ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Common Customs Tariff ° Tariff headings ° Meat of animals living in the wild but which, in the light of their zoological and genetic characteristics, are domestic swine ° Classification under subheading 02.01 A III(b) ° Excluded

Summary

The Common Customs Tariff must be interpreted as meaning that, with regard to imports from Bulgaria effected between 1983 and 1985, meat of animals which, in the light of their zoological and genetic characteristics, are domestic swine does not come under tariff subheading 02.01 A III(b), as defined in Regulation No 3000/82 amending Regulation No 950/68 on the Common Customs Tariff (meat of swine other than domestic swine), even if that meat has been certified by the competent authorities in Bulgaria as being of swine living in the wild in Bulgaria (Type B wild swine).

In view of the wording of the different subheadings under which swine meat may be classified, from which it follows that the classification criterion for distinguishing the meat of domestic swine from the meat of swine other than domestic swine lies in the notion of species, which identifies a category defined on the basis of objective zoological and genetic criteria and not on the basis of the specific method by which the animals are bred, subheading 02.01 A III(b) can cover only meat of species of swine which are distinguishable from domestic species of swine by reason of their zoological and genetic characteristics.

This interpretation cannot be gainsaid by an amendment made in 1992 to the explanatory notes on the Combined Nomenclature, according to which the meat of animals of the swine species certified by the competent authorities in Australia as meat of swine living in the wild in Australia is considered as meat of swine other than of domestic swine, since that note was adopted several years after the imports in question for the application of a different nomenclature and concerns the special case of Australia, and since no text of that kind has been adopted in respect of meat imported from Bulgaria.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1. Free movement of goods ° Quantitative restrictions ° Measures having equivalent effect ° Prohibition of the sale of bakery products whose salt content is higher than 2% ° Not permissible ° Justification ° Protection of public health ° No justification

(EEC Treaty, Arts 30 and 36)

2. Free movement of goods ° Quantitative restrictions ° Measures having equivalent effect ° National legislation prohibiting, as provided by Council Directive 79/112/EEC, the sale of foodstuffs on whose packaging neither the specific name nor the EEC number of the preservatives used is designated ° Application to products imported from another Member State which has exercised the derogation option allowed by the directive ° Measure justified for the purpose of protecting consumers ° Permissible

(EEC Treaty, Art. 30; Council Directive 79/112/EEC, Arts 6(5)(b), second indent, and 23(1)(a))

Summary

1. National legislation prohibiting the marketing of bread and other bakery products whose salt content by reference to the dry matter exceeds the maximum permitted level of 2%, when applied to products which have been lawfully manufactured and marketed in another Member State, constitutes a measure having an effect equivalent to a quantitative restriction within the meaning of Article 30 of the EEC Treaty.

In so far as the Member State in question relied on general conjecture instead of data based on relevant scientific research, and thus failed to prove that the rules in question are necessary in order to protect consumer health and that they go no further than is necessary in order to achieve that aim, those rules cannot be regarded as justified under Article 36 of the EEC Treaty on the ground of protecting public health.

2. In the context of Council Directive 79/112 on the labelling and presentation of foodstuffs, which represented only the initial stage of the harmonization process in that sector, a Member State which had made it obligatory to designate, as provided by the second indent of Article 6(5)(b), either the specific name or the EEC number of the ingredients listed in Annex II to that directive, was entitled to rely on the imperative requirement of protecting consumers in order to prohibit the marketing of a product from another Member State which had chosen to exercise the option allowed by Article 23(1)(a) of that directive and to require only designation of the general category "preservative".

Even though such a prohibition was, in principle, caught by the prohibition in Article 30 of the Treaty, it was justified by that imperative requirement in so far as it was not out of proportion to the desired result and hindered as little as possible the importation of products lawfully manufactured and marketed in other Member States, since to designate only the general category "preservative" is inadequate, particularly in view of the multiplicity of preserving agents which the products in question may contain and in view of the fact that labelling is one of the means that least restricts the free movement of goods within the Community.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Agriculture ° Common organization of the markets ° Poultrymeat ° Export refunds ° Ad hoc classification in the nomenclature of various cuts

(Commission Regulations Nos 267/87, Annex; 1151/87, Annex; 2800/87, Annex; 3846/87, Annex)

Summary

Regulations Nos 1151/87 and 2800/87, both of which fix export refunds in the poultrymeat sector, must be interpreted as meaning that a chicken leg with (part of) the back (without the rump) must be classified under subheading:

a) 02.02 B II e) 3 ("Legs and cuts of legs of other poultry") of the Annexes to those regulations if the size of the piece of back does not give the product its essential character;

b) 02.02 B II ex g) ("Other") if the opposite applies.

