THE FIRST OF WHICH IS A CONSIDERATION OF THE POSSIBILITIES OF PROMOTION OR TRANSFER WITHIN THE INSTITUTION . IT IS FOR THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY TO ASSESS WHETHER IT IS POSSIBLE TO FILL THE VACANT POST BY MEANS OF THAT FIRST PROCEDURE OR WHETHER IT IS APPROPRIATE TO PROCEED TO THE SECOND PROCEDURE ENVISAGED , NAMELY THE ORGANIZATION OF A COMPETITION INTERNAL TO THE INSTITUTION . SINCE PROMOTIONS OR TRANSFERS WITHIN THE INSTITUTION ARE PERMITTED BY THE STAFF REGULATIONS , IT FOLLOWS THAT THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY HAS A WIDE DISCRETION IN THAT RESPECT .

2 . IN ORDER TO EVALUATE THE INTERESTS OF THE SERVICE TOGETHER WITH THE MERITS WHICH MUST BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT IN THE CONTEXT OF THE DECISION PROVIDED FOR BY ARTICLE 45 OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS IN A MATTER OF PROMOTION , THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY HAS A WIDE MARGIN OF DISCRETION AND , IN THAT SPHERE , THE COURT MUST RESTRICT ITSELF TO THE QUESTION WHETHER , REGARD BEING HAD TO THE METHODS AND MEANS WHICH MAY HAVE LED TO THE ASSESSMENT MADE BY THE ADMINISTRATION , THE LATTER REMAINED WITHIN BOUNDS WHICH ARE NOT OPEN TO CRITICISM AND DID NOT USE ITS POWER IN A MANIFESTLY INCORRECT MANNER .

WHERE OFFICIALS WHO ARE ELIGIBLE FOR PROMOTION HAVE LENGTHY EXPERIENCE , THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY IS ENTITLED TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT , IN ORDER TO ASSESS THEIR QUALIFICATIONS FOR THE POST IN QUESTION , IN ADDITION TO THE NUMBER AND THE NATURE OF THE DEGREES HELD BY THEM , THE COMPETENCE AND EFFICIENCY WHICH THEY HAVE SHOWN IN THE SERVICE . MOREOVER , IT CANNOT BE SUGGESTED THAT IT IS A MISUSE OF THE POWER OF DISCRETION TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT , IN CONJUNCTION WITH OTHER FACTORS , THE AGE OF CANDIDATES AND THEIR SENIORITY IN THE GRADE OR SERVICE . INDEED , THE QUALIFICATIONS AND MERITS OF THE CANDIDATES BEING EQUAL , THOSE MATTERS MAY EVEN CONSTITUTE A DECISIVE FACTOR IN THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY ' S DECISION .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

MEASURES ADOPTED BY THE COMMUNITY INSTITUTIONS - INTERNAL DIRECTIVE - RULES INDICATING THE PRACTICE TO BE FOLLOWED BY THE ADMINISTRATION - WHETHER BINDING ON THE ADMINISTRATION

( STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS , ART . 5 ( 3 ))

Summary

ALTHOUGH THE COURT HAS CONSISTENTLY HELD THAT INTERNAL DIRECTIVES OR MEASURES OF AN INTERNAL NATURE MAY NOT BE REGARDED AS RULES OF LAW WHICH THE ADMINISTRATION IS ALWAYS BOUND TO OBSERVE , THEY NEVERTHELESS FORM RULES OF PRACTICE FROM WHICH THE ADMINISTRATION MAY NOT DEPART WITHOUT GIVING THE REASONS WHICH LED IT TO DO SO , SINCE OTHERWISE THE PRINCIPLE OF EQUALITY OF TREATMENT WOULD BE INFRINGED .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS - EXCEPTIONS - PROTECTION OF ANIMAL HEALTH - POWERS OF THE MEMBER STATES - LIMITS

( EEC TREATY , ART . 36 )

