ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Transport ° Road transport ° Social legislation ° Derogations from the rules relating to driving periods and rest periods for reasons of safety of persons, of the vehicle and of its load ° Scope

(Council Regulation No 3820/85, Arts 12 and 15(1))

Summary

Article 12 of Regulation No 3820/85 on the harmonization of certain social legislation relating to road transport, in the light of its wording and context, does not authorize a driver to derogate from the provisions relating to driving and rest periods in Articles 6, 7 or 8 of the regulation for reasons known before the journey commenced.

It is clear from Article 12 that a decision, taken in order to ensure the safety of persons, of the vehicle and of its load, to extend a driving period beyond that normally authorized under the regulation must be for the driver alone, must be taken when it unexpectedly becomes impossible for him to comply with the driving and rest periods laid down and must take into account the immediate requirements of road safety. Article 15(1), moreover, by requiring transport undertakings to organize work in such a way that drivers are able to comply with the regulation, precludes an undertaking from planning a derogation before the driver leaves.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Competition ° Agreements, decisions and concerted practices ° Prohibition ° Block exemption ° Regulation No 123/85 ° Purpose ° Exemption for certain restrictions of competition agreed on between manufacturers and concessionaires in the motor vehicle industry ° Prohibition of independent reselling of new vehicles by a trader who is outside the official distribution network for the make concerned and is not an authorized intermediary ° None

(Commission Regulation No 123/85)

Summary

Regulation No 123/85 on the application of Article 85(3) of the Treaty to certain categories of motor vehicle distribution and servicing agreements merely provides economic agents in the motor vehicle industry with certain possibilities enabling them to remove their distribution and servicing agreements from the scope of the prohibition contained in Article 85(1) of the Treaty despite the inclusion in those agreements of certain types of exclusivity and no-competition clauses. It concerns only contractual relations between suppliers and their approved distributors and, although it states what the parties to such agreements may or may not undertake to do in relations with third parties, it does not, in contrast, serve to regulate the activities of such third parties, who may operate in the market outside the framework of distribution agreements.

Regulation No 123/85 must therefore be interpreted as not preventing a trader who is neither an approved reseller in the distribution network of a manufacturer of a particular make of motor vehicle nor an authorized intermediary within the meaning of Article 3(11) of that regulation from carrying on an independent business reselling new vehicles of that make.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1. Community law ° Principles ° Equal treatment ° Discrimination on grounds of nationality ° Definition ° National measures applicable to all persons within the jurisdiction of a Member State ° Exclusion ° National legislation requiring the victim of a criminal offence who wishes to bring suit as a civil party in criminal proceedings to grant his representative a special power of attorney ° Whether permissible

(EC Treaty, Arts 6, 52 and 59)

2. Community law ° Principles ° Fundamental rights ° Observance ensured by the Court ° Compatibility with the European Convention on Human Rights of national legislation lying outside the scope of Community law ° Assessment by the Court ° Not possible

Summary

1. Article 6 of the EC Treaty, in conjunction with Articles 52 and 59 thereof, laying down the principle of non-discrimination on grounds of nationality, must be interpreted as not precluding a Member State' s legislation from requiring a victim of a criminal offence who wishes to bring suit as a civil party in criminal proceedings to grant his representative a special power of attorney, even when the law of the Member State of which the victim is a national does not lay down such a formality.

2. Where national legislation falls within the field of application of Community law, the Court, when requested to give a preliminary ruling, must provide the national court with all the elements of interpretation which are necessary in order to enable that court to assess the compatibility of that legislation with the fundamental rights ° as laid down in particular in the European Convention of Human Rights ° the observance of which the Court ensures. However, the Court has no such jurisdiction with regard to national legislation lying outside the scope of Community law.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Acts of the institutions — Choice of legal basis — Criteria — Practice of an institution — Irrelevant in regard to the rules of the Treaty

2. Trans-European networks — Measures necessary in order to ensure interoperability of networks — Council Decision on inter-administration telematic networks for statistics relating to the trading of goods between Member States — Legal basis — Article 129d of the Treaty — Ancillary effects on the functioning of the internal market — No effect — Annulment on account of the use of Article 235 of the Treaty as the legal basis — Temporal effects — (EC Treaty, Arts 100a, 129c, 129d, 174 and 235; Council Decision 94/445/EC)

Summary

1. In the context of the organization of the powers of the Community the choice of the legal basis for a measure must be based on objective factors which are amenable to judicial review. Those factors include in particular the aim and content of the measure.

A mere practice on the part of the Council cannot derogate from the rules laid down in the Treaty and therefore cannot create a precedent binding on the Community institutions where, prior to the adoption of a measure, they have to determine its correct legal basis.