Regulation No 3846/87 establishing an agricultural product nomenclature for export refunds must be interpreted as meaning that a chicken leg with (part of) the back (without the rump) must be classified under subheading:

a) 0207 41 71 100 ("Halves or quarters, without rumps") of the Annex to that regulation if the piece of back corresponds to the rear part of the back, allowing for the permitted tolerances in cutting;

b) 0207 41 51 000 ("Legs and cuts thereof") if the above is not the case and the size of the piece of back does not alter the essential character of the product;

c) 0207 41 71 900 ("Other") if it cannot be classified under either of the two preceding subheadings.

Regulation No 267/87 fixing the export refunds on poultrymeat and Regulation No 1151/87 must be interpreted as meaning that the front part of a chicken' s back with wings must be classified under subheading:

a) 02.02 B II b) ("Whole wings, with or without tips") in the Annexes to those regulations if the size of the piece of back does not give the product its essential character;

b) 02.02 B II ex g) ("Other") if the opposite applies.

Regulation No 3846/87 must be interpreted as meaning that the front part of a chicken' s back with wings must be classified under subheading:

a) 0207 41 21 000 ("Whole wings, with or without tips") in the Annex to that regulation if the size of the piece of back does not give the product its essential character;

b) 0207 41 71 900 ("Other") if the opposite applies.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Social security for migrant workers ° Invalidity insurance ° Benefits ° Alteration ° Recalculation ° Grant in another Member State of a family benefit within the meaning of Article 1(u)(i) of Regulation 1408/71 ° Excluded

(Council Regulation No 1408/71, Arts 1(u)(i), 46 and 51)

Summary

Where benefits paid in one Member State by way of an invalidity pension are calculated in accordance with Article 46 of Regulation No 1408/71, Article 51 of that regulation is to be interpreted as precluding a recalculation of the benefits in question in the event of the grant in another Member State of an allowance which is in the nature of a family benefit for the purposes of Article 1(u)(i) of the regulation or which, being granted automatically to families meeting certain objective criteria, relating in particular to their size, income and capital resources, may be considered a family benefit.

It is apparent from the wording, structure and objective of Article 51 that it relates only to benefits governed by Chapter 3 of Title III of Regulation 1408/71, which applies to pensions in respect of old age, death and invalidity. Since family benefits fall within the scope of Chapter 7 of Title III of the regulation, they are outside that of Chapter 3. It follows that the grant of a family benefit does not give rise to the application of Article 51 of the regulation and neither obliges nor authorizes the Administrative Commission to recalculate an invalidity pension in accordance with Article 46 of the Regulation.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1. Convention on jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments ° Special jurisdiction ° Jurisdiction "in matters relating to tort, delict or quasi-delict" ° Place where the harmful event occurred ° Cross-border defamation by the press ° Plaintiff' s right to choose ° Court of the place where the publisher is established ° Jurisdiction in respect of all the harm ° Courts of the places where the publication was distributed in each Contracting State where the reputation of the person harmed is injured ° Jurisdiction limited to the harm caused in the State of the court seised

(Brussels Convention of 27 September 1968, Art. 5(3))

2. Convention on jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments ° Special jurisdiction ° Jurisdiction "in matters relating to tort, delict or quasi-delict" ° Defamation ° Assessment of the harmful character of the event in question and the evidence required of the alleged harm ° Application of the conflict of laws rules of the forum ° Limits

(Brussels Convention of 27 September 1968, Art. 5(3))

Summary

1. On a proper construction of the expression "place where the harmful event occurred" in Article 5(3) of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters as amended by the Convention of 9 October 1978 on the accession of the Kingdom of Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and by the Convention of 25 October 1982 on the accession of the Hellenic Republic, the victim of a libel by a newspaper article distributed in several Contracting States may bring an action for damages against the publisher either before the courts of the Contracting State of the place where the publisher of the defamatory publication is established, which have jurisdiction to award damages for all the harm caused by the defamation, or before the courts of each Contracting State in which the publication was distributed and where the victim claims to have suffered injury to his reputation, which have jurisdiction to rule solely in respect of the harm caused in the State of the court seised.