2 . FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS - EXCEPTIONS - PROTECTION OF ANIMAL HEALTH - REAL AIM OF THE MEASURES IN QUESTION - BLOCKING OF IMPORTS FOR COMMERCIAL AND ECONOMIC REASONS - DISGUISED RESTRICTION WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 36 - PROHIBITED RESTRICTION

( EEC TREATY , ART . 36 )

Summary

1 . ALTHOUGH UNDER ARTICLE 36 OF THE TREATY IT IS FOR EACH OF THE MEMBER STATES TO DETERMINE , AND , IF APPROPRIATE , TO ALTER ITS POLICY RELATING TO ANIMAL HEALTH , THE EFFECTS OF HEALTH POLICY ON IMPORTS FROM OTHER MEMBER STATES CANNOT EXCEED THE LIMITS LAID DOWN BY COMMUNITY LAW .

2 . THE SECOND SENTENCE OF ARTICLE 36 IS DESIGNED TO PREVENT RESTRICTIONS ON TRADE MENTIONED IN THE FIRST SENTENCE OF THAT ARTICLE FROM BEING DIVERTED FROM THEIR PROPER PURPOSE AND USED IN SUCH A WAY AS EITHER TO CREATE DISCRIMINATION IN RESPECT OF GOODS ORIGINAT- ING IN OTHER MEMBER STATES OR INDIRECTLY TO PROTECT CERTAIN NATIONAL PRODUCTS .

IN SO FAR AS CERTAIN FACTS SUGGEST THAT THE REAL AIM OF HEALTH MEASURES ADOPTED BY A MEMBER STATE IS TO BLOCK , FOR COMMERCIAL AND ECONOMIC REASONS , IMPORTS FROM OTHER MEMBER STATES AND INASMUCH AS IT CANNOT BE SHOWN THAT , FOR REASONS OF ANIMAL HEALTH , THE ONLY POSSIBILITY OPEN TO THE MEMBER STATE CONCERNED WAS TO APPLY THOSE MEASURES AND THAT THEY WERE THEREFORE NOT MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN WAS NECESSARY FOR THE INTENDED PURPOSE , THE MEASURES IN QUESTION CONSTITUTE A DISGUISED RESTRICTION WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE SECOND SENTENCE OF ARTICLE 36 .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES - OWN RESOURCES - POST-CLEARANCE RECOVERY OF IMPORT OR EXPORT DUTIES - REGULATION NO 1697/79 - RETROACTIVITY - NONE

( COUNCIL REGULATION NO 1697/79 )

Summary

REGULATION NO 1697/79 ON THE POST-CLEARANCE RECOVERY OF IMPORT DUTIES OR EXPORT DUTIES WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN REQUIRED OF THE PERSON LIABLE FOR PAYMENT ON GOODS ENTERED FOR A CUSTOMS PROCEDURE INVOLVING THE OBLIGATION TO PAY SUCH DUTIES DOES NOT APPLY TO PAYMENTS OF IMPORT OR EXPORT DUTIES MADE BEFORE THE DATE ON WHICH IT ENTERED INTO FORCE , NAMELY 1 JULY 1980 .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS - REFERENCE TO THE COURT - OBLIGATION TO REFER - INTERLOCUTORY PROCEEDINGS - NO OBLIGATION TO REFER - CONDITIONS - POSSIBILITY OF INSTITUTING PROCEEDINGS ON THE SUBSTANCE OF THE CASE

( EEC TREATY , THIRD PARA . OF ART . 177 )

2 . FREE MOVEMENT OF PERSONS - WORKERS - COMMUNITY RULES - SITUATIONS HAVING NO LINK WITH COMMUNITY LAW - NOT APPLICABLE - RIGHT OF ENTRY AND RESIDENCE - WORKER EMPLOYED IN THE MEMBER STATE OF WHICH HE IS A NATIONAL WHO HAS NEVER EXERCISED THE RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT - REFUSAL BY THE MEMBER STATE IN QUESTION TO ALLOW ENTRY OR RESIDENCE OF A RELATIVE WHO IS A NATIONAL OF A NON-MEMBER COUNTRY - WHETHER PERMISSIBLE

