ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Actions for annulment ° Natural or legal persons ° Measures of direct and individual concern to them ° Regulation amending the detailed rules for applying aid measures for nuts and locust beans

(EEC Treaty, Art. 173, second para.; Commission Regulation No 1304/91, Art. 1)

Summary

The possibility of determining more or less precisely the number or even the identity of the persons to whom a measure applies by no means implies that it must be regarded as being of individual concern to them within the meaning of the second paragraph of Article 173 of the Treaty as long as it is established that such application takes effect by virtue of an objective legal or factual situation defined by the measure in question.

Therefore Article 1 of Regulation No 1304/91, which serves to amend for the future, for all producers' organizations, certain detailed rules for applying aid for the implementation of improvement plans in the nut and locust bean sector by laying down more stringent conditions for applications by producers to change their plans in the course of execution, to receive annual instalments of aid and to draw advances in respect of such aid, is not of individual concern to producers' organizations whose plans were approved before the regulation was adopted.

In so far as the said Article 1 does not refer specifically to the aforementioned organizations, contains no concrete indication that the measures it introduces were adopted specifically taking account of the applicants' plans and it applies in the same way to all producers' organizations, whatever the date of approval of their plans, it is addressed in general terms to indeterminate classes of persons and applies to objectively determined situations.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Free movement of goods ° Industrial and commercial property ° Trade-mark right ° Right of the proprietor of a mark consisting in a word in general use in the language of several Member States to oppose the use, for goods imported from another Member State, of a designation leading to confusion ° Permissibility ° Conditions

(EEC Treaty, Arts 30 and 36)

Summary

It does not represent an unlawful restriction on intra-Community trade for the purposes of Articles 30 and 36 of the EEC Treaty if a subsidiary trading in Member State A of an automobile manufacturer established in Member State B is prohibited from using as a mark in Member State A the designation "Quadra", which the manufacturer has hitherto used without restriction for a four-wheel-drive motor vehicle, both in its own State and elsewhere, on the ground that another automobile manufacturer in Member State A claims ° validly under the internal law of Member State A ° a trade-mark right ("Warenzeichenrecht") and/or a right to a get-up ("Ausstattungsrecht") in the word "Quattro", with which the designation "Quadra" would create a risk of confusion, even though the word "Quattro" denotes a numeral in another Member State and that meaning is clearly discernible in other Member States, and even though the number 4 thereby designated plays a significant and varied role in automobile manufacturing and the automobile trade.

In the absence of unification or approximation of laws within the Community, the laying down of conditions for the protection of a designation such as "Quattro" and the establishment of criteria making it possible to determine the existence of a risk of confusion between two designations ° as to which Community law does not require a strict interpretation ° are a matter for national law, subject to the limits laid down by the second sentence of Article 36 of the Treaty.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Tax provisions ° Harmonization of laws ° Turnover taxes ° Common system of value added tax ° Exemptions provided for by the Sixth Directive ° Exemptions in respect of transactions relating to the granting of credit ° Grant, by the supplier of goods or services, of deferral of payment of the price in return for the payment of interest ° Exemption ° Grant of deferral until delivery ° Taking account of the interest as part of the consideration ° Taxation

(Council Directive 77/388, Arts 11(A)(1)(a) and 13(B)(d)(1))

Summary

Article 13(B)(d)(1) of the Sixth Directive (77/388) on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes must be interpreted as meaning that a supplier of goods or services who authorizes his customer to defer payment of the price, in return for payment of interest, is in principle making an exempt grant of credit within the meaning of that provision. However, where a supplier of goods or services grants his customer deferral of payment of the price, in return for payment of interest, only until delivery, that interest does not constitute consideration for the grant of credit but part of the consideration obtained for the supply of goods or services within the meaning of Article 11(A)(1)(a) of the Sixth Directive.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Procedure ° Revision of a judgment ° Conditions of admissibility of application ° New fact ° Fact known at the time when judgment was delivered ° Inadmissible

(Statute of the Court of Justice of the EEC, Art. 41)

Summary

It follows from the first paragraph of Article 41 of the EEC Statute of the Court of Justice that revision is not an appeal procedure but an exceptional review procedure that allows the authority of res judicata attaching to a final judgment to be called in question on the basis of the findings of fact relied upon by the court. Revision presupposes the discovery of elements of a factual nature which existed prior to the judgment and which were unknown at that time to the court which delivered it as well as to the party applying for revision and which, had the court been able to take them into consideration, could have led it to a different determination of the proceedings.

