ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 State aid - Concept - Tax exemption granted to certain undertakings by the public authorities - Covered

(EC Treaty, Art. 92(1) (now, after amendment, Art. 87(1) EC))

2 State aid - Adverse effect on competition - Tax exemption granted to undertakings established in one Member State with no real compensation in practice for undertakings in other Member States

(EC Treaty, Art. 92(1) (now, after amendment, Art. 87(1) EC))

3 State aid - Recovery of unlawful aid - Obligation - Not fulfilled - Justification put forward - Absolute impossibility of implementation - No justification

(EC Treaty, Art. 93(2) (now Art. 88(2) EC)

Summary

1 The concept of aid within the meaning of Article 92(1) of the Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 87(1) EC) embraces not only positive benefits, such as subsidies, but also measures which, in various forms, mitigate the charges which are normally included in the budget of an undertaking and which, therefore, without being subsidies in the strict sense of the word, are similar in character and have the same effect.

A measure whereby the public authorities grant to certain undertakings a tax exemption which, although not involving a transfer of State resources, places the persons to whom the exemption applies in a more favourable financial position than other taxpayers constitutes State aid within the meaning of Article 92(1) of the Treaty.

2 A tax credit scheme for the benefit of road hauliers from a particular Member State has adverse effects on their competitors - namely road hauliers established in other Member States, whether operating on their own account or for hire or reward - in so far as, even if the legislation of the Member State concerned provides for the latter to receive compensatory payments, they cannot, in the absence of any provisions laying down detailed rules for granting those payments, usefully avail themselves of the right to claim them.

3 Although a Member State may plead that it was absolutely impossible for it to implement properly a Community decision requiring it to recover aid unlawfully granted, that condition is not satisfied where the Member State concerned merely relies on the legal or practical difficulties involved in implementing the decision and takes no step whatsoever to recover the aid from the undertakings in question.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Tax provisions - Harmonisation of laws - Turnover taxes - Common system of value added tax - Power of Member States to maintain certain exemptions on a transitional basis - Scope - Reduction of the material scope of exemptions - Whether permissible

(Council Directive 77/388, Arts 4(3) and 28(3)(b) and Annex F, point 16)

Summary

$$In relation to the supply of building land, a Member State is entitled to exempt that supply under Article 28(3)(b) of the Sixth Directive 77/388, read in conjunction with point 16 of Annex F thereto, notwithstanding the fact that, on the one hand, it has since the adoption of that directive introduced an election to waive the value added tax exemption in respect of such supplies and, on the other hand, it has reduced the material scope of the exemption applicable to such supplies so that some previously exempt supplies are now subject to value added tax.

The amendments made by the Member State concerned have not widened the scope of the exemption; on the contrary, they have reduced it. Consequently, they were not adopted in disregard of the wording of Article 28(3)(b). Whilst that provision precludes the introduction of new exemptions or the extension of the scope of existing exemptions following the entry into force of the Sixth Directive, it does not prevent a reduction of those exemptions, since their abolition constitutes the objective pursued by Article 28(4) of the Sixth Directive.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Common Customs Tariff - Duty-free allowances for goods contained in travellers' personal luggage - Harmonisation of laws - Exemptions from turnover tax and excise duty - Goods contained in travellers' personal luggage - National legislation prohibiting or restricting, in the general interest, imports of certain goods by travellers arriving from non-member countries - Whether permissible - Restrictions (based on the duration of the journey) on imports of alcoholic drinks - Proportionate

(Council Regulation No 918/83; Council Directive 69/169)

Summary

$$National legislation prohibiting or restricting imports of certain goods by travellers arriving from non-member countries on grounds of public morality, public policy, public security or protection of health and life of humans is not contrary to Regulation No 918/83 setting up a Community system of reliefs from customs duty or to Directive 69/169 concerning exemption from turnover tax and excise duty on imports in international travel. Nor, in principle, is national legislation restricting imports of alcoholic drinks by travellers arriving from non-member countries. Similarly, national legislation restricting imports by travellers arriving from third countries of alcoholic drinks, on the basis of the duration of the journey, with a view to combating disturbances of public order connected with the consumption of alcohol, is not contrary to either of those measures.

