ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Sixth Chamber)

28 March 1996

((Differentiated export refunds – Force majeure – Additional security – Release of security – Resolution of the UN Security Council))

In Case C-299/94,

and

THE COURT (Sixth Chamber),,

after considering the written observations submitted on behalf of:

─

─

─

─

─

having regard to the Report for the Hearing,

after hearing the oral observations of Anglo Irish Beef Processors International and Others, represented by Michael M. Collins, SC, and Peter Shanley, SC, of Ireland, represented by Aindrias O'Caoimh, SC, of the Council of the European Union, represented by António Tanca, and of the Commission, represented by Peter Oliver and Claudia Schmidt, at the hearing on 30 November 1995,

after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 18 January 1996,
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Social security for migrant workers ° Community rules ° Matters covered ° Benefits covered and benefits excluded ° Criteria for distinguishing between them ° Adaptation allowance granted to German mine workers from the time at which they are laid off to the time at which they are awarded an old-age pension ° Excluded

(Council Regulation No 1408/71, Art. 4(1) and (2))

Summary

Article 4(1) and (2) of Regulation No 1408/71 must be interpreted as not applying to benefits which, like those provided for by the 1971 and 1988 German guidelines on the granting of the adaptation allowance to employees in the coal-mining industry, are granted by a Member State in the form of non-compulsory national subsidies to workers from the time at which they are laid off to the time at which they attain retirement age.

That allowance, which does not appear on the list of social security benefits expressly set out in Article 4(1) of Regulation No 1408/71, does not, by virtue of the factors relating to it and, in particular, its purposes and the conditions for its grant, display characteristics such as to enable a sufficient link to be established between them and any of the risks mentioned on that list. Although the benefits display certain similarities with old-age benefits as regards the method by which they are calculated and certain of their purposes, they nevertheless clearly differ from old-age benefits in that they pursue an object related to employment policy and are financed out of public funds, and although they are granted to workers who have been laid off, they differ from unemployment benefit in that, in addition to the fact that the amount of the allowance is determined in accordance with the provisions governing old-age benefits, recipients of adaptation allowances are not required to register as job-seekers, to keep themselves available on the employment market, or to refrain from undertaking an activity as an employed or self-employed person the income from which exceeds a specified ceiling.
Keywords



Keywords

++++

Member States ° Obligations ° Implementation of directives ° Failure to fulfil obligations not contested

(EC Treaty, Art. 169)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Appeals ° Formal requirements ° Names of the other parties to the proceedings before the Court of First Instance ° Mention of the date on which the judgment of the Court of First Instance was notified ° Omission ° Deficiencies not sufficient to render the appeal inadmissible

(Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 112(1)(b) and (2))

2. Appeals ° Pleas in law ° Erroneous appraisal of the facts ° Inadmissible

(EC Treaty, Art. 168a; EC Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 51)

Summary

1. The fact that, contrary to the requirements of Article 112 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, an appeal fails to name the other parties to the proceedings before the Court of First Instance or state the date on which the judgment under appeal was notified to the appellants is not sufficient to render the appeal inadmissible where the other parties were not prejudiced by the omission of their names and the appeal was lodged within the prescribed period.

2. Pursuant to Article 168a of the Treaty and Article 51 of the Statute of the Court of Justice, an appeal may rely only on grounds relating to the infringement of rules of law, to the exclusion of any appraisal of the facts.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Actions for failure to fulfil obligations - Court's appraisal of the merits - Situation to be taken into account - Situation as it stood at the end of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion

(EC Treaty, Art. 169)

Summary

In proceedings under Article 169 of the Treaty, the question whether a Member State has failed to fulfil its obligations must be determined by reference to the situation in that State as it stood at the end of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion, and the Court cannot take account of any subsequent changes.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 Agriculture - Common organization of the markets - Milk and milk products - Additional levy on milk - Milk production restructuring programme in favour of small producers - Condition for application - Prior application of the additional levy scheme

(Council Regulation No 1183/90)

2 Agriculture - Common organization of the markets - Milk and milk products - Additional levy on milk - Milk production restructuring programme in favour of small producers - Member States' obligation to reallocate individual reference quantities released by the payment of compensation for the cessation of production by other producers

(Council Regulation No 857/84, as amended by Regulation No 1183/90, Art. 3c; Commission Regulation No 1546/88, as amended by Regulation No 2138/90, Art. 3b)

Summary

3 The application of the milk production restructuring programme in favour of small producers provided for by Regulation No 1183/90, amending Regulation No 857/84, necessarily presupposes the application of the scheme for an additional levy on milk.