Consequently, an application for revision unsupported by any new fact which existed prior to the judgment in question is inadmissible.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1. Community law ° Interpretation ° Methods ° Interpretation of an implementing regulation in relation to the basic regulation

2. Common commercial policy ° Protection against dumping practices ° Regulation imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain ball bearings and tapered roller bearings originating in Japan ° Material field of application ° Bearing bushes ° Exclusion

(Council Regulations No 2176/84, Arts 7 and 12, and No 1739/85, Art. 1(1))

Summary

1. When the wording of secondary Community law is open to more than one interpretation, preference should be given to an interpretation which renders the provision consistent with the Treaty. An implementing regulation must also be given an interpretation consistent with the provisions of the basic regulation.

2. Article 1(1) of Regulation No 1739/85 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain ball bearings and tapered roller bearings originating in Japan must be interpreted as meaning that it does not include bearing bushes. Thus interpreted, that provision is not illegal, as it would have been if, in infringement of Articles 7 and 12 of the basic anti-dumping regulation, No 2176/84, according to which anti-dumping duties apply only to products which are the subject of dumping practices identified during the investigation, it had included the said products when they had not been taken into account during the anti-dumping proceeding.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Common customs tariff ° Customs value ° Decrease in value due to deterioration of goods ° Taking into account without regard to the date of transfer of the risk to the buyer

(Council Regulation No 1224/80 , Arts 1, 3 and 8; Commission Regulation No 1495/80, Art. 4, as amended by Regulation No 1580/81)

Summary

Article 4, second sentence, of Regulation No 1495/80, adopting certain provisions for the implementation of Articles 1, 3 and 8 of Regulation No 1224/80 relating to the valuation of goods for customs purposes, must be interpreted as meaning that no distinction should be drawn according to whether a deterioration of goods which decreases their customs value occurs before or after the transfer of the risk to the buyer.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Common Customs Tariff ° Tariff headings ° Pasteurized mixture of ground and pressed coconut pulp and certain other substances ° Classification under subheading 2106 90 99 of the Combined Nomenclature

Summary

A substance consisting of a pasteurized, homogenized and subsequently spray-dried mixture of ground and pressed coconut pulp to which maltose and sodium caseinate are added before it is dried in order to obtain the form of a powder, and containing a negligible quantity of fibre and at least 5% sucrose, must be classified under subheading 2106 90 99 of the Combined Nomenclature.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1. Common Customs Tariff ° Classification of goods ° Criteria ° Objective characteristics and properties of the product ° Exception ° Manufacturing process expressly referred to by the combined nomenclature

2. Common Customs Tariff ° Tariff headings ° Flat-rolled products rolled on four faces within the meaning of subheading 7211 21 00 of the combined nomenclature ° Classification determined solely by the manufacturing process

Summary

1. Although, in the interests of legal certainty and ease of verification, the decisive criterion for the classification of goods is in general to be sought in their objective characteristics and properties as defined in the wording of the relevant heading of the combined nomenclature and of the notes to the sections or chapters, there are cases in which the manufacturing process determines the heading under which goods are to be classified, since the said provisions make specific reference to that process.

2. Subheading 7211 21 00 of the Common Customs Tariff, in the version published in Annex I to Regulation No 3174/88 amending Annex I to Regulation No 2658/87 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff, is to be interpreted as meaning that the expression "rolled on four faces" refers solely to the manufacturing process employed, whether or not that manufacturing process produces sharp edges on all the rolled faces of the product.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Agriculture ° Common organization of the markets ° Sugar ° Production quotas ° Relationship between sugar manufacturers and beet growers ° Offers from the manufacturer to purchase quantities of beet intended for the manufacture of sugar within the limits of the A and B quotas ° Detailed rules for the allocation of the quantities to be delivered by sellers ° Community powers ° Inaction on the part of the Community legislature ° Application of national law ° Limits

(Council Regulation No 1785/81)