Neither the Regulation nor the Directive, the objectives of which are respectively to eliminate differences in the field of exemptions from customs duties and to harmonise exemptions from turnover tax and excise duty on imports in international travel, do not preclude the application by the Member States of import or export prohibitions or restrictions which are justified on the grounds referred to above. As regards, in particular, restrictions on imports on the basis of the duration of the journey, such legislation is consistent with the principle of proportionality since it is appropriate in so far as it introduces only a limited derogation from the Community system of customs and tax reliefs applicable to travellers, and since it is necessary in so far as the alternatives do not appear to be effective enough to attain the objective pursued.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 Actions for failure to fulfil obligations - Commission decisions to issue a reasoned opinion and to initiate proceedings before the Court of Justice - Application of the principle of collegiality - Scope - Commissioners under a duty of collective deliberation

2 Approximation of laws - Quality of bathing water - Directive 76/160 - Implementation by the Member States - Obligation as to results

(Council Directive 76/160)

Summary

1 The principle of collegiality which governs the functioning of the Commission is based on the equal participation of the Commissioners in the adoption of decisions and implies that decisions should be the subject of collective deliberation and that all the members of the college of Commissioners should bear collective responsibility at the political level. The formal requirements for effective compliance with the principle of collegiality vary according to the nature and legal effects of the acts adopted. A reasoned opinion merely confers upon the Commission the right - not a duty - to commence proceedings before the Court. The decision to commence proceedings before the Court does not per se alter the legal position in question.

Accordingly, both the Commission's decision to issue a reasoned opinion and its decision to bring an action for a declaration of failure to fulfil obligations must be the subject of collective deliberation by the college of Commissioners and the information on which those decisions are based must therefore be available to the members of the college. However, it is not necessary for the college itself formally to decide on the wording of the acts which give effect to those decisions and put them in final form.

2 Directive 76/160 concerning the quality of bathing water, Article 4(1) of which requires the Member States, within 10 years of notification of that measure, to take all necessary measures to ensure that bathing waters conform to the microbiological and physico-chemical limit values set therein, requires the Member States to ensure that certain results are achieved in good time and, save for the derogations provided for, does not allow them to rely on particular circumstances to justify a failure to fulfil that obligation.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Approximation of laws - Trade marks - Directive 89/104 - Protection of the trade mark extended to non-similar products or services - Conditions - Reputation of the mark in the Member State - Meaning - Criteria to be applied

(Council Directive 89/104, Art. 5(2))

Summary

$$Article 5(2) of First Council Directive 89/104 concerning trade marks - which extends the protection of a registered trade mark to products or services which are neither identical nor similar to those for which the mark is registered, where the latter has a reputation in the Member State and there is clear evidence that the mark is being unfairly harmed - is to be interpreted as meaning that, in order to satisfy the requirement relating to reputation, a registered trade mark must be known by a significant part of the public concerned by the products or services which it covers. In examining whether this condition is fulfilled, the national court must take into consideration all the relevant facts of the case, in particular the market share held by the trade mark, the intensity, geographical extent and duration of its use, and the size of the investment made by the undertaking in promoting it. Territorially, the condition is fulfilled when the trade mark has a reputation in a substantial part of the territory of a Member State since, failing closer definition of requirements under Community law on this point, a trade mark cannot be required to have a reputation `throughout' the territory of the Member State.

Accordingly, in the Benelux territory, it is sufficient for the mark to be known by a significant part of the public concerned in a substantial part of that territory, which may consist of a part of one of the Benelux countries.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Environment - Water pollution - Directive 76/464 - `Discharge' within the meaning of Article 1(2)(d) of the Directive - Precipitation of contaminated steam on to surface water - Precipitation on to land and roofs

(Council Directive 76/464, Art. 1(2)(d))

Summary

$$The term `discharge' in Article 1(2)(d) of Directive 76/464 on pollution caused by certain dangerous substances discharged into the aquatic environment of the Community must be interpreted as covering the emission of contaminated steam which is precipitated on to surface water. The distance between those waters and the place of emission of the contaminated steam is relevant only for the purpose of determining whether the pollution of the waters cannot be regarded as foreseeable according to general experience, so that the pollution is not attributable to the person causing the steam.

The term `discharge' must also be interpreted as covering the emission of contaminated steam which is first precipitated on to land and roofs and then reaches the surface water via a storm drain. It is not material in this respect whether the drain in question belongs to the establishment concerned or to a third party.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Community law - Abusive exercise of a right arising from a provision of Community law - National rule prohibiting the abuse of rights - Application by national courts

2. Freedom of movement for persons - Freedom of establishment - Companies - Directive 77/91 - Alteration of the capital of a public limited liability company - National rules providing for an increase by administrative decision of the capital of a public limited liability company in financial difficulties - Frustration of the exercise of rights arising from the directive by recourse to a national rule prohibiting the abuse of rights

(Council Directive 77/91, Art. 25(1))

Summary

1. Community law cannot be relied on for abusive or fraudulent ends. Consequently, Community law does not preclude the application by national courts of a provision of national law in order to assess whether a right arising from a provision of Community law is being exercised abusively. However, the application of such a national rule must not prejudice the full effect and uniform application of Community law in the Member States.

