ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS - INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL PROPERTY - TRADE-MARK RIGHT - PROTECTION - LIMITS - TRADE MARK LAWFULLY AFFIXED TO A PRODUCT IN A MEMBER STATE - RE-PACKAGING BY A THIRD PARTY AND IMPORTATION INTO ANOTHER MEMBER STATE - OPPOSITION BY THE PROPRIETOR - NOT PERMISSIBLE

( EEC TREATY , ART . 36 )

Summary

THE ESSENTIAL FUNCTION OF A TRADE MARK IS TO GUARANTEE THE IDENTITY OF THE ORIGIN OF THE MARKED PRODUCT TO THE CONSUMER OR FINAL USER BY ENABLING HIM TO DISTINGUISH WITHOUT ANY POSSIBILITY OF CONFUSION BETWEEN THAT PRODUCT AND PRODUCTS WHICH HAVE ANOTHER ORIGIN . THIS GUARANTEE OF ORIGIN MEANS THAT THE CONSUMER OR FINAL USER MAY BE CERTAIN THAT A TRADE-MARKED PRODUCT WHICH IS OFFERED TO HIM HAS NOT BEEN SUBJECT AT A PREVIOUS STAGE IN THE MARKETING PROCESS TO INTERFERENCE BY A THIRD PERSON , WITHOUT THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE PROPRIETOR OF THE TRADE MARK , AFFECTING THE ORIGINAL CONDITION OF THE PRODUCT .

THEREFORE , THE PROPRIETOR OF A TRADE-MARK RIGHT MAY NOT RELY ON THAT RIGHT IN ORDER TO PREVENT AN IMPORTER FROM MARKETING A PHARMACEUTICAL PRODUCT MANUFACTURED IN ANOTHER MEMBER STATE BY THE SUBSIDIARY OF THE PROPRIETOR AND BEARING THE LATTER ' S TRADE MARK WITH HIS CONSENT , WHERE THE IMPORTER , IN RE-PACKAGING THE PRODUCT , CONFINED HIMSELF TO REPLACING THE EXTERNAL WRAPPING WITHOUT TOUCHING THE INTERNAL PACKAGING AND MADE THE TRADE MARK AFFIXED BY THE MANUFACTURER TO THE INTERNAL PACKAGING VISIBLE THROUGH THE NEW EXTERNAL WRAPPING , AT THE SAME TIME CLEARLY INDICATING ON THE EXTERNAL WRAPPING THAT THE PRODUCT WAS MANUFACTURED BY THE SUBSIDIARY OF THE PROPRIETOR AND RE-PACKAGED BY THE IMPORTER .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

APPLICATION FOR DECLARATION OF NULLITY - ACTION HAVING LOST ITS PURPOSE - NO NEED TO GIVE A DECISION

( ECSC TREATY , ART . 33 , SECOND PARAGRAPH )

Summary

A DECLARATION THAT THERE IS NO NEED TO GIVE A DECISION MUST BE MADE IN RESPECT OF AN ACTION CONCERNING A DECISION WHICH HAS NOT HAD , AND CAN NO LONGER HAVE , ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS ON THE APPLICANTS AND WHICH HAS THEREFORE LOST ITS PURPOSE .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . OFFICIALS - RECRUITMENT - PROBATIONARY PERIOD - PROBATION REPORT - DELAY IN DRAWING UP THE REPORT - CONSEQUENCES

( STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS , ART . 34 ( 2 ))

2 . OFFICIALS - RECRUITMENT - PROBATIONARY PERIOD - PROBATION REPORT - SCOPE AND CONTENT

( STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS , ART . 34 ( 2 ))

3 . OFFICIALS - RECRUITMENT - PROBATIONARY PERIOD - PROBATION REPORT - ASSESSMENT OF THE PROBATIONARY OFFICIAL ' S ABILITIES - POWERS OF THE ADMINISTRATION - REVIEW BY THE COURT - LIMITS

( STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS , ART . 34 ( 2 ))

4 . OFFICIALS - ADMINISTRATION ' S DUTY TO ASSIST - SCOPE

( STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS , ART . 24 )