( REGULATION NO 1612/68 OF THE COUNCIL , ART . 10 )

Summary

1 . THE THIRD PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 177 OF THE EEC TREATY MUST BE INTERPRETED AS MEANING THAT A NATIONAL COURT OR TRIBUNAL AGAINST WHOSE DECISIONS THERE IS NO JUDICIAL REMEDY UNDER NATIONAL LAW IS NOT REQUIRED TO REFER TO THE COURT A QUESTION OF INTERPRETATION AS REFERRED TO IN THE FIRST PARAGRAPH OF THAT ARTICLE IF THE QUESTION IS RAISED IN INTERLOCUTORY PROCEEDINGS AND THE DECISION TO BE TAKEN IS NOT BINDING ON THE COURT OR TRIBUNAL WHICH LATER HAS TO DEAL WITH THE SUBSTANCE OF THE CASE , PROVIDED THAT EACH OF THE PARTIES IS ENTITLED TO INSTITUTE PROCEEDINGS OR TO REQUIRE PROCEEDINGS TO BE INSTITUTED ON THE SUBSTANCE OF THE CASE EVEN BEFORE THE COURTS OR TRIBUNALS OF ANOTHER JURISDICTIONAL SYSTEM AND THAT DURING SUCH PROCEEDINGS ANY QUESTION OF COMMUNITY LAW PROVISIONALLY DECIDED IN THE SUMMARY PROCEEDINGS MAY BE RE-EXAMINED AND BE THE SUBJECT OF A REFERENCE TO THE COURT UNDER ARTICLE 177 .

2 . THE TREATY PROVISIONS ON FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT FOR WORKERS AND THE RULES ADOPTED TO IMPLEMENT THEM CANNOT BE APPLIED TO CASES WHICH HAVE NO FACTOR LINKING THEM WITH ANY OF THE SITUATIONS GOVERNED BY COMMUNITY LAW .

IT FOLLOWS THAT COMMUNITY LAW DOES NOT PROHIBIT A MEMBER STATE FROM REFUSING TO ALLOW A RELATIVE , AS REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 10 OF REGULATION NO 1612/68 OF THE COUNCIL , OF A WORKER EMPLOYED WITHIN THE TERRITORY OF THAT STATE WHO HAS NEVER EXERCISED THE RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT WITHIN THE COMMUNITY TO ENTER OR RESIDE WITHIN ITS TERRITORY IF THAT WORKER HAS THE NATIONALITY OF THAT STATE AND THE RELATIVE THE NATIONALITY OF A NON-MEMBER COUNTRY .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . AGRICULTURE - COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKETS - MILK AND MILK PRODUCTS - AID FOR SKIMMED-MILK POWDER FOR USE AS ANIMAL FEED - CONDITIONS FOR GRANT - QUALITY AND COMPOSITION OF THE FEED - FEED UNFIT FOR CONSUMPTION BY ANIMALS - NOT ELIGIBLE FOR AID

( COUNCIL REGULATIONS NO 804/68 , ART . 10 ( 1 ) AND NO 986/68 , ART . 2 ( 4 ); COMMISSION REGULATION NO 990/72 , ARTS 1 AND 4 )

2 . AGRICULTURE - COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKETS - MILK AND MILK PRODUCTS - AID FOR SKIMMED-MILK POWDER FOR USE AS ANIMAL FEED - PURPOSE - DISPOSAL OF SURPLUS SKIMMED MILK - EMPLOYMENT OF THE PROCESSED PRODUCT FOR USEFUL ECONOMIC ENDS

( COUNCIL REGULATIONS NO 804/68 , ART . 10 ( 1 ) AND NO 986/68 , ART . 2 ( 4 ); COMMISSION REGULATION NO 990/72 , ARTS 1 AND 4 ).