( see paras 33-34, 44 and operative part )

2. A shareholder relying on Article 25(1) of the Second Directive 77/91 on company law cannot be deemed to be abusing his rights under that provision on the ground that he is a minority shareholder, or has benefited from the reorganisation of the company subject to a reorganisation scheme, or has not exercised his right of preemption, or that he was one of the shareholders who asked that the company be placed under the scheme applicable to companies in serious difficulties, or has allowed a certain period of time to elapse before bringing his action. However, Community law does not preclude national courts from applying a provision of national law which enables them to determine whether a right deriving from a Community law provision is being abused if, of the remedies available for a situation that has arisen in breach of that provision, a shareholder has chosen a remedy that will cause such serious damage to the legitimate interests of others that it appears manifestly disproportionate.

( see paras 36-37, 43-44 and operative part )
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Own resources of the European Communities - Protection of the Community's financial interests - Fight against fraud - Regulation No 515/97 on mutual assistance between the administrative authorities of the Member States and cooperation between the latter and the Commission to ensure the correct application of the law on customs and agricultural matters - Legal basis - Article 235 of the Treaty (now Article 308 EC)

(EC Treaty, Arts 100 and 209a (now, after amendment, Arts 95 EC and 280 EC) and Art. 235 (now Art. 308 EC); Council Regulation No 515/97)

Summary

$$Regulation No 515/97 on mutual assistance between the administrative authorities of the Member States and cooperation between the latter and the Commission to ensure the correct application of the law on customs and agricultural matters was properly adopted on the basis of Article 235 of the Treaty (now Article 308 EC), since Article 100a of the Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 95 EC) is not applicable in this context.

Indeed, that measure lays down, in relation to the various fields covered, rules the aim and specific content of which, taken as a whole, are the fight against fraud, so that it seeks to protect the financial interests of the Community. That protection does not follow from the establishment of the customs union, but constitutes an independent objective which, under the scheme of the Treaty, is placed in Title II (financial provisions) of Part V relating to the Community institutions and not in Part III on Community policies, which includes the customs union and agriculture. Since Article 209a of the Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 280 EC), in the version applicable when Regulation No 515/97 was adopted, indicated the objective to be attained but did not confer on the Commission competence to set up a system of the kind at issue, recourse to Article 235 of the Treaty was justified.

Moreover, although Regulation No 515/97 provides for the creation of an automated information system called the `Customs Information System', the mere fact that such a system cannot be established unless principles harmonised at Community level concerning the protection of personal data are in force at national level is not a sufficient basis for Article 100a of the Treaty to apply, since such harmonisation of national laws is only an incidental effect of the legislation.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Agriculture - EAGGF - Clearance of accounts - Disallowance of expenditure arising from irregularities in the application of the Community rules - Absence of system of objective controls

(Council Regulation No 2048/89, Arts 3(1) and 6(1))

2. Agriculture - EAGGF - Clearance of accounts - Disallowance of expenditure arising from irregularities in the application of the Community rules - Finding of shortcomings in the system of controls put in place by a Member State - Not disputed by the Member State - Consequences

(Council Regulation No 1201/89, Arts 8 and 12)

Summary

1. Where the system of inspections put in place by a Member State to ensure compliance with the rules in the wine sector relies exclusively on the competence and action of specific agents, who alone are in a position to verify the accuracy of applications for premiums, and where verification by external services, both national and Community, is thus precluded, such a system of controls lacks the objectivity required by Community legislation.

( see para. 38 )

2. A Member State against which the Commission has justified its decision finding the absence of or shortcomings in the checks carried out in the framework of the application of the EAGGF Guarantee section operating rules cannot rebut the Commission's findings by mere assertions which are not substantiated by evidence of a reliable and operational supervisory system. If it is not able to show that they are inaccurate, the Commission's findings can give rise to serious doubts as to the existence of an adequate and effective series of supervisory measures and inspection procedures.

Where the absence of or shortcomings in the system of controls are not disputed by the Member State, a financial correction cannot be called in question, either from the aspect of an incorrect assessment of the facts or on the basis that the Commission misused its powers or exceeded the limits of its discretion.