Summary

1 . A DELAY IN THE DRAWING UP OF THE PROBATION REPORT CONSTITUTES AN IRREGULARITY , IN VIEW OF THE EXPRESS REQUIREMENTS OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS , WHICH , REGRETTABLE AS IT MAY BE , IS STILL NOT OF SUCH A NATURE AS TO CALL IN QUESTION THE VALIDITY OF THE REPORT . SINCE THE OBJECTIVE OF ARTICLE 34 OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS IS TO GUARANTEE TO THE PERSON CONCERNED THE RIGHT TO SUBMIT ANY OBSERVATIONS TO THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY AND ALSO TO ENSURE THAT SUCH OBSERVATIONS SHALL BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION BY THAT AUTHORITY , A DECISION TO DISMISS THE PERSON CONCERNED ON THE BASIS OF A PROBATION REPORT DRAWN UP LATE IS NOT FOR THAT REASON INVALID , PROVIDED THAT THE TIME WHICH ELAPSED BETWEEN THE DRAWING UP OF THE REPORT AND THE DECISION OF DISMISSAL IS SUFFICIENT FOR THE PROBATIONER TO BE ABLE TO MAKE HIS OBSERVATIONS AFTER THE REPORT WAS COMMUNICATED TO HIM AND ALSO FOR THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY TO BE ENABLED TO ASSESS THE POSITION , AS IT IS BOUND TO DO .

2 . THE PROBATION REPORT MUST DESCRIBE ONLY THE MAIN ACTIVITIES TO THE PERSON CONCERNED DURING THE PROBATIONARY PERIOD . THAT DESCRIPTION MUST BE SUFFICIENTLY PRECISE TO PERMIT THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY TO ADOPT ITS DECISION AND TO STATE THE REASONS ON WHICH IT IS BASED .

3 . IT IS FOR THE COMPETENT ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY TO USE ITS POWER OF ASSESSMENT AS REGARDS THE ABILITY OF THE PERSON CONCERNED TO PERFORM THE DUTIES ENTRUSTED TO HIM , SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY THE COURT OF THE MANNER IN WHICH THAT HAS BEEN DONE IN THE EVENT OF MANIFEST ERROR .

4 . THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 24 OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS ARE CONCERNED WITH THE DEFENCE OF OFFICIALS AGAINST THE ACTS OF THIRD PARTIES AND NOT AGAINST ACTS EMANATING FROM THE INSTITUTION ITSELF , THE REVIEW OF WHICH IS GOVERNED BY OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

CONVENTION ON JURISDICTION AND THE ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENTS - JURISDICTION IN MATTERS RELATING TO A CONTRACT - SCOPE - DISPUTE BETWEEN THE PARTIES AS TO THE EXISTENCE OF THE CONTRACT - JURISDICTION EXTENDS TO THAT QUESTION

( CONVENTION OF 27 SEPTEMBER 1968 , ART . 5 ( 1 ))

Summary

IN THE CASES PROVIDED FOR IN ARTICLE 5 ( 1 ) OF THE CONVENTION OF 27 SEPTEMBER 1968 , THE NATIONAL COURT ' S JURISDICTION TO DETERMINE QUESTIONS RELATING TO A CONTRACT INCLUDES THE POWER TO CONSIDER THE EXISTENCE OF THE CONSTITUENT PARTS OF THE CONTRACT ITSELF , SINCE THAT IS INDISPENSABLE IN ORDER TO ENABLE THE NATIONAL COURT IN WHICH PROCEEDINGS ARE BROUGHT TO EXAMINE WHETHER IT HAS JURISDICTION UNDER THE CONVENTION . THEREFORE THE PLAINTIFF MAY INVOKE THE JURISDICTION OF THE COURTS OF THE PLACE OF PERFORMANCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 5 ( 1 ) OF THE CONVENTION , EVEN WHEN THE EXISTENCE OF THE CONTRACT ON WHICH THE CLAIM IS BASED IS IN DISPUTE BETWEEN THE PARTIES .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

CONVENTION ON JURISDICTION AND THE ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENTS - SPECIAL JURISDICTION - COURT FOR THE PLACE OF PERFORMANCE OF A CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATION - CLAIMS BASED ON DIFFERENT OBLIGATIONS RESULTING FROM A CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT - OBLIGATION TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT FOR THE PURPOSE OF JURISDICTION - OBLIGATION CHARACTERIZING THE CONTRACT IN QUESTION

