ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Customs union – Creation of a customs debt following unlawful bringing in of goods – Extent of the obligation to present goods to customs – Inclusion of goods hidden in a vehicle without the knowledge even of its driver – Customs debtor within the meaning of the first indent of Article 202(3) of the Customs Code – Concept

(Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92, Article 4(19), Article 40 and the first indent of Article 202(3))

Summary

The presentation to customs of goods introduced into the Community, in terms of Article 4(19) of Regulation No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code, concerns all goods, including those hidden in a secret compartment specially made for that purpose. The obligation to present goods as set out in Article 38 of the Code rests, as provided by Article 40 of the Code, with the driver and co-driver of a lorry who introduced the goods, even though the goods were hidden in the vehicle without their knowledge.

The person who has introduced goods into the customs territory of the Community without mentioning them in the notification of presentation to customs is a customs debtor within the meaning of the first indent of Article 202(3) of the Customs Code, even if other persons can be declared debtors in respect of the same goods on the basis of the other provisions of that article.

(see paras 24, 29-30, operative part)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Tax provisions – Harmonisation of laws – Turnover taxes – Common system of value added tax – Special arrangements for second-hand goods – ‘Second-hand goods’ – Live animals – Included – Horse bought from a private individual and sold on after training

(Council Directive 77/388, Art. 26a)

Summary

Article 26a of Sixth Council Directive 77/388 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes, which provides for special arrangements applicable to second-hand goods, which are defined as tangible movable property that is suitable for further use as it is or after repair, must be interpreted as meaning that live animals may be considered to be second-hand goods within the meaning of that provision.

Thus an animal bought from a private individual (other than the breeder) which is sold on after training for a specific use may be considered to be second-hand goods within the meaning of that provision. It is of little import that the increase in value of such an animal does not arise from a ‘repair’ in the strict meaning of the term, but from, for example, a biological process or the training of the animal. Furthermore, since the common system of value added tax aims in principle to tax the economic value added at different stages in the production and distribution process, until the phase of final use, by taxable persons acting as such, within the meaning of the Sixth Directive, it would run contrary to that system to tax the entire sale price asked by the taxable dealer instead of only the economic value added when the animal was in his possession.

(see paras 26-27, 29, operative part 1-2)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Acts of the institutions – Guidelines on regulatory cooperation and transparency agreed upon with the United States of America – Institution competent to adopt such a measure – Account to be taken of the division of powers and the institutional balance established by the Treaty in the field of the common commercial policy – Non-binding effect of the Guidelines – Irrelevant

(Arts 133 EC and 300 EC)

2. International agreements – Determination of binding character – Decisive criterion – Intention of the parties – Guidelines on regulatory cooperation and transparency agreed upon with the United States of America – Non-binding effect – Undermining of the Commission’s power of legislative initiative – Exclusion

(Art. 300 EC)

Summary

1. The fact that a measure, such as the Guidelines on regulatory cooperation and transparency agreed upon with the United States of America, is not binding is not sufficient to confer on the Commission the competence to adopt it. Determining the conditions under which such a measure may be adopted requires that the division of powers and the institutional balance established by the Treaty in the field of the common commercial policy be duly taken into account, since in this case the measure seeks to reduce the risk of conflict related to the existence of technical barriers to trade in goods.

(see para. 40)

2. For the purpose of determining whether or not a measure, such as the guidelines on regulatory cooperation and transparency agreed upon with the United States of America, is binding, the intention of the parties must in principle be the decisive criterion. In the present case, that intention is clearly expressed in the text of the Guidelines itself, paragraph 7 of which specifies that the purpose of the document is to establish guidelines which regulators of the United States Federal Government and the services of the Commission ‘intend to apply on a voluntary basis’. On the basis of that information, it is apparent that the parties had no intention of entering into legally binding commitments when they concluded those guidelines. Consequently, those guidelines do not constitute a binding agreement and therefore do not fall within the scope of Article 300 EC.

Since they are devoid of binding effect, those guidelines cannot impose obligations on the Commission in carrying out its role of initiating legislation in the context of the Community legislative process. Therefore, the mere fact that a measure such as those guidelines provides for the possibility of engaging in prior consultation and gathering all necessary information before submitting appropriate proposals cannot undermine the Commission’s power of initiative.