( see paras 58-60 )
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Tax provisions Harmonisation of laws Turnover taxes Common system of value added tax Supply of services Determination of the place where taxable transactions are effected Composite supply involving the disposal of waste Refund of tax to taxable persons not established in the territory of the country Refusal to refund where part of the work covered by the contract has been subcontracted by the taxable persons who are holders of a main contract and not established in the territory of the country to a taxable person who is established in the territory of the country Not permissible

(Council Directives 77/388, Art. 9(1), and 79/1072, Art. 2)

Summary

$$The connection of a composite supply taken as a whole with Article 9(1) of the Sixth Directive 77/388 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes, according to which the place where a service is supplied is to be deemed to be the place where the supplier has established his business or has a fixed establishment, or with the fourth indent of Article 9(2)(c), according to which the place of supply of services relating to work on movable tangible property is the place where those services are physically carried out, must be such as to ensure its rational and uniform taxation.

Thus, where the holder of the main contract for a composite supply of services relating to waste disposal has its business or a fixed establishment in a Member State, the services which it performs are deemed to be supplied in the first State, even if it entrusts the actual disposal of the waste to a subcontractor, who is a taxable person for the purposes of value added tax in another Member State, whilst paying the corresponding VAT. Since the conditions to which the refund of value added tax is subject under the Eighth Directive 79/1072 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes Arrangements for the refund of value added tax to taxable persons not established in the territory of the country are thus fulfilled, the main contractor is justified in subsequently claiming, on the basis of Article 2 of the Eighth Directive, the refund of the value added tax paid in that other Member State.

Accordingly a Member State fails to fulfil its obligations under that Directive, in particular Article 2 thereof, by refusing to refund to taxable persons established in another Member State, who are holders of a main contract for a composite supply of services relating to waste disposal, the value added tax which they have been required to pay where they have subcontracted part of the work covered by such a contract to a taxable person established in the territory of the country.

( see paras 40, 53-54, and operative part 1 )
Case C-349/97





Kingdom of Spain

v

Commission of the European Communities





«(EAGGF – Clearance of accounts – 1993)»

Opinion of Advocate General Geelhoed delivered on 21 February 2002

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber), 8 May 2003

Summary of the Judgment

1.. Agriculture – EAGGF – Clearance of accounts – Disallowance of expenditure arising from irregularities in the application of the Community rules – Disputed by the Member State concerned – Burden of proof – Shared by the Commission and the Member State

(Council Regulation No 729/70)

2.. Agriculture – Common organisation of the markets – Oils and fats – Olive oil – Production aid – Olives used for purposes other than the production of olive oil – Excluded

(Council Regulation No 2261/84)

3.. Agriculture – EAGGF – Clearance of accounts – Disallowance of expenditure arising from irregularities in the application of the Community rules – Assessment of the losses incurred by the EAGGF – Disputed by the Member State concerned – Burden of proof

(Council Regulation No 729/70)

4.. Agriculture – Common organisation of the markets – Oils and fats – Olive oil – Production aid – Implementation through the intermediary of recognised producer groups – Mandatory withdrawal of recognition where there is inadequate capacity to check their member's production

(Council Regulations Nos 136/66 and 2261/84)

5.. Agriculture – EAGGF – Clearance of accounts – Disallowance of expenditure arising from irregularities in the application of the Community rules – Financial correction not carried out by the Commission in a given year despite the fact that irregularities were found – No effect on the right to impose corrections in a subsequent year

(Council Regulation No 729/70)

6.. Agriculture – Common organisation of the markets – Oils and fats – Olive oil – Production aid – Register of olive cultivation – Administration's own official departments – Definition

(Council Regulation No 154/75, Art. 3(5))

7.. Approximation of laws – Procedures for the award of public contracts – Scope – Contracts awarded by a contracting authority to a non-independent body – Excluded

8.. Agriculture – Common organisation of the markets – Oils and fats – Olive oil – Consumption aid – Withdrawal of approval of packaging undertakings where aid improperly applied for – Compliance with the principle of proportionality

(Commission Regulations Nos 2677/85, Arts 12(6), and 643/93)

9.. Agriculture – Common agricultural policy – EAGGF financing – Dried fodder – Member State's inspection systems – Setting of a minimum moisture content – Possible but not exclusive means

(Council Regulations Nos 729/70, Art. 8(1), and 1117/78)

10.. Actions for annulment – Pleas in law – Lack of evidence put forward as a specific plea – Not permissible

(EC Treaty, Art. 173 (now, after amendment, Art. 230 EC))

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.