( CONVENTION OF 27 SEPTEMBER 1968 , ART . 5 ( 1 ))

Summary

THE OBLIGATION TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 5 ( 1 ) OF THE CONVENTION OF 27 SEPTEMBER 1968 IN THE CASE OF CLAIMS BASED ON DIFFERENT OBLIGATIONS ARISING UNDER A CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT AS A REPRESENTATIVE BINDING A WORKER TO AN UNDERTAKING IS THE OBLIGATION WHICH CHARACTERIZES THE CONTRACT .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES - OWN RESOURCES - SUMS WRONGLY PAID - RECOVERY - APPLICATION OF NATIONAL LAW - CONDITIONS AND LIMITS

2 . AGRICULTURE - COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKETS - CEREALS - DENATURING PREMIUMS WRONGLY PAID - RECOVERY - INTEREST - APPLICATION OF NATIONAL LAW - CONDITIONS

Summary

1 . IN SO FAR AS COMMUNITY LAW HAS NOT PROVIDED OTHERWISE ACTIONS FOR THE RECOVERY OF SUMS WHICH HAVE BEEN WRONGLY PAID UNDER COMMUNITY LAW MUST BE DECIDED BY NATIONAL COURTS . IN PARTICULAR , IT IS FOR THE NATIONAL AUTHORITIES TO SETTLE ALL ANCILLARY QUESTIONS RELATING TO SUCH RECOVERY , SUCH AS THE QUESTION OF PAYMENT OF INTEREST .

HOWEVER , THE APPLICATION OF NATIONAL LAW MUST NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE SCOPE OR IMPAIR THE EFFECTIVENESS OF COMMUNITY LAW BY MAKING THE RECOVERY OF SUMS WRONGLY PAID IMPOSSIBLE IN PRACTICE . NOR MAY IT MAKE THE RECOVERY OF SUCH SUMS SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS OR DETAILED RULES LESS FAVOURABLE THAN THOSE WHICH APPLY TO SIMILAR PROCEDURES GOVERNED BY NATIONAL LAW ALONE . IN SUCH MATTERS THE NATIONAL AUTHORITIES MUST PROCEED WITH THE SAME CARE AS THEY EXERCISE IN IMPLEMENTING CORRESPONDING NATIONAL LAWS SO AS NOT TO IMPAIR , IN ANY WAY , THE EFFECTIVENESS OF COMMUNITY LAW .

2 . IT IS COMPATIBLE WITH COMMUNITY LAW IN ITS PRESENT STATE FOR A MEMBER STATE TO CHARGE , IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF ITS OWN NATIONAL LAW , INTEREST ON WRONGLY-PAID COMMUNITY DE NATURING PREMIUMS PROVIDED THAT THOSE RULES DO NOT GIVE RISE TO ANY DIFFERENCE IN TREATMENT WHICH IS NOT OBJECTIVELY JUSTIFIED BETWEEN TRADERS RECEIVING SUCH PREMIUMS AND THOSE WHO , AS THE CASE MAY BE , OBTAIN SIMILAR BENEFITS OF A PURELY NATIONAL NATURE .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

SOCIAL POLICY - MEN AND WOMEN - PAY - EQUALITY - PRINCIPLE - IMPLEMENTATION BY THE MEMBER STATES - WORK TO WHICH EQUAL VALUE IS ATTRIBUTED - RIGHTS TO EQUAL PAY EVEN IN THE ABSENCE OF A SYSTEM OF JOB CLASSIFICATION - DUTIES OF THE MEMBER STATES

( EEC TREATY , ART . 119 ; COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 75/117/EEC , ART . 1 , FIRST PARAGRAPH )