3 . AGRICULTURE - COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKETS - MILK AND MILK PRODUCTS - AID FOR SKIMMED-MILK POWDER FOR USE AS ANIMAL FEED - CONDITIONS FOR GRANT - POSSIBILITY OF USE FOR ANIMAL FEED - DENATURED SKIMMED-MILK POWDER - SKIMMED-MILK POWDER FOR USE AS ANIMAL FEED - EQUAL TREATMENT OF THE TWO PRODUCTS

( COUNCIL REGULATION NO 986/68 , ART . 2 ( 5 ))

Summary

1 . THE COMMUNITY RULES CONCERNING AID FOR SKIMMED-MILK POWDER FOR USE AS ANIMAL FEED LAY DOWN REQUIREMENTS AS TO QUALITY AND COMPOSITION WITH WHICH FEED PROCESSED FROM SKIMMED MILK MUST COMPLY . THOSE REQUIRE- MENTS ARE NOT COMPLIED WITH IN THE CASE OF FEED WHICH IS UNFIT FOR ANIMAL CONSUMPTION BECAUSE IT CONTAINS A TOXIC SUBSTANCE .

2 . THE ATTAINMENT OF THE OBJECTIVE OF DISPOSING OF SURPLUS SKIMMED MILK IS NOT , OF ITSELF , SUFFICIENT TO SATISFY THE CONDITIONS LAID DOWN FOR THE GRANT OF COMMUNITY AID FOR THE PROCESSING OF SKIMMED-MILK POWDER INTO ANIMAL FEED . IT MAY BE SEEN FROM THE WHOLE CORPUS OF THE RELEVANT RULES THAT THE PURPOSE OF THOSE RULES IS NOT SOLELY THE MARKETING OF A PRODUCT AND THE RELIEF OF PRESSURE ON THE MARKET IN MILK BUT ALSO THE EMPLOYMENT OF THE PRODUCT FOR USEFUL ECONOMIC ENDS , THAT IS TO SAY TO MAKE AVAILABLE TO BREEDERS COMPOUND ANIMAL FEED WHICH IS RICH IN HIGH-QUALITY PROTEIN AND IS REASONABLY PRICED . IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES THE ATTAINMENT OF THE OBJECTIVE OF DISPOSING OF SURPLUS SKIMMED MILK IS NOT , OF ITSELF , SUFFICIENT TO WARRANT THE GRANT OF COMMUNITY AID IN RESPECT OF A PRODUCT WHICH IS UNFIT FOR ANIMAL CONSUMPTION BECAUSE IT CONTAINS A TOXIC SUBSTANCE .

3 . ARTICLE 2 ( 5 ) OF REGULATION NO 986/68 LAYING DOWN GENERAL RULES FOR GRANTING AID FOR SKIMMED MILK AND SKIMMED-MILK POWDER FOR USE AS ANIMAL FEED , ACCORDING TO WHICH ' ' ANY PRODUCT REFERRED TO IN PARAGRAPH ( 1 ) IN RESPECT OF WHICH AID IS GRANTED MAY BE USED ONLY AS FEED ' ' , APPLIES EQUALLY TO ' ' SKIMMED-MILK POWDER WHICH HAS BEEN DENATURED ' ' , WHICH IS REFERRED TO IN PARAGRAPH ( 1 ) ( C ) OF THE SAME ARTICLE . THUS THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE IN TREATMENT BETWEEN DENATURED SKIMMED-MILK POWDER AND SKIMMED-MILK POWDER USED FOR ANIMAL FEED , SINCE BOTH PRODUCTS MUST BE CAPABLE OF USE AS ANIMAL FEED IN ORDER TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR COMMUNITY AID .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS - AGRICULTURE - COMMON ORGANIZATIONS OF THE MARKETS - PRINCIPLES - FREEDOM OF COMMERCIAL TRANSACTIONS

( EEC TREATY , ARTS 30 AND 34 )

2.AGRICULTURE - COMMON ORGANIZATIONS OF THE MARKETS - FRUIT AND VEGETABLES - PRINCIPLES - FREEDOM OF COMMERCIAL TRANSACTIONS - NATIONAL MEASURES RESTRICTING MARKETING - NOT PERMISSIBLE