It is apparent from the recitals in the preamble to Regulation No 1183/90, first, that the programme in question is designed to supplement, by the allocation of additional reference quantities, the measure in favour of small producers in order to bring them as a whole up to a level of production better adapted to market requirements and, second, that, under arrangements to curb production such as the milk quota scheme, additional reference quantities can be granted only if individual reference quantities have first been released by other producers.

4 Article 3c of Regulation No 857/84, as inserted by Regulation No 1183/90, and Article 3b of Regulation No 1546/88 laying down detailed rules for the application of the additional levy on milk, as inserted by Regulation No 2138/90, require the Member States to reallocate, within the period prescribed, individual reference quantities released as a result of the payment of compensation for the total and definitive cessation of milk production by other producers, since, unlike other Community rules adopted within the framework of the additional levy scheme, the restructuring programme established by Regulation No 1183/90 is designed not to reduce milk production but to bring about an improvement in the structures of small holdings. The objective of that measure can be achieved only if those holdings continue to produce milk and if the producers concerned can obtain the additional quantities which they need for that purpose.

The fact that milk production in a Member State has far exceeded the maximum quantity allocated to it under the additional levy scheme cannot justify the unilateral suspension by that State of the reallocation of the individual reference quantities released under the restructuring programme.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 Social security for migrant workers - Family allowances - Workers subject to German legislation - Self-employed workers - Meaning as used in Article 73 of Regulation No 1408/71 - Compulsory for self-employed workers to have old-age insurance

(Council Regulations No 1408/71, Arts 1(a)(ii) and 73, and Annex I, point I,(C),(b), and No 3427/89)

2 Freedom of movement for persons - Freedom of establishment - Rules of a Member State making the taking into account of dependent children for the calculation of family allowances subject to the condition that they reside on the national territory - Discrimination against self-employed migrant workers - Not permissible

(EC Treaty, Art. 52)

Summary

3 For the purposes of the payment of family benefits under German legislation, Article 73 of Regulation No 1408/71, as amended and updated by Regulation No 2001/83, as amended by Regulation No 3427/89, which provides that an employed or self-employed person subject to the legislation of a Member State is to be entitled, in respect of the members of his family who are residing in another Member State, to the family benefits provided for by the legislation of the former State as if they were residing in that State, must be interpreted as covering only self-employed persons complying with the specific definition provided by the combined provisions of Article 1(a)(ii) and point I, C, (b) of Annex I to that regulation, that is to say, those required to join, or pay contributions in respect of, an old-age insurance within a scheme for self-employed persons, or to join a scheme within the framework of compulsory pension insurance.

The broad interpretation to be attributed to the concept of a self-employed person within the meaning of the regulation, in view of the objective of freedom of movement which the Community has set itself, cannot go so far as to render ineffective those provisions of Annex I by which the Community legislator determined, as it was entitled to do, which self-employed persons were to benefit in future from Article 73, which was previously applicable only to employed persons.

4 Article 52 of the Treaty must be interpreted as precluding national rules which cause the taking of a self-employed person's children into account when calculating family allowances to be dependent upon their residing in that Member State.

In the absence of objective justification, such rules discriminate against migrant workers, since it is primarily their children who reside abroad.

The problems to which abolition of the residence requirement could give rise, regard being had to the need to ensure that benefits are in fact used for the upkeep of the children and to avoid overlapping payments, must be tackled by applying by analogy the provisions introduced into Regulation No 1408/71 for self-employed persons coming within its scope.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

EAEC - Supply system - Obligation of the Supply Agency to ensure disposal of Community production - None - No distinction between Community production and imported products with respect either to the ordinary procedure for balancing supply against demand or to the simplified procedure

(EAEC Treaty, Arts 52 to 76; Rules of the Euratom Supply Agency determining the manner in which demand is to be balanced against the supply of ores, source materials and special fissile materials, Art. 5 bis)

Summary

The Euratom Supply Agency was established to guarantee, under the conditions laid down in Chapter 6 of the EAEC Treaty, that all users receive a regular and equitable supply of ores and nuclear fuels.