Summary

THE GENERAL SCHEME AND CONTENT OF DIRECTIVE 75/117 , WHOSE ESSENTIAL PURPOSE IS TO IMPLEMENT THE PRINCIPLE OF EQUAL PAY FOR MEN AND WOMEN , INDICATE THAT IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE MEMBER STATES TO GUARANTEE THE RIGHT TO RECEIVE EQUAL PAY FOR WORK OF EQUAL VALUE EVEN IN THE ABSENCE OF A SYSTEM OF JOB CLASSIFICATION . TO THAT END THEY MUST MAKE USE OF APPROPRIATE LAWS , REGULATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS IN SUCH A WAY THAT ALL EMPLOYEES IN THE COMMUNITY MAY BE PROTECTED IN THESE MATTERS . IT FOLLOWS THAT WHERE THERE IS DISAGREEMENT AS TO THE APPLICATION OF THE CONCEPT OF ' ' WORK TO WHICH EQUAL VALUE IS ATTRIBUTED ' ' WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE FIRST PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 1 OF THE DIRECTIVE , THE WORKER MUST BE ENTITLED TO CLAIM BEFORE AN APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY THAT HIS WORK HAS THE SAME VALUE AS OTHER WORK AND , IF THAT IS FOUND TO BE THE CASE , TO HAVE HIS RIGHTS UNDER THE TREATY AND THE DIRECTIVE ACKNOWLEDGED BY A BINDING DECISION . EACH MEMBER STATE MUST THEREFORE ENDOW AN AUTHORITY WITH THE REQUISITE JURISDICTION TO DECIDE WHETHER WORK HAS THE SAME VALUE AS OTHER WORK .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

APPLICATION FOR A DECLARATION THAT A MEASURE IS VOID - NATURAL OR LEGAL PERSONS - CONDITIONS FOR ADMISSIBILITY

ACTION FOR FAILURE TO ACT - NATURAL OR LEGAL PERSONS - CONDITIONS FOR ADMISSIBILTY

( EEC TREATY , ART . 173 , SECOND PARAGRAPH , AND ART . 175 , THIRD PARAGRAPH )

Summary

IT MAY BE SEEN FROM THE SECOND PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 173 AND THE THIRD PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 175 OF THE TREATY THAT THE APPLICANT , FOR HIS APPLICATION FOR A DECLARATION THAT A MEASURE IS VOID OR HIS ACTION FOR FAILURE TO ACT TO BE ADMISSIBLE , MUST BE IN A POSITION TO ESTABLISH EITHER THAT HE IS THE ADDRESSEE OF A MEASURE OF AN INSTITUTION HAVING SPECIFIC LEGAL EFFECTS WITH REGARD TO HIM , WHICH IS , AS SUCH , CAPABLE OF BEING DECLARED VOID , OR THAT THE INSTITUTION , HAVING BEEN DULY CALLED UPON TO ACT IN PURSUANCE OF THE SECOND PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 175 , HAS FAILED TO ADOPT IN RELATION TO HIM A MEASURE WHICH HE WAS LEGALLY ENTITLED TO CLAIM BY VIRTUE OF THE RULES OF COMMUNITY LAW .

A NATURAL OR LEGAL PERSON WHO IS ASKING AN INSTITUTION , NOT TO TAKE A DECISION IN RESPECT OF HIM , BUT TO OPEN AN INQUIRY WITH REGARD TO THIRD PARTIES AND TO TAKE DECISIONS IN RESPECT OF THEM , MAY HAVE AN INDIRECT INTEREST , AS OTHER PRIVATE PERSONS MAY HAVE , IN SUCH PROCEEDINGS AND THEIR POSSIBLE OUTCOME , BUT HE IS NEVERTHELESS NOT IN THE PRECISE LEGAL POSITION OF THE ACTUAL ADDRESSEE OF A DECISION WHICH MAY BE DECLARED VOID UNDER THE SECOND PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 173 OR IN THAT OF THE POTENTIAL ADDRESSEE OF A LEGAL MEASURE WHICH THE INSTITUTION IN QUESTION HAS A DUTY TO ADOPT WITH REGARD TO HIM , AS IS THE POSITION UNDER THE THIRD PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 175 .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . MEASURES ADOPTED BY THE INSTITUTIONS - APPLICATION RATIONE TEMPORIS - NONRETROACTIVITY - EXCEPTIONS - CONDITIONS

( EEC TREATY , ART . 191 )

2 . MEASURES ADOPTED BY THE INSTITUTIONS - STATEMENT OF THE REASONS ON WHICH MEASURES ARE BASED - DUTY TO PROVIDE - OBJECTIVE - SCOPE

( EEC TREATY , ART . 190 )

Summary

1 . ALTHOUGH IN GENERAL THE PRINCIPLE OF LEGAL CERTAINTY PRECLUDES A COMMUNITY MEASURE FROM TAKING EFFECT FROM A POINT IN TIME BEFORE ITS PUBLICATION , IT MAY EXCEPTIONALLY BE OTHERWISE WHERE THE PURPOSE TO BE ACHIEVED SO DEMANDS AND WHERE THE LEGITIMATE EXPECTATIONS OF THOSE CONCERNED ARE DULY RESPECTED .