2. The criteria for assessing whether the event in question is harmful and the evidence required of the existence and extent of the harm alleged by the plaintiff in an action in tort, delict or quasi-delict are not governed by the Convention but are determined in accordance with the substantive law designated by the national conflict of laws rules of the court seised on the basis of the Convention, provided that the effectiveness of the Convention is not thereby impaired. The fact that under the national law applicable to the main proceedings damage is presumed in libel actions, so that the plaintiff does not have to adduce evidence of the existence and extent of that damage, does not therefore preclude the application of Article 5(3) of the Convention.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Social policy ° Equal pay for men and women ° Equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security ° Assimilation of a retirement pension reduced by loss of earnings as a result of time spent bringing up a child to pursuit of a main occupation affording social security ° Whether permissible ° Obligation of Member States to grant advantages in respect of old-age pension schemes to persons who have brought up children ° None

(EEC Treaty, Art. 119; Council Directives 75/117 and 79/7)

Summary

It is not incompatible with the principle of equal pay for men and women laid down in Article 119 of the Treaty and in Directive 75/117 to assimilate receipt of a retirement pension to pursuit of a main occupation affording social security, when that pension has been reduced by loss of earnings as a result of time spent bring up a child.

The fact that such assimilation may enable part-time work done by the recipient of the pension to be paid at less than the normal rate cannot be regarded as incompatible with the principle of equal pay for men and women because Directive 79/7 on equal treatment in matters of social security does not require the Member States to grant advantages in respect of old-age pension schemes to persons who have brought up children or to provide benefit entitlements where employment has been interrupted in order to bring up children.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1. Agriculture ° Approximation of laws ° Control of classical swine fever ° Directives 80/217 and 80/1095 ° Requirement for the Member States to provide for a system of compensation for owners whose animals have been slaughtered by order of the national authorities ° None

(Council Directives 80/217 and 80/1095)

2. Community law ° Principles ° Equal treatment ° Discrimination on grounds of nationality ° Rules on control of classical swine fever which do not require Member States to compensate owners whose animals have been slaughtered by order of the national authorities ° No discrimination ° Adoption of a system of compensation by certain Member States in the context of their competence and existence of a requirement to compensate in the context of the control of other animal diseases ° Not relevant

(EEC Treaty, Arts 7 and 40(3), second para.)

Summary

1. By adopting Directives 80/217 and 80/109 introducing measures for the control of classical swine fever, the Community legislature did not intend to regulate the financial aspects of implementation of those measures by the owners of the animals concerned and, specifically, to prescribe measures to compensate those owners. In the absence of Community provisions on the matter, compensation of owners whose pigs have been slaughtered by order of the national authorities under measures to control that disease falls within the competence of each Member State. It follows that the applicable Community rules on control of classical swine fever must be interpreted as not requiring Member States to provide for a system of compensation for owners whose pigs have been slaughtered by order of the national authorities.

2. The Community rules on control of classical swine fever do not disregard the principle of non-discrimination laid down in Article 7 of the Treaty: since they do not require the Member States to provide for a system of compensation for owners whose pigs have been slaughtered by order of the national authorities, they cannot be criticized for having established a system of compensation which differs according to the nationality of the owners whose animals have been slaughtered.

Neither can the fact that certain Member States, in the context of the competence they retain, have adopted a system of compensation for those owners whereas other Member States have not done so constitute infringement of the rules of the Treaty.

Moreover, the fact that the Community has prescribed total or partial compensation for owners of animals slaughtered in order to control animal diseases other than classical swine fever breaches neither the principle of non-discrimination nor even the principle of equal treatment laid down in the second paragraph of Article 40(3) of the Treaty, since the situations at issue are objectively different.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1. Officials ° Temporary staff ° Definitive termination of service ° Allowance ° Method of calculation

(Council Regulation No 2274/87, Art. 4(4))

2. Officials ° Decision adversely affecting an official ° Obligation to state the reasons on which it is based ° Purpose

(Staff Regulations, Art. 25(2))

3. Officials ° Temporary staff ° Definitive termination of service ° Cover under the joint sickness insurance scheme ° Condition ° Lack of cover by another sickness insurance by virtue of legal or statutory provisions ° Scope ° Rule of equivalence of benefits ° Excluded

(Staff Regulations, Art. 72; Council Regulation No 2274/87, Art. 4(6))

4. Appeals ° Pleas in law ° Plea directed against the decision of the Court of First Instance on costs ° Inadmissible if all other pleas rejected

(Statute of the Court of Justice of the EC, Art. 51(2))

Summary

1. Since, when it laid down in the second subparagraph of Article 4(4) of Regulation No 2274/87 introducing special measures to terminate the service of temporary staff of the European Communities that account was to be taken, for the purpose of calculating the allowance to be paid to the persons concerned, of their gross income before deduction of tax, the Community legislature was aware of the difference between national tax systems, it must be concluded that it accepted that such differences could have an impact on the financial situation of the persons concerned.