2. Decision 94/445 on inter-administration telematic networks for statistics relating to the trading of goods between Member States is principally intended to ensure the interoperability of national telematic networks by means of technical measures of an operational character. Such measures are measures which, as such and irrespective of the establishment of Community guidelines on the matter pursuant to the first indent of Article 129c(1) of the Treaty, are covered by the second indent of Article 129c(1) and should be adopted under the third paragraph of Article 129d.

Recourse cannot be made to Article 100a of the Treaty rather than the third paragraph of Article 129d on the ground that the decision also serves objectives of the internal market, since those objectives are merely ancillary and the mere fact that the establishment or the functioning of the internal market is affected is not sufficient for Article 100a to apply. Since Decision 94/445 was wrongly adopted on the basis of Article 235 of the Treaty, whose use as the legal basis for a measure is justified only where no other provision of the Treaty gives the Community institutions the necessary power to adopt the measure in question, it must be annulled.

However, in order to avert discontinuity in measures already started and for important reasons of legal certainty, comparable to those which arise where certain regulations are annulled, there appears to be justification for the Court ' s exercising the power expressly conferred upon it by the second paragraph of Article 174 of the Treaty where a regulation is annulled and deciding to maintain the effects of Commission decisions already adopted on the basis of the annulled decision until such time as a decision adopted on the appropriate legal basis enters into force.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Preliminary rulings — Jurisdiction of the Court — Limits — Contrived dispute or request for interpretation of provisions of Community law inapplicable in the main proceedings — (EC Treaty, Art. 177)

2. Environment — Conservation of wild birds — Directive 79/409 — Implementation by the Member States — Conditions for granting derogations from the prohibitions laid down in the directive — (Council Directive 79/409, Arts 5, 7 and 9)

Summary

1. Pursuant to the division of judicial functions between national courts and the Court of Justice provided for by Article 177 of the Treaty, the Court gives preliminary rulings where the questions referred concern the interpretation of a provision of Community law without, in principle, having to look into the circumstances in which the national courts were prompted to submit questions and envisage applying the provision of Community law which they have asked the Court to interpret.

The matter would be different only if it were apparent either that the procedure provided for in Article 177 had been misused and was in fact being used to have the Court give a ruling when there was no genuine dispute or that the provision of Community law referred to the Court for interpretation was manifestly incapable of applying.

2. Article 9(1) of Directive 79/409 on the conservation of wild birds, which provides for the possibility for the Member States to derogate from the general prohibition on hunting protected species laid down in Articles 5 and 7 of the directive where there is no other satisfactory solution and for one of the reasons listed exhaustively therein, and Article 9(2), which defines the precise formal conditions for such derogations, must be interpreted as authorizing the Member States to grant those derogations only by measures which refer in sufficient detail to the factors mentioned in Article 9(1) and (2).

In a sphere in which the management of the common heritage is entrusted to the Member States in their respective territories, faithful transposition of directives becomes particularly important.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Agriculture ° Common agricultural policy ° Food aid ° Implementation ° Invitation to tender for the mobilization of common wheat as food aid for the Republic of Benin ° Obligations of the successful tenderer ° Observance of the quality standards ° Liability attaching to the successful tenderer for shipment on board after expiry of the prescribed time-limit ° Conditions ° System of securities ° Slight infringement of the quality standards ° Total forfeiture of the security ° Principle of proportionality ° Breach ° None

(Commission Regulation No 1824/80, Arts 5 and 6(1))

Summary

Article 6(1) of Commission Regulation No 1824/80 opening an invitation to tender for the mobilization of common wheat as food aid for the Republic of Benin is to be interpreted as meaning that observance of the quality standards referred to in Article 7 of that regulation constitutes an obligation which the successful tenderer must fulfil as regards the carrying out of the operations referred to in Article 6(1) in order for the security to be released.

Article 5 of that regulation is to be interpreted as meaning that the successful tenderer incurs liability for shipment on board which takes place after expiry of the prescribed time-limit where he did not fix the timing of delivery with the agent, twice refused vessels which the agent offered and advised the agent on 29 August 1980 that the latter should make a vessel available for loading by 1 September 1980 at the latest.