2 . THE STATEMENT OF THE REASONS ON WHICH A MEASURE IS BASED , WHICH IS REQUIRED BY ARTICLE 190 OF THE TREATY , MUST BE ADAPTED TO THE NATURE OF THE MEASURE IN QUESTION . IT MUST ENABLE THE REASONING OF THE COMMUNITY INSTITUTION RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MEASURE TO EMERGE CLEARLY AND UNEQUIVOCALLY SO AS TO ENABLE THOSE CONCERNED TO RECOGNIZE THE REASONS FOR THE MEASURE ADOPTED AND THE COURT TO EXERCISE ITS POWER OF REVIEW . THAT REQUIREMENT IS SATISFIED BY THE PREAMBLE TO A REGULATION WHICH , LACONIC AS IT MAY BE , SETS FORTH IN ESSENCE THE OBJECTIVE PURSUED BY THE INSTITUTION RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CONTESTED MEASURE .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

REFERENCE FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING - JURISDICTION OF THE COURT - LIMITS - QUESTION PURPOSELESS - NO NEED TO GIVE A RULING

( EEC TREATY , ART . 177 )

Summary

IN PROCEEDINGS UNDER ARTICLE 177 OF THE EEC TREATY THE COURT CANNOT GIVE A RULING ON A QUESTION WHEN , IN THE LIGHT OF THE FACTUAL AND LEGAL CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE MAIN PROCEEDINGS , IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO GLEAN FROM THAT QUESTION THE FACTORS NECESSARY FOR AN INTERPRETATION OF COMMUNITY LAW WHICH THE NATIONAL COURT MIGHT USEFULLY APPLY IN ORDER TO RESOLVE , IN ACCORDANCE WITH THAT LAW , THE DISPUTE BEFORE IT .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . FISHERIES - CONSERVATION OF THE RESOURCES OF THE SEA - COMMUNITY RULES APPLICABLE TO SPANISH VESSELS LAID DOWN BEFORE THE ENTRY INTO FORCE OF THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EEC AND SPAIN - SUBSTITUTION FOR PRIOR INTERNATIONAL COMMITMENTS BETWEEN CERTAIN MEMBER STATES AND SPAIN - EFFECTS - ENFORCEABILITY AGAINST SPANISH FISHERMEN OF THE INTERIM COMMUNITY REGIME

( COUNCIL REGULATIONS NOS 1719/80 , 3305/80 AND 554/81 ; AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EEC AND SPAIN OF 15 APRIL 1980 )

2 . FISHERIES - CONSERVATION OF THE RESOURCES OF THE SEA - COMMUNITY RULES APPLICABLE TO SPANISH VESSELS LAID DOWN BEFORE THE ENTRY INTO FORCE OF THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EEC AND SPAIN - SUBSTITUTION FOR PRIOR INTERNATIONAL COMMITMENTS BETWEEN CERTAIN MEMBER STATES AND SPAIN - ABSENCE OF COMMUNITY REGULATIONS CONCERNING LICENCES DURING THE TIME BETWEEN THE PERIODS COVERED BY REGULATIONS NOS 3305/80 AND 554/81 - EFFECT ON CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS INSTITUTED AGAINST FISHERMEN NOT HOLDING A LICENCE - APPRAISAL - JURISDICTION OF THE NATIONAL COURTS

( EEC TREATY , ART . 177 ; COUNCIL REGULATIONS NOS 3305/80 AND 554/81 )

