ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Approximation of laws - Procedures for the award of public works contracts - Directive 71/305 - Award of contracts - Principle that tenderers must be treated equally - Scope

(Council Directive 71/305)

2. Approximation of laws - Procedures for the award of public works contracts - Directive 71/305 - Award of contracts - Award criteria - Choice of criteria by the awarding authority - Limits

(Council Directive 71/305, Art. 29(1))

3. Approximation of laws - Procedures for the award of public works contracts - Directive 71/305 - Award of contracts - Award criterion relating to a factual element that could be known precisely only after the contract had been awarded - Whether permissible - Conditions - Compliance with the principle that tenderers must be treated equally

(Council Directive 71/305, Art. 29(1) and (2))

Summary

1. Compliance with the principle that tenderers must be treated equally, which lies at the very heart of Directive 71/305 concerning the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, as amended by Directive 89/440, requires that tenderers be in a position of equality both when they formulate their tenders and when those tenders are being assessed by the adjudicating authority.

( see paras 33-34 )

2. Article 29(1), second indent, of Directive 71/305 concerning the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, as amended by Directive 89/440, does not list exhaustively the criteria which may be accepted as criteria for the award of a public works contract. The choice of criteria made by the appointing authority may, however, relate only to criteria designed to identify the offer which is economically the most advantageous and must not confer on the adjudicating authority an unrestricted freedom of choice as regards the awarding of the contract to a tenderer.

( see paras 35-37 )

3. In the case of the award of a public works contract coming within the scope of Directive 71/305 concerning the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, as amended by Directive 89/440, the use of a criterion for awarding the contract which relates to a factual element that will be known precisely only after the contract has been awarded will be compatible with the requirements of equal treatment of tenderers only on condition that the transparency and objectivity of the procedure are respected, which presupposes that the criterion is mentioned in the contract documents or contract notice, that it is there formulated in such a way as to allow all reasonably well-informed and normally diligent tenderers to interpret it in the same way, and that the adjudicating authority must keep to that interpretation throughout the procedure and apply the criterion in question objectively and uniformly to all tenderers.

Objectivity may be guaranteed by recourse to the professional opinion of an expert, on condition that his report is based, in all essential respects, on objective factors regarded in good professional practice as being relevant and appropriate to the assessment made.

( see paras 38, 40, 42-45 and operative part )
Keywords



Keywords

1. Actions for failure to fulfil obligations - Examination of the merits by the Court - Situation to be taken into account - Situation at the end of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion

(Art. 226 EC)

2. Member States - Obligations - Implementation of directives - Failure to fulfil obligations - Justification - Not permissible

(Art. 226 EC)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Competition - Public undertakings and undertakings to which Member States grant special or exclusive rights - Telecommunications sector - Directives 90/388 and 96/19 - Universal voice telephone service - Traditional service provider with an almost complete monopoly - National scheme for sharing the net cost of universal service provision obligations with other organisations - Necessity - None

(Commission Directives 90/388, Art. 4c and 96/19, Art. 1(6))

2. Approximation of laws - Telecommunications sector - Directive 97/33 - Universal voice telephone service - National scheme for sharing the net cost of universal service provision obligations - Criteria for setting the reference values for calculating the contributions required of service providers - Principle of transparency

(Parliament and Council Directive 97/33, Art. 5(1))

3. Approximation of laws - Telecommunications sector - Directive 97/33 - Universal voice telephone service - National system for sharing the net cost of universal service provision obligations - Criteria for determining the cost components

(Parliament and Council Directive 97/33, Art. 5(1), Annex III)

Summary

1. Article 4c of Directive 90/388, inserted by Directive 96/19, on national schemes for sharing out the net cost of providing a universal fixed voice telephone service permits Member States to put in place such a scheme only where it is necessary for sharing the net cost of meeting universal service provision obligations imposed on telecommunications service providers with other organisations. That condition is not fulfilled where the traditional service provider still enjoys an almost complete monopoly in fixed voice telephone services, to which the duty to provide a universal service applies, and where the Member State concerned merely formulates some general remarks about the creation of the new mobile telephone market, without stating precisely how that event might have affected the net cost of its universal service.

( see paras 25-30 )

2. Article 5(1) of Directive 97/33 provides that, when establishing a mechanism for sharing out the net cost of meeting universal service obligations, Member States must take due account of the principle of transparency. It is therefore important that the reference values chosen for setting any contribution demanded of new market entrants are set comparing like with like so as to ensure transparency and enable new entrants to calculate their probable costs and income.