That chapter does not, however, contain any provision obliging the Agency to guarantee the disposal of Community ore production. On the contrary, since Article 60 of the Treaty, on the procedure for balancing supply against demand, applies not only to supplies from the Community but also, in accordance with the reference in Article 65, to applications from users and contracts between users and the Agency relating to supplies from outside the Community, under the system whereby offers and applications are centralized with the Agency, no distinction may be made according to the origin of the products.

Similarly, the simplified procedure for balancing supply against demand, as defined in Article 5 bis of the Agency Rules, adopted pursuant to the sixth paragraph of Article 60 of the Treaty, applies also to supplies imported from non-member countries, since Article 65 refers to Article 60 as a whole. That procedure is moreover not contrary to Article 66 of the Treaty, since it does not infringe the Agency's exclusive right to conclude contracts directly, in view of the fact that under Article 5 bis (d) to (g) of the Rules it is for the Agency to conclude them, which it may refuse to do.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Non-contractual liability - Early alignment of sugar prices applicable in Spain on the common prices - No compensation for isoglucose producers - Principles of protection of legitimate expectations and non-discrimination - Breach - None - No liability incurred

(EC Treaty, Arts 40(3), second subpara., and 215, second subpara.; Act of Accession 1985, Art. 70(3)(b); Council Regulations Nos 1716/91 and 3814/92)

Summary

Regulation No 3814/92, which provides for the early alignment, with effect from 1 January 1993, of the sugar prices applicable in Spain on the common prices, grants aid for beet and sugar-cane producers for sugar held in stock, and authorizes Spain to grant adjustment aid to sugar producers, does not give rise to any liability on the part of the Community towards Spanish isoglucose producers, vis-à-vis whom the adoption of the regulation did not constitute infringement of the principle of protection of legitimate expectations or of the principle of non-discrimination laid down in the second subparagraph of Article 40(3) of the Treaty.

On the one hand, it follows, first, from interpretation of Article 70(3)(b) of the Act of Accession of Spain that the applicants could not legitimately derive any legitimate expectation from the Act that the transitional period of price alignment would remain guaranteed beyond the start of the 1992/93 marketing year. Second, nor could Regulation No 1716/91, in providing for prices to be aligned in two stages until 1995, have given rise to any legitimate expectation on the part of the producers, since by extending the alignment period, the Council clearly took account only of the interests of sugar farmers and producers protected by successive grants of aid, and even though Regulation No 1716/91 was adopted after the entry into force of the Single European Act which provides for the achievement of the single internal market by 1 January 1993, prudent and well-informed traders should have anticipated an early alignment of sugar prices, a fortiori since the proposal for Regulation No 3814/92 was known about some months before it was adopted, and finally, as regards more particularly the second stage of alignment, the power to lay down the conditions in question at a later date, reserved to the Council by Article 7 of Regulation No 1716/91, precluded the possibility that producers could have had any legitimate expectations concerning those conditions.

On the other hand, the fact that the regulation does not provide for transitional measures to help Spanish isoglucose producers cope with the consequences of early price alignment, when it does provide for such measures in favour of sugar producers, does not amount to discrimination against the former, since the situations of the two groups are objectively different as regards both formation of stocks and conditions for the supply of raw materials.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Approximation of laws - Uniform laws - Industrial and commercial property - Patent law - Supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products - Grant pursuant to the transitional provision contained in Article 19 of Regulation No 1768/92 - Conditions - Valid marketing authorization held in the Member State in which the application is made

(Council Regulation No 1768/92, Arts 3(b) and 19)

Summary

The grant of a supplementary protection certificate under Article 19 of Regulation No 1768/92 concerning the creation of a supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products, which covers any product which, on the date of the entry into force of that regulation, is protected by a valid basic patent and for which the first authorization to place it on the market as a medicinal product in the Community was obtained after 1 January 1985, is subject to the condition, laid down by Article 3(b) of the regulation, that a valid authorization to place the product on the market as a medicinal product must have been granted in the Member State in which the application is submitted and at the date of that application.