( REGULATION NO 1035/72 OF THE COUNCIL )

3.MEMBER STATES - DUTIES - IMPLEMENTATION OF COMMUNITY LAW - DEROGATIONS- JUSTIFICATION BASED ON CONSIDERATIONS OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE NATURE - NOT ACCEPTABLE

4.FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS - QUANTITATIVE RESTRICTIONS ON EXPORTS - MEASURES HAVING EQUIVALENT EFFECT - COMPULSORY MEMBERSHIP OF FRUIT AND VEGETABLE EXPORTERS IN A QUALITY-CONTROL AUTHORITY - NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKET IN FRUIT AND VEGETABLES

( EEC TREATY , ART . 34 ; REGULATION NO 1035/72 OF THE COUNCIL ; REGULATION NO 2638/69 OF THE COMMISSION )

Summary

1 . ARTICLES 30 AND 34 OF THE TREATY DEALING WITH THE ABOLITION OF QUANTITATIVE RESTRICTIONS ON IMPORTS AND EXPORTS AND ALL MEASURES HAVING EQUIVALENT EFFECT FORM AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE COMMON ORGANIZATIONS OF THE MARKETS IN THE AGRICULTURAL SECTORS . AS FAR AS TRADE WITHIN THE COMMUNITY IS CONCERNED , THE COMMON ORGANIZATIONS OF THE MARKETS ARE THEREFORE BASED ON FREEDOM OF COMMERCIAL TRANSACTIONS AND ARE INCOMPATIBLE WITH ANY NATIONAL LEGISLATION CAPABLE OF HINDERING INTRA-COMMUNITY TRADE .

2.IT IS CONTRARY TO THE FREEDOM OF COMMERCIAL TRANSACTIONS ON WHICH THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKET IN FRUIT AND VEGETABLES IS BASED FOR NATIONAL LEGISLATION TO MAKE THE EXPORTATION OF THOSE PRODUCTS CONDITIONAL ON THE EXPORTER ' S BEING AFFILIATED TO A PUBLIC BODY OR A BODY APPROVED BY AN OFFICIAL AUTHORITY .

3.CONSIDERATIONS OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE NATURE CANNOT JUSTIFY DEROGATION BY A MEMBER STATE FROM THE RULES OF COMMUNITY LAW .

4.ARTICLE 34 OF THE EEC TREATY AND THE RULES ON THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKET IN FRUIT AND VEGETABLES DO NOT ALLOW NATIONAL LEGISLATION TO STIPULATE THAT AN ASSOCIATION INCORPORATED UNDER PRIVATE LAW , DESIGNATED AS THE SOLE CHECKING AUTHORITY WITHIN THE MEANING OF REGULATION NO 1035/72 ON THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKET IN FRUIT AND VEGETABLES , SHALL ISSUE ONLY TO MEMBERS OF THAT ASSOCIATION THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS OF RECEIPT AND CERTIFICATES OF INSPECTION REFERRED TO IN REGULATION NO 2638/69 LAYING DOWN ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS ON QUALITY CONTROL OF FRUIT AND VEGETABLES MARKETED WITHIN THE COMMUNITY .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . FISHERIES - CONSERVATION OF THE RESOURCES OF THE SEA - TECHNICAL CONSERVATION MEASURES - USE OF DEVICES OBSTRUCTING OR DIMINISHING THE MESH OF FISHING NETS - PROHIBITION - IMMEDIATE EFFECT - ABSENCE OF DETAILED IMPLEMENTING RULES - IRRELEVANT

( COUNCIL REGULATION NO 2527/80 , ART . 7 )

2 . FISHERIES - CONSERVATION OF THE RESOURCES OF THE SEA - PERIOD PROVIDED FOR IN ARTICLE 102 OF THE ACT OF ACCESSION - EXPIRY - EXCLUSIVE POWERS OF THE COMMUNITY

( ACT OF ACCESSION , ART . 102 )