(see paras 42-43, 45, 50-51)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Actions for failure to fulfil obligations – Pre-litigation procedure – Delimitation of the subject-matter of the dispute – Reasoned opinion – Detailed statement of grounds of complaint – Ground of complaint alleged in the application which, although set out in the letter of formal notice, was not set out in the reasoned opinion – Not permissible

(Art. 226 EC)

2. Actions for failure to fulfil obligations – Examination of the merits by the Court – Situation to be taken into consideration – Situation on expiry of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion

(Art. 226 CE)

Summary

1. In an action for failure to fulfil obligations, whilst the letter of formal notice which comprises an initial succinct résumé of the alleged infringement, may be useful in construing the reasoned opinion, the Commission is none the less obliged to specify precisely in that opinion the grounds of complaint which it already raised more generally in the letter of formal notice and alleges against the Member State concerned, after taking cognisance of any observations submitted by it under the first paragraph of Article 226 EC. That requirement is essential in order to delimit the subject-matter of the dispute prior to any initiation of the contentious procedure provided for in the second paragraph of Article 226 EC and in order to ensure that the Member State in question is accurately apprised of the grounds of complaint maintained against it by the Commission and can thus bring an end to the alleged infringements or put forward its arguments in defence prior to any application to the Court by the Commission.

Therefore, a ground of complaint alleged in the Commission’s application which was set out in the letter of formal notice but was not set out in the reasoned opinion must be regarded as irregular.

(see paras 21, 28)

2. In the context of an action under Article 226 EC, the question whether a Member State has failed to fulfil its obligations must be determined as at the end of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion.

(see para. 31)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Social security for migrant workers – Special non-contributory benefits – Coordination scheme laid down in Article 10a of Regulation No 1408/71 – Scope – Compensatory supplement to retirement or invalidity pensions granted on the basis of objective criteria and not financed by contributions from insured persons – Benefit mentioned in Annex IIa to that regulation – Included

(Council Regulation No 1408/71, Arts 4(2a) and 10a and Annex IIa)

Summary

The provisions of Article 10a of Regulation No 1408/71, as amended and updated by Regulation No 118/97, and those of Annex IIa to that regulation are to be interpreted as meaning that a compensatory supplement, such as the Austrian compensatory supplement, mentioned in Annex IIa, which tops up a retirement pension or an invalidity pension and is intended to ensure a minimum means of subsistence for its recipient where the pension is insufficient, the granting of which is dependent on objective criteria defined by law and which is never financed from contributions made by the insured persons, falls within the scope of that regulation and therefore constitutes a special non-contributory benefit within the meaning of Article 4(2a) of that regulation. Accordingly the situation of a person who, after 1 June 1992, the date of entry into force of Regulation No 1247/92 which inserted Articles 4(2a) and 10a into Regulation No 1408/71, fulfils the conditions for the grant of that benefit is governed with effect from 1 January 1995, the date of the Republic of Austria’s accession to the European Union, solely by the coordinating provisions laid down by Article 10a.

(see paras 26, 29, 31, operative part)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Tax provisions – Harmonisation of laws – Turnover taxes – Common system of value added tax – Basis of assessment – Supply of goods and services – Subsidies directly linked to the price – Meaning – Aid granted in the dried fodder sector – Exclusion – National scheme failing to levy value added tax on that aid – Whether permissible

(Council Directive 77/388, Art. 11(A)(1)(a))

Summary

Article 11(A)(1)(a) of the Sixth Directive 77/388 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes, is intended to subject the full value of goods or services to VAT by providing that the basis of assessment comprises subsidies directly linked to the price of the transaction in question, paid to taxable persons. A Member State which does not levy the tax on aid paid under Regulation No 603/95 on the common organisation of the market in dried fodder does not fail to fulfil its obligations under that provision.

‘Subsidies linked directly to the price’ include only subsidies which constitute the whole or part of the consideration for a supply of goods or services and which are paid by a third party to the seller or supplier.

The conditions for the aid at issue to be subject to VAT are not met in respect of the sale by a processing undertaking, after drying, of fodder purchased from producers of green fodder, since, in such a case, the aid is not paid specifically to a processing undertaking to enable it to supply dried fodder to a purchaser at a price which is lower than on the world market. Nor are those conditions met as regards the special-order contracts concluded by such an undertaking with a producer of green fodder, as the aid which the processing undertaking receives is not paid for its benefit in such a case and that undertaking merely functions as an intermediary between the body which distributes the aid and the fodder producer.