Summary

Since the Community legislature has not yet exercised its power under Regulation No 1785/81 on the common organization of the markets in the sugar sector to lay down detailed rules on the allocation among sellers of the quantities of sugar beet which the manufacturer offers to buy before sowing for the manufacture of sugar within the limits of the A and B quotas, Regulation No 1785/81 does not preclude the application, in connection with that allocation, of the principle under cartel law of equal treatment for suppliers and under company law for shareholders in a share company subject to accessory contributions. Although they are empowered to apply their national law, Member States are not dispensed from observing the principles and general rules governing the common agricultural policy.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1. Preliminary rulings ° Reference to the Court ° Need for both parties to have been heard ° Assessment by the national court

(EEC Treaty, Art. 177)

2. Preliminary rulings ° Reference to the Court ° Compliance of the decision to make a reference with the rules of national law governing the organization of the courts and their procedure ° Not a matter for the Court to verify

(EEC Treaty, Art. 177)

3. Tax provisions ° Harmonization of laws ° Turnover taxes ° Common system of value added tax ° Payment of the tax after it has become chargeable ° National system requiring taxable persons to make interim payments in the nature of advances ° Incompatibility with the Sixth Directive ° Possibility for individuals to rely on the corresponding provisions

(Council Directive 77/388, Arts 10 and 22(4) and (5))

Summary

1. Whilst, in the context of the procedure provided for by Article 177 of the Treaty, it may be in the interests of the proper administration of justice that a question should be referred to the Court for a preliminary ruling only after both sides have been heard, such a requirement is not among the conditions laid down for the implementation of that procedure. It is therefore for the national court alone to assess the need for hearing the defendant before making an order for reference.

2. In the context of the procedure provided for by Article 177 of the Treaty, it is not for the Court to determine whether the decision whereby a matter is brought before it was taken in accordance with the rules of national law governing the organization of the courts and their procedure. The Court must therefore abide by the decision from a court of a Member State requesting a preliminary ruling in so far as it has not been overturned in any appeal procedures provided for by national law.

3. It is contrary to Article 10 and Article 22(4) and (5) of the Sixth Council Directive (77/388/EEC) ° which provide, first, that value added tax becomes chargeable at the time when the goods are delivered or the services are performed and, secondly, that the Member States may derogate from the rule that payment must be made when the periodical return is submitted by demanding interim payment ° for provisions of national law to require taxable persons to pay value added tax equal to 65% of the total chargeable amount in respect of a period which has not yet expired, with the result that taxable persons, in certain circumstances, have to pay tax on transactions which have not yet been carried out. Such legislation has the effect of transforming the interim payments into advances which are contrary to the rule of the directive under which Member States should require value added tax to be paid only in respect of transactions which have been performed.

Taxable persons required to make such payments may rely in the national court on the aforementioned provisions of the Sixth Directive.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Acts of the institutions ° Directives ° Implementation by the Member States ° Mere administrative practices insufficient

(EEC Treaty, Art. 189, third para.)

Summary

Mere administrative practices, which by their nature are alterable at will by the authorities and are not given the appropriate publicity, cannot be regarded as constituting proper fulfilment of the obligations incumbent on the Member States to which a directive is addressed under Article 189 of the Treaty.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1. Appeals - Pleas in law - Facts wrongly appraised - Inadmissibility - Review by the Court of the appraisal of the evidence - Excluded save where the clear sense of the evidence has been distorted

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

2. Competition - Administrative procedure - Commission decision finding an infringement - Decision contested - Nature of the evidence to be adduced before the Community judicature

3. Appeals - Application first made in the appeal proceedings - Inadmissibility

(Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 116)

Summary

1. Pursuant to Article 168a of the Treaty and the first paragraph of 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 by the Court of First Instance and any appraisal of the facts is excluded. The appraisal by the Court of First Instance of the evidence put before it does not constitute (save where the clear sense of that evidence has been distorted) a point of law which is subject, as such, to review by the Court of Justice.

2. When the Commission has concluded on the basis of circumstantial factors that there has been an infringement of the competition rules of the Treaty, and when its reasoning is based on a supposition, it is sufficient for the applicant contesting the infringement to prove circumstances which cast the facts established by the Commission in a different light and which thus allow another explanation of the facts to be substituted for the one adopted by the Commission.

However, when the reasoning for the Commission' s conclusion is based on precise factual evidence, the applicant must show that the Commission' s appraisals are incorrect.