Summary

1 . THE INTERIM FISHERIES REGIME ESTABLISHED BY THE COMMUNITY PENDING THE ENTRY INTO FORCE OF THE AGREEMENT ON FISHERIES BETWEEN THE EEC AND SPAIN FALLS WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE RELATIONS ESTABLISHED BETWEEN THE COMMUNITY AND SPAIN IN ORDER TO RESOLVE THE PROBLEMS INHERENT IN THE CONSERVATION MEASURES AND THE EXTENSION OF FISHERY ZONES AND IN ORDER TO ENSURE RECIPROCAL ACCESS BY FISHERMEN TO THE WATERS SUBJECT TO SUCH MEASURES . THOSE RELATIONS , WHICH WERE CONFIRMED BY THE AGREEMENT ON FISHERIES OF 1980 , REPLACED THE PRIOR INTERNATIONAL OBLIGATIONS EXISTING BETWEEN CERTAIN MEMBER STATES AND SPAIN IN ORDER TO DEAL WITH THE INCREASINGLY URGENT NEED TO CONSERVE THE LIVING RESOURCES OF THE SEA AND TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE GENERAL EVOLUTION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW IN THE FIELD OF SEA FISHING . ACCORDINGLY , SPANISH FISHERMEN MAY NOT RELY ON PRIOR INTERNATIONAL COMMITMENTS AS BETWEEN FRANCE AND SPAIN IN ORDER TO PREVENT THE APPLICATION OF THE INTERIM REGULATIONS ADOPTED BY THE COMMUNITY IN THE EVENT OF ANY INCOMPATIBILITY BETWEEN THE TWO CATEGORIES OF PROVISIONS .

2 . WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST SPANISH FISHERMEN CHARGED WITH FISHING IN FRENCH TERRITORIAL WATERS WITHOUT BEING IN POSSESSION OF A FISHING LICENCE IT IS FOR THE NATIONAL COURT TO CONSIDER THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE ABSENCE OF ANY COMMUNITY REGULATIONS CONCERNING FISHING LICENCES APPLICABLE TO SPANISH FISHING VESSELS DURING THE TIME BETWEEN THE PERIODS WHEN REGULATIONS NOS 3305/80 AND 554/81 WERE IN FORCE .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

COMMON CUSTOMS TARIFF - TARIFF HEADINGS - ' ' POLYMERS ' ' AND ' ' COPOLYMERS ' ' WITHIN THE MEANING OF SUBHEADINGS 39.02 C . XII AND 39.07 B.V . ( D ) - CONCEPT - ' ' CORIAN ' ' - INCLUSION

Summary

THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMMON CUSTOMS TARIFF ARE TO BE CONSTRUED AS MEANING THAT THE PRODUCT KNOW AS CORIAN , WHICH CONSISTS BY WEIGHT OF APPROXIMATELY 66 % ALUMINIUM HYDROXIDE , APPROXIMATELY 33 % POLYMETHYL METHACRYLATE AND A VERY SMALL PERCENTAGE OF CATALYTIC AND OTHER CURING AGENTS , FALLS UNDER SUBHEADING 39.02 C XII OF THE COMMON CUSTOMS TARIFF WHEN IT IS IMPORTED IN THE FORM OF SLABS , AND UNDER SUBHEADING 39.07 B V ( D ) WHEN IT IS IMPORTED IN THE FORM OF ARTICLES MADE OF THAT MATERIAL , AND IS NOT CLASSIFIABLE UNDER ANY OTHER HEADING OF THE COMMON CUSTOMS TARIFF .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . OFFICIALS - POST - REQUIREMENT THAT DUTIES CORRESPOND TO GRADE AND POST - ALLOTMENT OF TRANSLATION AND REVISION WORK TO OFFICIALS WHO ARE MEMBERS OF THE LANGUAGE STAFF - DISCRETION ON THE PART OF THE ADMINISTRATION

( STAFF REGULATIONS , ARTS 5 AND 7 ( 1 ))

2 . OFFICIALS - APPOINTMENT - CONSIDERATION OF COMPARATIVE MERITS - CONDITIONS FOR LAWFULNESS - TAKING ACCOUNT OF PERIODIC REPORTS - CONDITIONS

( STAFF REGULATIONS , ARTS 43 AND 45 ( 1 ))

3 . PROCEDURE - COSTS - COSTS CAUSED UNREASONABLY OR VEXATIOUSLY

( RULES OF PROCEDURE , SECOND SUBPARAGRAPH OF ART . 69 ( 3 ))

Summary

1 . THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY HAS , IN THE INTERESTS OF THE SERVICE , A WIDE DISCRETION IN ALLOTTING TO OFFICIALS WHO ARE MEMBERS OF THE LANGUAGE STAFF TRANSLATION AND REVISION WORK WHICH MUST BE DONE AT ANY PARTICULAR TIME . SUCH DISCRETION IS INDISPENSABLE IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE EFFECTIVE ORGANIZATION OF WORK AND TO ADAPT THE ORGANIZATION TO VARYING NEEDS .