In any event, observance of the principle of equal treatment must, as regards the circumstances of former employees of the Communities, be considered not merely from the tax point of view but in overall terms, taking account of all the advantages which they receive from the Member State on whose territory they carry on their professional activity.

2. The statement of reasons for a decision adversely affecting an official meets the requirements of Article 25 of the Staff Regulations if it provides the information necessary for him to determine whether or not the decision was well founded and for the Court to exercise its powers of review.

3. Article 4(6) of Regulation No 2274/87 introducing special measures to terminate the service of temporary staff of the European Communities must be interpreted as meaning that a former member of the temporary staff who is in receipt of an allowance provided for by that regulation and is covered by a national social welfare scheme governed by public law, such as the German scheme of assistance for civil servants, which includes cover for medical expenses, is not entitled to cover under the joint sickness insurance scheme provided for by Article 72 of the Staff Regulations, regardless of any considerations concerning the equivalence of the benefits provided by each of those schemes.

4. Where all the other pleas advanced by an appellant against a judgment of the Court of First Instance have been rejected, a plea alleging illegality of the decision of that Court on costs must, by virtue of the second paragraph of Article 51 of the Statute of the Court of Justice, be rejected as inadmissible.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments ° Recognition and enforcement ° Grounds for refusal ° Failure duly and timeously to serve the document instituting the proceedings on the absent defendant ° Concept of document instituting the proceedings or equivalent document ° Document enabling the defendant to assert his rights before an enforceable judgment is given ° Order for payment under Italian law served jointly with the plaintiff' s application ° Included

(Convention of 27 September 1968, Art. 27(2))

Summary

The term "document instituting the proceedings or equivalent document" within the meaning of Article 27(2) of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters, as amended by the Convention of 9 October 1978 on the accession of the Kingdom of Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, means the document or documents which must be duly and timeously served on the defendant in order to enable him to assert his rights before an enforceable judgment is given in the State of origin. The decreto ingiuntivo within the meaning of Book IV of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure (Articles 633 to 656), together with the application instituting the proceedings, must therefore be regarded as "the document which instituted proceedings or ... an equivalent document" within the meaning of that provision, since their joint service starts time running for the defendant to oppose the order and since the plaintiff cannot obtain an enforceable order before the expiry of that time-limit.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Social policy — Men and women workers — Equal pay — Pay — Concept — Compensation for taking part in staff representation — Included — (EEC Treaty, Art. 119; Council Directive 75/117)

2. Social policy — Men and women workers — Equal pay — Compensation for loss of earnings due to attendance at training courses for staff committee members held during full-time working hours — National rules limiting compensation for part-time employees attending courses to their individual working hours — Difference of treatment compared with full-time employees attending courses — Part-time staff consisting mainly of women — Different treatment not permissible without objective justification — (EEC Treaty, Art. 119; Council Directive 75/117)

Summary

1. The concept of " pay" within the meaning of Article 119 of the Treaty and 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 comprises any consideration, whether in cash or in kind, whether immediate or future, provided that the worker receives it, albeit indirectly, in respect of his employment from his employer, and irrespective of whether the worker receives it under a contract of employment, by virtue of legislative provisions or on a voluntary basis.

It includes compensation paid to a male or female worker for taking part in statutorily established staff representation. Although such compensation does not derive as such from the contract of employment, it nevertheless constitutes a benefit paid indirectly by the employer, since it is paid by virtue of legislative provisions and under a contract of employment.

2. Where the category of part-time workers includes a much higher number of women than men, national legislation which, not being suitable and necessary for achieving a legitimate social policy aim, has the effect of limiting to their individual working hours the compensation which staff committee members employed on a part-time basis are to receive from their employer for attending training courses which impart the knowledge necessary for serving on staff committees and are held during the full-time working hours applicable in the undertaking but which exceed their individual part-time working hours, when staff committee members employed on a full-time basis receive compensation for attendance at the same courses on the basis of their full-time working hours, contravenes the prohibition of indirect discrimination in the matter of pay laid down by Article 119 of the Treaty and 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.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Actions for annulment ° Action contesting a decision which merely confirms a previous decision ° Inadmissibility

(EC Treaty, Art. 173)

Summary

A decision which merely confirms a previous decision is not a measure against which an action for annulment may be brought.
Keywords



Keywords

++++

European Communities public procurement ° Arbitration clause conferring jurisdiction on the Court of Justice ° Contract for services ° Unilateral termination pursuant to contractual provisions ° Applicable law ° Right to damages ° Calculation ° Right to default interest

(ECSC Treaty, Art. 42; EEC Treaty, Art. 181; EAEC Treaty, Art. 153)