3. In appeal proceedings, an application first made to the Court of Justice by a party responding to the appeal must be dismissed as inadmissible under Article 116 of the Rules of Procedure.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Free movement of goods - Quantitative restrictions - Measures having equivalent effect - Prohibition of importation and marketing of a product bearing the name "Clinique" - Not permissible and not compatible with Directive 76/768/EEC - Justification - Protection of consumers or public health - No justification

(EEC Treaty, Arts 30 and 36; Council Directive 76/768, Art. 6(2))

Summary

Articles 30 and 36 of the Treaty and Article 6(2) of Directive 76/768 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to cosmetic products must be interpreted as precluding a national measure which prohibits the importation and marketing of a product classified and presented as a cosmetic on the ground that the product bears the name "Clinique".

Such a prohibition does not appear necessary to satisfy the requirements of consumer protection and the health of humans since the clinical or medical connotations of the word "Clinique" are not sufficient to make that word so misleading as to justify that prohibition in view of the fact that the products in question are not available in pharmacies and are not presented as medicinal products, their presentation is not open to criticism under the rules applicable to cosmetic products and the use of that name for marketing purposes apparently does not mislead consumers in other countries.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Court of Auditors ° Emoluments of members ° Pensions ° Survivor' s pension ° Calculation ° Maximum amount of the pension

(Council Regulation No 2290/77, Arts 10 and 16)

Summary

The various amendments made to Regulation No 2290/77 determining the emoluments of the members of the Court of Auditors show that the legislature intended to accord favourable treatment to the widow if the member died during his term of office, but at the same time the intention of the legislature, expressed in Article 16(2) of the aforesaid regulation, was always to ensure that the total amount allocated to the widow and dependent children could not exceed the maximum amount of the pension to which the deceased would have been entitled on ceasing to hold office. In the case of a member who has died during his term of office, that maximum amount is the maximum pension referred to in Article 10 of that regulation, namely 70% of the basic salary last received.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Approximation of laws - Procedures for the award of public works contracts - Directives 71/304/EEC and 71/305/EEC - Registration of contractors - Application by a holding company not itself carrying out the works but availing itself, for the purpose of proving its standing and competence, of references relating to its subsidiaries - Whether permissible - Conditions - Assessment by the national court

(Council Directives 71/304 and 71/305)

Summary

Directive 71/304 concerning the abolition of restrictions on freedom to provide services in respect of public works contracts and on the award of public works contracts to contractors acting through agencies or branches and Directive 71/305 concerning the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts must be interpreted as meaning that they permit, for the purposes of the assessment of the criteria to be satisfied by a contractor when an application for registration by the dominant legal person of a group is being examined, account to be taken of companies belonging to that group, provided that the legal person in question establishes that it actually has available the resources of those companies which are necessary for carrying out the works.

In a disputed case, it is for the national court to assess, in the light of the factual and legal circumstances before it, whether such proof has been produced.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1. Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments ° Recognition and enforcement ° Definition of "judgment" ° Scope ° Court settlement ° Excluded

(Convention of 27 September 1968, Art. 25)

2. Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments ° Recognition and enforcement ° Grounds for refusal ° Strict interpretation ° Judgment irreconcilable with a judgment given in the State in which recognition is sought ° Treatment of a court settlement reached in the State in which recognition is sought as a judgment given by a court of that State ° Excluded

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

Summary

1. The definition of a "judgment" given in Article 25 of the Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters refers, for the purposes of the application of the various provisions of the Convention in which the term is used, solely to judicial decisions actually given by a court or tribunal of a Contracting State deciding on its own authority on the issues between the parties. That is not the case as far as a settlement is concerned, even if it was reached in a court of a Contracting State and brings legal proceedings to an end, because settlements in court are essentially contractual in that their terms depend first and foremost on the parties' intention.

2. Article 27 of the Convention must be interpreted strictly, inasmuch as it constitutes an obstacle to the achievement of one of its fundamental objectives, which is to facilitate, to the greatest extent possible, the free movement of judgments by providing for a simple and rapid enforcement procedure. Hence Article 27(3) of the Convention is to be interpreted as meaning that an enforceable settlement reached before a court of the State in which recognition is sought in order to settle legal proceedings which are in progress does not constitute a "judgment" within the meaning of that provision, "given in a dispute between the same parties in the State in which recognition is sought" which, under the Convention, may preclude recognition and enforcement of a judgment given in another Contracting State.