2 . THE PERIODIC REPORT CONSTITUTES AN INDISPENSABLE CRITERION OF ASSESSMENT EACH TIME THE OFFICIAL ' S CAREER IS TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION BY THE ADMINISTRATION .

AN APPOINTMENT PROCEDURE IS TAINTED WITH IRREGULARITY IN SO FAR AS THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO CONSIDER THE COMPARATIVE MERITS OF THE CANDIDATES BECAUSE THERE HAS BEEN A SUBSTANTIAL DELAY ON THE PART OF THE ADMINISTRATION IN DRAWING UP THE PERIODIC REPORTS OF ONE OR MORE OF THEM .

IT IS NOT , HOWEVER , NECESSARY THAT WHEN THE APPOINTMENT DECISION IS MADE ALL APPLICANTS SHOULD BE AT EXACTLY THE SAME STAGE REGARDING THE STATE OF THEIR PERIODIC REPORTS OR THAT THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY SHOULD POSTPONE ITS DECISION IF THE MOST RECENT REPORT ON ONE OR OTHER OF THE APPLICANTS IS NOT YET FINAL BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN REFERRED TO THE APPEAL ASSESSOR OR TO THE JOINT COMMITTEE . FURTHERMORE , AT LEAST WHERE A LARGE NUMBER OF APPOINTMENTS ARE CHALLENGED , THE FACT THAT THE PERSONAL FILE OF ONE APPLICANT IS IRREGULAR AND INCOMPLETE IS NOT A SUFFICIENT GROUND FOR THE ANNULMENT OF THE APPOINTMENTS UNLESS IT IS ESTABLISHED THAT THIS WAS CAPABLE OF HAVING A DECISIVE EFFECT ON THE APPOINTMENT PROCEDURE .

3 . WHEN PROCEEDINGS ARE INDUCED BY THE CONDUCT OF THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY AND BY THE LACK OF REGARD IT HAS SHOWN THE APPLICANT , THE LATTER SHOULD NOT BE PENALIZED , EVEN IF HE HAS FAILED IN THE MAJORITY OF HIS SUBMISSIONS , FOR REQUESTING THE COURT TO REVIEW THE EFFECT THAT THAT CONDUCT MIGHT HAVE UPON THE LAWFULNESS OF THE MEASURES IN QUESTION . IT IS THEREFORE APPROPRIATE IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES TO APPLY THE SECOND PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 69 ( 3 ) OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE , ACCORDING TO WHICH THE COURT MAY ORDER EVEN A SUCCESSFUL PARTY TO PAY THE COSTS IN PROCEEDINGS WHICH HAVE ARISEN AS A RESULT OF THE CONDUCT OF THAT PARTY .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

AGRICULTURE - COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKETS - MILK AND MILK PRODUCTS - SPECIAL AID FOR THE DENATURING OF SKIMMED-MILK POWDER INTENDED FOR FEED FOR ANIMALS OTHER THAN YOUNG CALVES - DENATURING NOT CARRIED OUT IN CONFORMITY WITH COMMUNITY PROVISIONS - LOSS OF THE BENEFIT OF THE AID IN ITS ENTIRETY - PRINCIPLE OF PROPORTIONALITY - BREACH - NONE

( COMMISSION REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 1844/77 )