( see paras 48-50 )

3. Under Article 5(3) of Directive 97/33, which provides that the net cost of universal service obligations is to be calculated in accordance with Annex III of that directive, only those costs that are a direct consequence of the provision of universal service may be taken into account. Establishing a level playing field for telecommunications providers requires an objective and transparent costs structure. It is therefore not permissible under Directive 97/33 to ascribe flat-rate or imprecise values to the components of the net cost of universal service provision, rather than carrying out specific calculations.

( see para. 60 )
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Social security for migrant workers - Community rules - Old-age insurance - Periods to be taken into consideration - National legislation providing that child-raising periods completed in national territory are treated as substitute periods - Additional requirements where children raised in another State in the European Economic Area or in another Member State - Not permissible

(EC Treaty, Arts 8a, 48 and 52 (now, after amendment, Arts 18 EC, 39 EC and 43 EC); Council Regulation No 1408/71, Art. 94(2))

Summary

$$Article 94(2) of Regulation No 1408/71, in the version amended and updated by Regulation No 118/97, read in conjunction, depending on the case, with Articles 8a, 48 and 52 of the Treaty (now, after amendment, Articles 18 EC, 39 EC and 43 EC), is to be interpreted as precluding application of a Member State's legislation under which child-raising periods completed in another State party to the Agreement on the European Economic Area or in another Member State of the European Union are not treated as substitute periods for the purposes of old-age insurance unless

- they were completed after the entry into force of that regulation in the first State, and

- the applicant receives, or received, for the children concerned, cash maternity allowances or equivalent allowances under the legislation of that same State,

when such periods completed in national territory are treated as substitute periods for the purposes of old-age insurance without any limitation in time or any other condition.

( see para. 52, operative part )
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. State aid - General aid scheme approved by the Commission - Individual aid purporting to be covered by the approval - Scrutiny by the Commission - Failure to comply with the conditions of the decision approving the scheme - Application of the scheme of new aid

(Art. 88(1) to (3) EC)

2. State aid - Prohibition - Derogations - Criteria governing derogations - Incompatibility with the common market of any aid not complying with those criteria - Role of the Commission - Ensuring compliance with the criteria for derogation

(Art. 87(1) and (3)(e) EC)

Summary

1. The rules of special procedure, laid down by Article 88 EC, which require the Commission to keep State aid under constant review vary according to whether the aid at issue constitutes existing aid or new aid. While the former is subject to Article 88(1) and (2) EC, the latter is governed by Article 88(2) and (3) EC.

Where the Commission finds that aid alleged to have been granted in pursuance of a previously authorised scheme of aid does not comply with the conditions laid down in its decision approving the scheme and is therefore not covered by it, that aid must be regarded as new aid.

If, when aid is granted in pursuance of a previously authorised scheme, the Member State does not comply with the conditions to which the Commission made its decision approving the scheme subject, since the aid paid is new aid, the Commission is obliged to institute the special procedure provided for by the first subparagraph of Article 88(2) EC.

( see paras 22-25 )

2. Where State aid is covered by derogating rules adopted under Article 87(3)(e) EC, that aid is, as a matter of principle, at the outset incompatible with the common market and is considered to be compatible with the common market only on condition that it complies with the criteria for derogation contained in the decision approving that system.

Accordingly, where the Commission finds that aid authorised under that scheme is no longer covered by it, it is not required to reassess its compatibility in relation to the criteria set out in Article 87(1) EC or to determine whether it affects trade between Member States and distorts competition.

( see paras 47-48 )
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Tax provisions - Harmonisation of laws - Taxes other than turnover taxes which affect the consumption of manufactured tobacco - Directive 95/59 - Determination of minimum retail selling prices for tobacco manufactured by the public authorities - Minimum reference price on all cigarettes sold under the same brand - Not permissible

(Council Directive 95/59, as amended by Directive 1999/81, Art. 9(1))

2. Tax provisions - Harmonisation of laws - Taxes other than turnover taxes which affect the consumption of manufactured tobacco - Directives 92/79 and 95/59 - Different rate of tax for dark- and light-tobacco cigarettes - Not permissible