(see paras 31-32, 36-37, 41, 43, 47, 50)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Agriculture – Uniform legislation – Protection of plant varieties – Article 14(3) of Regulation No 2100/94 and Article 9 of Regulation No 1768/95 – Possibility for the holder of a Community right to request information where there is some indication that a supplier of processing services is processing the protected product

(Council Regulation No 2100/94, Art. 14(2) and (3); Council Regulation No 1768/95, Art. 9)

Summary

The sixth indent of Article 14(3) of Regulation No 2100/94 on Community plant variety rights in conjunction with Article 9 of Regulation No 1768/95 implementing rules on the agricultural exemption provided for in Article 14(3) of Regulation No 2100/94 allows the holder of a Community plant variety right to request a supplier of processing services to provide the relevant information which he has obtained through ordinary performance of his tasks, without additional burden or costs, where the holder has some indication that the latter has processed or intends to process the product of the harvest obtained by farmers by planting propagating material of a variety belonging to the holder, other than a hybrid or synthetic variety, which is covered by that right and belongs to one of the agricultural plant species listed in Article 14(2) of Regulation No 2100/94, for planting.

In such a case, the processor is required to provide the holder with the relevant information relating not only to the farmers for whom the holder has some indication that the processor has provided or intends to provide such services but also to all other farmers for whom he has processed or intends to process the product of the harvest obtained by planting propagating material of the variety concerned, where that variety has been declared or is otherwise known to him.

(see paras 54, 66, operative part 1-2)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Freedom to provide services – Restrictions – Justification on grounds of public policy – Need for and proportionality of the measures – Existence of different systems of protection in other Member States – Not relevant

(Arts 46 EC and 49 EC)

2. Freedom to provide services – Restrictions – National legislation prohibiting the commercial exploitation of games simulating acts of homicide – Justification – Protection of public policy – Respect for human dignity as a general principle of law

(Arts 46 EC and 49 EC)

Summary

1. Whilst measures which restrict the freedom to provide services may be justified on public policy grounds only if they are necessary for the protection of the interests which they are intended to guarantee and only in so far as those objectives cannot be attained by less restrictive measures, it is not indispensable in that respect for the restrictive measure issued by the authorities of a Member State to correspond to a conception shared by all Member States as regards the precise way in which the fundamental right or legitimate interest in question is to be protected. Thus the need for, and proportionality of, the provisions adopted are not excluded merely because one Member State has chosen a system of protection different from that adopted by another State.

(see paras 36-38)

2. Community law does not preclude an economic activity consisting of the commercial exploitation of games simulating acts of homicide from being made subject to a national prohibition measure adopted on grounds of protecting public policy by reason of the fact that that activity is an affront to human dignity.

That measure cannot be regarded as one imposing an unjustified restriction on the freedom to provide services. In the first place, the protection of fundamental rights, it being stated that the Community legal order undeniably strives to ensure respect for human dignity as a general principle of law, constitutes a legitimate interest capable in principle of justifying a restriction on the obligations imposed by Community law, even by virtue of a fundamental freedom guaranteed by the Treaty such as the freedom to provide services. Secondly, the measure in question corresponds to the level of protection of human dignity which the national constitution intended to ensure in the territory of the Member State concerned and does not go beyond what is necessary to achieve the objective pursued.

(see paras 34-35, 39-41, operative part)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Social policy – Men and women – Access to employment and working conditions – Equal treatment – Collective agreement providing for classification in a higher salary grade on completion of a qualifying period – Account taken of periods of maternity leave – Refusal to take account, because of its duration, of the whole of a period of maternity leave taken under the legislation of the former German Democratic Republic – Not permissible

(Council Directive 76/207)

Summary

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 a collective agreement from excluding from a qualifying period for access to a higher salary grade the part of the period for which a female worker took maternity leave, under the legislation of the former German Democratic Republic, which exceeds the protected period provided for by the legislation of the Federal Republic of Germany to which that agreement refers, where the objectives and purpose of both periods of leave are the protection of women as regards pregnancy and maternity, as provided for by Article 2(3) of that directive.

(see para. 59, operative part)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. State aid – Planned aid – Prohibition on implementation before the Commission’s final decision – Direct effect – Persons who may rely on an infringement – Individual subject to a tax which is an integral part of an aid measure

(EC Treaty, Art. 93(3) (now Art. 88(3), EC))

2. State aid – Provisions of the Treaty – Scope – Taxes coupled with exemptions regarded as aid – Included – Condition – Hypothecation

(EC Treaty, Art. 92 (now, after amendment, Art. 87 EC) and Art. 93 (now Art. 88 EC))

Summary

1. An individual may have an interest in relying before the national court on the direct effect of the prohibition on implementation referred to in the last sentence of Article 93(3) of the Treaty (now, Article 88(3) EC), not only in order to erase the negative effects of the distortion of competition created by the grant of unlawful aid, but also in order to obtain a refund of a tax levied in breach of that provision. In the latter case, the question whether an individual has been affected by the distortion of competition arising from the aid measure is irrelevant to the assessment of his interest in bringing proceedings. The only fact to be taken into consideration is that the individual is subject to a tax which is an integral part of a measure implemented in breach of the prohibition referred to in the last sentence of Article 93(3) of the Treaty.