3 . FISHERIES - CONSERVATION OF THE RESOURCES OF THE SEA - TECHNICAL CONSERVATION MEASURES - USE OF DEVICES OBSTRUCTING OR DIMINISHING THE MESH OF FISHING NETS - PROHIBITION - PERMISSION TO USE DEVICES FOR THE PROTECTION OF NETS - IMMEDIATE EFFECT - ABSENCE OF DETAILED IMPLEMENTING RULES - JURISDICTION OF COURTS - CRITERIA APPLICABLE

( COUNCIL REGULATION NO 2527/80 , ART . 7 )

Summary

1 . THE FIRST SENTENCE OF ARTICLE 7 OF REGULATION NO 2527/80 , ACCORDING TO WHICH NO DEVICE IS TO BE USED BY MEANS OF WHICH THE MESH IN ANY PART OF A FISHING NET IS OBSTRUCTED OR OTHERWISE EFFECTIVELY DIMINISHED , IS AN INDEPENDENT AND PERFECTLY CLEAR PROVISION , CREATING A PROHIBITION WITH IMMEDIATE EFFECT WHICH CANNOT DEPEND UPON THE ADOPTION OF THE DETAILED IMPLEMENTING RULES PROVIDED FOR IN THE SECOND SENTENCE OF THE SAID PROVISION .

2 . SINCE THE EXPIRY ON 1 JANUARY 1979 OF THE TRANSITIONAL PERIOD PROVIDED FOR IN ARTICLE 102 OF THE ACT OF ACCESSION THE POWER TO ADOPT , AS PART OF THE COMMON FISHERIES POLICY , MEASURES TO CONSERVE THE RESOURCES OF THE SEA VESTS FULLY AND FINALLY IN THE COMMUNITY .

3 . IT IS CLEAR FROM THE PURPOSE AND TERMS OF ARTICLE 7 OF REGULATION NO 2527/80 THAT THE ENTIRE PROVISION MUST HAVE IMMEDIATE EFFECT , INCLUDING THE PERMISSION TO USE DEVICES FOR THE PROTECTION OF NETS THE USE OF WHICH APPEARS TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE PROHIBITION OF THE USE OF ANY DEVICE BY MEANS OF WHICH THE MESH IN ANY PART OF A FISHING NET IS OBSTRUCTED OR OTHERWISE EFFECTIVELY DIMINISHED .

IN THE ABSENCE OF DETAILED IMPLEMENTING RULES ADOPTED BY THE COMMUNITY TO GIVE FORMAL EXPRESSION TO THAT PERMISSION , IT IS FOR THE COMPETENT COURTS TO FILL THE RESULTING LACUNA IN A MANNER WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH THE AIM OF PROTECTING FISHING STOCKS AND WHICH ALSO TAKES INTO ACCOUNT THE FACT THAT PROTECTION OF FISHING NETS SHOULD BE PERMITTED .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

AGRICULTURE - COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKETS - HOPS - AID TO A RECOGNIZED GROUP OF PRODUCERS FOR THE CONVERSION TO OTHER VARIETIES AND FOR THE REORGANIZATION OF HOP GARDENS - CONDITIONS OF GRANT - PROHIBITION OF EXTENSION OF HOP GARDENS - SCOPE

( COUNCIL REGULATION NO 2253/77 , ART . 4 )

Summary

THE PROHIBITION CONTAINED IN ARTICLE 4 OF REGULATION NO 2253/77 OF AN INCREASE IN THE AREA PLANTED WITH HOPS IN THE EVENT OF THE GRANT TO RECOGNIZED GROUPS OF PRODUCERS OF AID FOR THE CONVERSION TO OTHER VARIETIES AND FOR THE REORGANIZATION OF HOP GARDENS APPLIES TO ALL THE PRODUCERS WHO ARE MEMBERS OF THE RECOGNIZED PRODUCER GROUP RECEIVING AID , WHETHER OR NOT THOSE MEMBERS ARE INDIVIDUALLY CONCERNED WITH THE STRUCTURAL MEASURES IN QUESTION .