Article 6(1), referred to above, is to be interpreted as meaning that the security is forfeited where the quality standards referred to in Article 7 of the abovementioned regulation have been slightly infringed, even where the consignee has not made any observations in that regard, without the principle of proportionality being breached thereby, since observance of quality standards constitutes an essential condition for the successful tenderer infringement of which may be punished by total forfeiture of the security.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Agriculture ° Common organization of the markets ° Products processed from fruit and vegetables ° Market management measures for preserved cultivated mushrooms ° Levying of an additional amount on imports ° Set at a level effectively prohibiting imports ° Disproportionate financial burden ° Breach of the principle of proportionality ° Unlawful

(Council Regulation No 1796/81, Art. 2(1))

Summary

In setting, as a measure of market management, by Regulation No 1796/81 the additional amount to be levied on imports of preserved cultivated mushrooms at a flat-rate corresponding to the cost price of grade 1 mushrooms produced in the Community, the Council was in breach of the principle of proportionality. Set at such a level the amount is excessive because it goes beyond the objective of that regulation, which is to protect the Community market, it penalizes importers and amounts to a substantive prohibition of imports. Moreover, it cannot be justified by the fact that long-term measures such as measures of market management, facilitate long-term planning of the commercial activities of importers. Furthermore, as regards lower-grade mushrooms imported from non-member countries, it is much higher than the cost of lower-grade mushrooms produced in the Community, clearly going beyond the Council' s discretionary powers in that area. Accordingly Article 2(1) of Regulation No 1796/81 is invalid as regards the level of the additional amount set.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1. Member States ° Obligations ° Obligation to penalize infringements of Community law ° Scope

(EC Treaty, Art. 5; ECSC Treaty, Art. 86)

2. Member States ° Obligations ° Obligation to penalize infringements of Community law ° Penalty for breaches of Community customs rules ° Breach committed at the time of importation of goods originating in a non-member country subsequently incorporated into the Community customs territory ° Powers of national criminal courts

Summary

1. Where Community legislation does not specifically provide for any penalty for an infringement or refers for that purpose to national legislation, Article 86 of the ECSC Treaty and Article 5 of the EC Treaty require the Member States to take all measures necessary to guarantee the application and effectiveness of Community law. For that purpose, while the choice of penalties remains at their discretion, they must ensure that infringements of Community law are penalized under conditions, both procedural and substantive, which are analogous to those applicable to infringements of national law of a similar nature and importance and which, in any event, make the penalty effective, proportionate and dissuasive.

2. Although an extension of the Community customs territory, such as that resulting from German reunification or from the accession of a new Member State, may have the effect that goods originating in what was previously a non-member country become Community goods, that does not have the consequence that importation of those goods, at the time when actually effected, could be carried out without complying with the Community provisions laid down for trade with non-member countries. Such an extension constitutes a new material fact which does not have the effect of releasing Member States from their obligation to take all appropriate measures for guaranteeing the operation and efficacity of the Community law applicable at the material time, and cannot therefore preclude national courts from penalizing breaches of Community legislation applicable at the time of importation on conditions, both procedural and substantive, which are analogous to those applicable to infringements of national law of a similar nature and importance and which, in any event, make the penalty effective, proportionate and dissuasive.

In particular, the Community customs provisions applicable following the unification of the Federal Republic of Germany and the German Democratic Republic do not preclude the fact of importation into a Member State of goods originating in the German Democratic Republic, but declared as originating in another country, from being reclassified under national law, following that unification, with a view to penalizing breaches of the Community legislation applicable when that fact occurred.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Agriculture - Common organization of the markets - Milk and milk products - Additional levy on milk - Annual questionnaire on the application of the scheme addressed to the Member States - Notification to the Commission - Flat-rate reduction applied to advances on the entry of agricultural expenditure in the accounts in the event of non-compliance with the time-limit - Decision 93/673 - Legal basis - Breach of Regulation No 729/70 or the principle of proportionality - None

(Council Regulation No 729/70; Commission Regulation No 536/93, Art. 8, fourth indent; Commission Decision 93/673)

Summary

In adopting Decision 93/673 fixing the flat-rate reduction to advances on the entry of agricultural expenditure in the accounts in the event of non-compliance with the time-limit for notification of the annual questionnaire on the application of the additional levy scheme for milk, which provides in particular for a reduction of 1% of the overall amount paid to the Member State concerned for the previous budget year for late notification, 0.5% of the same overall amount for calculation of the levy which is incorrect by more than 10%, and 0.04% for each item of information missing, the Commission validly relied on Article 8, fourth indent, of Regulation No 536/93 laying down detailed rules on the application of the additional levy, which requires Member States to notify the questionnaire, duly completed, before the date given and which authorizes the Commission to make a reduction to advances not only if the notification is late but also if it is incomplete or incorrect.

The abovementioned decision does not infringe Regulation No 729/70 on the financing of the common agricultural policy because the reduction to advances, which cannot be definitive, does not preclude verification of the justification for the reduction in the context of the clearance of accounts provided for by that regulation, in the course of which the Member State concerned will be able to present its views on the lawfulness of the reduction, so that the rights of the defence will be guaranteed.