Quite apart from the fact that such a condition is not in any way precluded by the wording of Article 19(1), the authorization referred to therein is necessary only for the purpose of determining the duration of the certificate, as is apparent from Article 13 of the regulation, according to which the certificate is to take effect at the end of the lawful term of the basic patent for a period equal to the period which elapsed between the date on which the application for a basic patent was lodged and the date of the first authorization to place the product on the market in the Community; it is not intended to take the place of the authorization provided for in Article 3(b), but constitutes a further condition applying in the event that the latter authorization is not the first authorization to place the product on the market as a medicinal product in the Community. Moreover, entitlement to the certificate is strictly linked to the existence of a marketing authorization granted in the Member State in which the application is submitted and to the date of that application, as is apparent from Article 4 of the regulation, according to which the protection conferred by the certificate extends only to the product covered by the marketing authorization in respect of the corresponding medicinal product. Consequently, it is the marketing authorization referred to in Article 3(b), rather than the authorization referred to in Article 19(1), which confers entitlement to the certificate.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Social policy - Men and women - Access to employment and working conditions - Equal treatment - Dismissal of a woman on grounds of absence due to an illness attributable to pregnancy or confinement - Permissible - Account taken, when calculating the period providing grounds for dismissal, of absence outside periods of maternity leave - Permissible

(Council Directive 76/207, Arts 2(1) and (3) and 5(1))

Summary

Without prejudice to provisions of national law for the protection of women, particularly with regard to pregnancy and maternity, adopted pursuant to Article 2(3) of Directive 76/207 on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women as regards access to employment, vocational training and promotion, and working conditions, Article 5(1), in conjunction with Article 2(1), thereof does not preclude dismissals which are the result of absences due to an illness attributable to pregnancy or confinement, even where that illness arose during pregnancy and continued during and after maternity leave.

In particular, the principle of equal treatment enshrined in the Directive does not preclude account being taken of a woman's absence from work between the beginning of her pregnancy and the beginning of her maternity leave when calculating the period providing grounds for her dismissal under national law.

During the maternity leave accorded to her pursuant to national law, a woman is protected against dismissal on grounds of absence. To take absence during such a period into account as grounds for a subsequent dismissal would thus be contrary to the objective pursued by Article 2(3) of the Directive, and would deprive that provision of its effectiveness. Outside periods of maternity leave, however, and in the absence of any national or, as the case may be, Community provisions affording women specific protection, a woman is not protected under the Directive against dismissal on grounds of periods of absence due to an illness attributable to pregnancy.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 Social policy - Men and women - Equal pay - Article 119 of the Treaty - Scope - Employment relationships arising in the public service - Covered

(EC Treaty, Art. 119)

2 Social policy - Men and women - Equal pay - Article 119 of the Treaty and Directive 75/117 - Scope - Calculation of length of service required for access to promotion in the case of part-time employees - Not covered

(EC Treaty, Art. 119; Council Directive 75/117)

3 Social policy - Men and women - Access to employment, and working conditions - Equal treatment - Eligibility for promotion of part-time employees possibly impaired by method of calculating their length of service - Measure primarily affecting women - Not permissible without objective justification - Criteria for objective justification

(Council Directive 76/207)

Summary

4 Article 119 of the Treaty is to be interpreted as applying to employment relationships arising in the public service. To exclude the public service from the scope of Article 119 would run counter to that provision's objective.

5 A provision of national law which requires that, for the purposes of calculating the length of service of public servants, periods of employment during which the hours worked are between one-half and two-thirds of normal working hours are counted only as two-thirds of normal working hours does not fall within the scope of Article 119 of the Treaty or of Directive 75/117 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the application of the principle of equal pay for men and women. In so far as such a provision is primarily designed to lay down the conditions, in terms of length of service, for a civil servant's access to a higher grade, it only affects indirectly the level of pay to which the person concerned is entitled upon completion of the promotions procedure.

6 Directive 76/207 on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women as regards access to employment, vocational training and promotion, and working conditions precludes national legislation which requires that, for the purposes of calculating the length of service of public servants, periods of employment during which the hours worked are between one-half and two-thirds of normal working hours are counted only as two-thirds of normal working hours, save where such legislation is justified by objective criteria unrelated to any discrimination on grounds of sex. Although the fact that such legislation affects a greater number of women than men suggests that it is in principle contrary to Directive 76/207, that is not the case where - despite the fact that, in the case of part-time employees (principally women), length of service was calculated in accordance with a criterion more generous than strict proportionality in relation to working hours - it appears that part-time employees are generally slower than full-time employees in acquiring job-related abilities and skills, and the competent authorities are in a position to establish that the measures chosen reflect a legitimate social policy aim, are an appropriate means of achieving that aim and are necessary in order to do so.