(see para. 19)

2. Taxes do not fall within the scope of the provisions of the Treaty concerning State aid unless they constitute the method of financing an aid measure, so that they form an integral part of that measure.

For a tax, or part of a tax, to be regarded as forming an integral part of an aid measure, it must be hypothecated to the aid measure under the relevant national rules, in the sense that the revenue from the tax is necessarily allocated for the financing of the aid. In the event of such hypothecation, the revenue from the tax has a direct impact on the amount of the aid and, consequently, on the assessment of its compatibility with the common market.

The fact that the aid is granted in the form of a tax exemption or that the loss of revenue due to that exemption is, for the purposes of the budget estimates of the Member State, offset by an increase in the tax is not in itself sufficient to amount to such hypothecation.

(see paras 25-26, 29, operative part)
Case C-352/02





Commission of the European Communities

v

Hellenic Republic





«(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Failure to transpose Directive 2000/14/EC – Noise emission in the environment)»

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber), 5 June 2003 I - 0000

Summary of the Judgment
Case C-122/02





Commission of the European Communities

v

Kingdom of Belgium





«(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Failure to transpose Directive 98/83/EC)»

Opinion of Advocate General Geelhoed delivered on 10 October 2002 I - 0000

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber), 16 January 2003 I - 0000

Summary of the Judgment
Case C-93/02 P





Biret International SA

v

Council of the European Union





«(Appeal – Directives 81/602/EEC, 88/146/EEC and 96/22/EC – Prohibition on the use of certain substances having a hormonal action – Prohibition on the importation from third countries of meat from farm animals to which those substances have been administered – Application for damages – Direct effect of the WTO Agreement and the agreements annexed thereto – Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures – Recommendations and rulings of the WTO Dispute Settlement Body)»

Opinion of Advocate General Alber delivered on 15 May 2003

Judgment of the Court (Full Court), 30 September 2003

Summary of the Judgment
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

9 September 2003

((Equal treatment for men and women – Directives 86/457/EEC and 93/16/EEC – Obligation to undertake certain periods of full-time training during part-time training in general medical practice))

and

THE COURT,,

after considering the written observations submitted on behalf of:

─

─

─

─

having regard to the Report for the Hearing,

after hearing the oral observations of Ms Rinke, the Council and the Commission at the hearing on 12 November 2002,

after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 6 February 2003,
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Fifth Chamber)

11 December 2003

((Freedom to provide services – Lawyer established in one Member State working in conjunction with a lawyer established in another Member State – Legal costs to be reimbursed by the unsuccessful party in a dispute to the successful party – Limitation))

and

THE COURT (Fifth Chamber),,

after considering the written observations submitted on behalf of:

─

─

─

─

having regard to the Report for the Hearing,

after hearing the oral observations of A & R Gastronomie GmbH and of the Commission at the hearing on 19 June 2003,

after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 18 September 2003,
Case C-40/02





Margareta Scherndl

v

Bezirkshauptmannschaft Korneuburg





(Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Unabhängiger Verwaltungssenat im Land Niederösterreich (Austria))

«(Directive 90/496/EEC – Nutrition labelling of foodstuffs – Vitamin content – Declared value – Average value – Reference date – Permissible differences between the declared value and the value established in the course of an official check – Proportionality – Legal certainty)»

Opinion of Advocate General Mischo delivered on 10 April 2003 I - 0000

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber), 23 October 2003 I - 0000

Summary of the Judgment

1.. Approximation of laws – Nutrition labelling of foodstuffs – Directive 90/496 – Reference date for determining the value of a nutrient – End of minimum conservation period – Whether permissible – Determination of permissible differences between the declared value and the value established in the course of an official check – Competence of the Member States

(Council Directive 90/496, Arts 1(4)(k) and 6(8))

2.. Approximation of laws – Nutrition labelling of foodstuffs – Directive 90/496 – Breach of the principles of legal certainty and proportionality – None

(Council Directive 90/496, Arts 1(4)(k) and 6(8))

1.

2.
Case C-270/02





Commission of the European Communities

v

Italian Republic





«(Measures having equivalent effect – Foodstuffs for sportsmen and women lawfully manufactured and marketed in other Member States – Prior marketing authorisation)»

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber), 5 February 2004

Summary of the Judgment