(Council Directives 92/79, Art. 2, and 95/59, as amended by Directive 1999/81, Arts 8(2) and 16(5))

3. Tax provisions - Internal taxation - Prohibition of discrimination between imported products and similar domestic products - Different rate of tax for dark- and light-tobacco cigarettes - Not permissible

(EC Treaty, Art. 95 (now, after amendment, Art. 90 EC)

Summary

1. A Member State which maintains in force a system imposing a minimum reference price on all cigarettes sold under the same brand, even if the minimum price is not directly but indirectly set by reference to the price charged for another product of the same brand, fails to fulfil its obligations under Article 9(1) of Directive 95/59 on taxes other than turnover taxes which affect the consumption of manufactured tobacco, as amended by Directive 1999/81, which provides that manufacturers and importers are free to determine the maximum retail selling prices for cigarettes. The fixing of a minimum retail selling price by the public authorities inevitably has the effect of limiting the freedom of producers and importers to determine their maximum retail selling prices since, in any event, those prices cannot be lower than the compulsory minimum price.

( see paras 14-17, 35, operative part )

2. A Member State which maintains in force a system imposing a different rate of tax for dark- and light-tobacco cigarettes fails to fulfil its obligations under Articles 8(2) and 16(5) of Directive 95/59 on taxes other than turnover taxes which affect the consumption of manufactured tobacco, as amended by Directive 1999/81 and under Article 2 of Directive 92/79 on the approximation of taxes on cigarettes, which require the application of a single minimum global excise duty, identical for all cigarettes.

( see paras 20, 34-35, operative part )

3. A Member State which maintains in force a system imposing a different rate of tax for dark-tobacco cigarettes, which are almost exclusively manufactured in that State, and light-tobacco cigarettes, which are primarily imported products, to the detriment of the latter, fails to fulfil its obligations under the first paragraph of Article 95 of the Treaty (now, after amendment, the first paragraph of Article 90 EC).

( see paras 29, 34-35, operative part )
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Agriculture - Common organisation of the markets - Milk and milk products - Additional levy on milk - Award of reference quantities exempt from the levy - Beneficiaries - Producers who have received the holding through similar means to inheritance - Concept - Holding let to the spouse of the designated heir on conditions more favourable than market conditions, following the expiry of the non-marketing undertaking entered into by the devisor - Inclusion - Conditions

(Council Regulation No 857/84, Art. 3(a)1, second subpara., second indent)

Summary

$$The words producers ... who have received the holding through ... similar means in the second indent of the second subparagraph of Article 3a(1) of Regulation No 857/84 adopting general rules for the application of the levy, as amended by Regulation No 1639/91, must be interpreted as meaning that they refer to a producer who is the spouse of the designated heir and to whom the holding has been let on conditions more favourable than market conditions, following the expiry of the non-marketing undertaking entered into by the lessor (the devisor) under Regulation No 1078/77, provided that it follows from all the elements of fact and of law which characterise the letting that:

- the main intention of the arrangement is that the holding should continue to be exploited for the benefit of the designated heir and not that the market value of the holding should be realised by the devisor, and that

- the terms of the legal relations between the parties to the contract are such that the advantage which the devisor intends to confer on his heir is guaranteed in the long term, even if the spouses should separate or the marriage be dissolved.

( see para 37, operative part )
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Preliminary rulings - Jurisdiction of the Court - Limits - Manifestly irrelevant questions and questions regarding hypothetical problems in a context which precludes any useful answer - Questions not related to the purpose of the main proceedings

(Art. 234 EC)

2. Agriculture - Uniform legislation - Protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs - Regulation No 2081/92 - System of derogation from Article 13(2) - Scope - Products originating in the State of the protected designation of origin - Not covered

(Council Regulation No 2081/92, Art. 13(2))

Summary

$$1. In the context of the cooperation between the Court of Justice and the national courts established by Article 234 EC, it is solely for the national court before which the dispute has been brought, and which must assume responsibility for the subsequent judicial decision, to determine in the light of the particular circumstances of the case both the need for a preliminary ruling in order to enable it to deliver judgment and the relevance of the questions which it submits to the Court. Consequently, where the questions submitted by the national court concern the interpretation of Community law, the Court of Justice is, in principle, bound to give a ruling.