Lastly, the decision does not breach the principle of proportionality, inasmuch as its aim is to fix, in the interests of uniform application and legal certainty, the way in which the reduction to advances is applied, and to that end defines the various ways in which failure to fulfil the duty to communicate the questionnaire may occur, with the corresponding rate of reduction. In that regard the characteristics attributable to the flat-rate element in the reductions are not sufficient to make the reduction disproportionate, having regard to its aim, since the reductions do not appear to be excessive in view of the importance of due notification for the management of the levy scheme.
Case C-336/94

Eftalia Dafeki

v

Landesversicherungsanstalt Württemberg

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Sozialgericht Hamburg

‛Freedom of movement for workers — Equal treatment — Social security — Rule of national law according different probative value to certificates of civil status depending on whether they are of national or foreign origin’

Opinion of Advocate General La Pergola delivered on 3 December 1996 I-6763

Judgment of the Court, 2 December 1997 I-6774

Summary of the Judgment

Freedom of movement for persons — Workers — Equal treatment — Determination of entitlement to social security benefits — Production of certificates of civil status — Competent Member State required to recognise the probative value of certificates issued by the authorities of another Member State — Exception — Existence of concrete evidence undermining the accuracy of the certificates in question

(EC Treaty, Art. 48)

Although the administrative and judicial authorities of a Member State are not required under Community law to treat as equivalent certificates of civil status drawn up by the competent authorities of their own State and those issued by the competent authorities of another Member State, the fact remains that exercise of the rights arising from freedom of movement for workers is not possible without production of documents relative to personal status, which are generally issued by the worker's State of origin. It follows that, in proceedings for determining the entitlements to social security benefits of a migrant worker who is a Community national, the competent social security institutions and the courts of a Member State must accept certificates and analogous documents relative to personal status issued by the competent authorities of the other Member States, unless their accuracy is seriously undermined by concrete evidence relating to the individual case in question.
Case C-271/94





European Parliament

v

Council of the European Union





«(Council Decision 94/445/EC – Edicom – Telematic networks – Legal basis)»

Opinion of Advocate General La Pergola delivered on 22 November 1995

Judgment of the Court, 26 March 1996

Summary of the Judgment

1.. Acts of the institutions – Choice of legal basis – Criteria – Practice of an institution – Irrelevant in regard to the rules of the Treaty



2.. Trans-European networks – Measures necessary in order to ensure interoperability of networks – Council Decision on inter-administration telematic networks for statistics relating to the trading of goods between Member States – Legal basis – Article 129d of the Treaty – Ancillary effects on the functioning of the internal market – No effect – Annulment on account of the use of Article 235 of the Treaty as the legal basis – Temporal effects

(EC Treaty, Arts 100a, 129c, 129d, 174 and 235; Council Decision 94/445/EC)

1.

2.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Environment ° Conservation of wild birds ° Directive 79/409 ° Choice and delimitation of Special Protection Areas ° Criteria available ° Exclusion of economic requirements, even those which constitute a general interest superior to ecological interests or amount to imperative reasons of overriding public interest

(Council Directives 79/409, Arts 2 and 4(1) and (2), and 92/43, Art. 6(4))

Summary

Article 4(1) or Article 4(2) of Directive 79/409 on the conservation of wild birds, which requires the Member States to take special conservation measures for certain species, and in particular to designate as Special Protection Areas the most suitable territories for their conservation, must be interpreted as meaning that a Member State is not authorized to take account of the economic requirements mentioned in Article 2 of the directive when choosing and defining the boundaries of a Special Protection Area or even to take account of economic requirements constituting a general interest superior to that represented by the ecological objective of that directive.

Similarly, a Member State may not take account of economic requirements in so far as they amount to imperative reasons of overriding public interest of the kind referred to in Article 6(4) of Directive 92/43 on the conservation of the natural habitats of wild fauna and flora, as inserted in Directive 79/409. Although the latter provision widened the range of grounds on which it may be justified to encroach upon Special Protection Areas already designated as such, by expressly including therein reasons of a social or economic nature, it nevertheless did not make any change regarding the initial stage of classification referred to in Article 4(1) and (2) of Directive 79/409, and therefore the classification of sites as Special Protection Areas must in all circumstances be carried out in accordance with the criteria accepted by those provisions.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Member States ° Obligations ° Implementation of directives ° Failure to fulfil obligations ° Justification ° Not permissible

(EC Treaty, Art. 169)

Summary

A Member State may not plead provisions, practices or circumstances existing in its internal legal system in order to justify a failure to comply with the obligations and time-limits laid down in a directive.