However, in exceptional circumstances, it is for the Court to examine the conditions in which the case was referred to it by the national court, in order to assess whether it has jurisdiction. The Court may refuse to rule on a question referred for a preliminary ruling by a national court only where it is quite obvious that the interpretation of Community law that is sought bears no relation to the actual facts of the main action or its purpose, where the problem is hypothetical, or where the Court does not have before it the factual or legal material necessary to give a useful answer to the questions submitted to it.

( see paras 18-19 )

2. On a proper construction of Article 13(2) of Regulation No 2081/92 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs, as amended by Regulation No 535/97, products are not covered by the system of derogations set up by that article where they originate in the State which obtained the protected designation of origin the protection of which under Article 13(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation No 2081/92, as amended, is at issue and they do not meet the product specification for that protected designation of origin.

( see para. 34, operative part )
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Tax provisions - Harmonisation of laws - Turnover taxes - Common system of value added tax - Taxable amount - Supply of services - Payment made as a subsidy that is part of the consideration to an economic operator in connection with a service provided to certain categories of beneficiaries - Payment - Inclusion in the taxable amount

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

Summary

$$Article 11A(1)(a) of the Sixth Directive 77/388 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes is to be interpreted as meaning that a sum paid in the context of a subsidy scheme by a public authority to an economic operator in connection with the service of energy advice supplied by the latter to certain categories of householders constitutes part of the consideration for the supply of services and forms part of the taxable amount in respect of that supply for the purposes of value added tax.

( see para 28, operative part )
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Free movement of goods — Quantitative restrictions — Measures having equivalent effect — National legislation prohibiting the marketing as chocolate of cocoa and chocolate products containing fats other than cocoa butter and lawfully manufactured in the Member State of production — Obligation to market as chocolate substitute — Not permissible — Whether justifiable — Protection of consumers — No justification — (Art. 30 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Art. 28 EC); Council Directive 73/241)

Summary

A Member State is in breach of its obligations under Article 30 of the Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 28 EC) where it prohibits cocoa and chocolate products which comply with the minimum content requirements for cocoa and cocoa butter, laid down in point 1.16 of Annex I to Directive 73/241 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to cocoa and chocolate products intended for human consumption to which vegetable fats other than cocoa butter have been added, and which are lawfully manufactured in Member States that authorise the addition of such fats, from being marketed in its territory as "chocolate" , the name used in the Member State of production, and provides that those products may only be marketed as "chocolate substitute" .

Such legislation cannot be justified as being necessary in order to satisfy overriding requirements relating inter alia to consumer protection. The addition to cocoa and chocolate products of vegetable fats other than cocoa butter does not substantially alter their composition or their nature, so that they retain the characteristics expected by consumers buying products bearing the name "chocolate" . The inclusion in the label of a neutral and objective statement informing consumers of the presence in the product of vegetable fats other than cocoa butter is sufficient to ensure that consumers are given correct information.

see paras 78, 82-83, 87-88, 91, operative part
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Tax provisions — Harmonisation of laws — Turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax — Exemptions provided for by the Sixth Directive — Exemption for certain cultural services — Other [recognised] cultural bodies — Meaning — Soloists performing individually — Included — (Council Directive 77/388, Art. 13A(1)(n))

2. Tax provisions — Harmonisation of laws — Turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax — Exemptions provided for by the Sixth Directive — Restrictions under Article 13A — Exclusion — (Council Directive 77/388, Art. 13A)

Summary

1. Article 13A(1)(n) of the Sixth Directive 77/388 concerning the exemption from value added tax for certain cultural services supplied by bodies governed by public law or by other cultural bodies recognised by the Member State concerned, is to be interpreted to the effect that the expression "other [recognised] cultural bodies" does not exclude soloists performing individually.

The principle of fiscal neutrality requires that individual performers, as long as their services are recognised as cultural, may be regarded, like cultural groups, as bodies similar to public-law bodies supplying certain cultural services mentioned in that provision.

see paras 27, 30, operative part 1

2. The heading of Article 13A of the Sixth Directive 77/388, the wording of which is "Exemptions for certain activities in the public interest" , does not, of itself, entail restrictions on the possibilities of exemption provided for by that provision. The possible restrictions on the benefit of the exemptions may be imposed only in the context of the application of paragraph 2 of that provision, relating, respectively, to the Member States' discretion to make the benefit of the exemption subject to certain conditions and to their obligation to exclude certain services from such benefit.

see paras 37, 39-40, operative part 2