Summary

IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THE SPECIAL AID GRANTED FOR THE DENATURING OF SKIMMED-MILK POWDER INTENDED FOR FEED FOR ANIMALS OTHER THAN YOUNG CALVES IS CONSIDERABLY HIGHER THAN THE AMOUNT GRANTED IN THE CASE OF FEED FOR CALVES , AND IN VIEW OF THE RISK THAT IT MIGHT BE USED FOR OTHER , UNAUTHORIZED PURPOSES WHERE THE DENATURING DEPARTS EVEN TO A SLIGHT EXTENT FROM THE METHOD REFERRED TO IN REGULATION NO 1844/77 , THE COMMISSION WAS LEGALLY JUSTIFIED IN ADOPTING PROVISIONS WHICH ENTAIL WITHOLDING OF THE AID AND LOSS OF THE SECURITY FOR FAILURE TO FULFIL THE OBLIGATION TO CARRY OUT DENATURING LAID DOWN BY THE REGULATION AND WAS NOT OBLIGED TO VARY THE SEVERITY OF THE MEASURE IN QUESTION ACCORDING TO THE GRAVITY OF THE FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE OBLIGATION . SUCH A MEASURE CANNOT BE REGARDED AS OUT OF PROPORTION TO THE OBJECTIVE PURSUED AND THE FACT THAT THE DENATURING DEPARTS EVEN TO A SLIGHT EXTENT FROM THE ABOVE-MENTIONED METHOD IS CAPABLE OF DEPRIVING THE TRADER OF THE ENTIRE BENEFIT OF THE SPECIAL AID .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

NON-CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY - DAMAGE - COMPENSATION - CLAIM FOR INTEREST - PERMISSIBILITY

( EEC TREATY , SECOND PARA . OF ART . 215 )

Summary

A CLAIM FOR INTEREST SUBMITTED IN RELATION TO THE NON-CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY OF THE COMMUNITY UNDER THE SECOND PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 215 OF THE TREATY MUST BE CONSIDERED IN THE LIGHT OF THE PRINCIPLES COMMON TO THE LEGAL SYSTEMS OF THE MEMBER STATES TO WHICH THAT PROVISION REFERS . SUCH A CLAIM IS THEREFORE , AS A GENERAL RULE , PERMISSIBLE .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . OFFICIALS - PROMOTION - EXAMINATION OF COMPARATIVE MERITS - CONSULTATION OF CANDIDATES ' PERSONAL FILES - EXPLANATION OF USE MADE OF INFORMATION AVAILABLE - DUTY OF THE ADMINISTRATION - NONE

( STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS , ART . 45 )

2 . OFFICIALS - PROMOTION - EXAMINATION OF COMPARATIVE MERITS - CRITERION - QUALIFICATIONS - CONSIDERATION - LIMITS

( STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS , ART . 45 )

Summary

1 . ALTHOUGH THE PERSONAL FILES OF THE OFFICIALS ELIGIBLE FOR PROMOTION MUST BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PROMOTION COMMITTEES AND TO THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY , IT WOULD BE UNREASONABLE TO REQUIRE THE COMMITTEES AND THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY TO EXPLAIN IN EACH CASE THE USE WHICH THEY MADE OF THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO THEM .

2.THE VALUE OF A QUALIFICATION MAY BE OF SIGNIFICANCE WHEN OFFICIALS ARE RECRUITED , ESTABLISHED OR EVEN PLACED IN A DIFFERENT CATEGORY . IN THE CASE OF SUBSEQUENT PROMOTION , HOWEVER , OTHER FACTORS MUST BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT WHEN THE MERITS OF OFFICIALS ELIGIBLE FOR PROMOTION ARE COMPARED , IN PARTICULAR THE GENERAL QUALITY OF THE WORK WHICH THEY HAVE PERFORMED IN CARRYING OUT THEIR DUTIES .

AN OFFICIAL CANNOT , THEREFORE , TAKE ISSUE WITH THE FACT THAT AMONG THE OFFICIALS SELECTED FOR PROMOTION WAS SOMEONE WHOSE QUALIFICATION WAS , IN HIS ESTIMATION , INFERIOR TO HIS OWN .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS - QUANTITATIVE RESTRICTIONS - MEASURES HAVING EQUIVALENT EFFECT - MEDICINAL PREPARATIONS - PLACING ON THE MARKET RESERVED TO UNDERTAKINGS HAVING THEIR HEADQUARTERS IN THE NATIONAL TERRITORY - NOT PERMISSIBLE

( EEC TREATY , ARTS 30 AND 36 )

2 . FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS - DEROGATIONS - PROTECTION OF PUBLIC HEALTH - POWERS OF THE MEMBER STATES - LIMITS

( EEC TREATY , ART . 36 )

Summary

1 . LEGISLATION OF A MEMBER STATE WHICH RESERVES THE PLACING OF MEDICINAL PREPARATIONS ON THE MARKET TO PHARMACEUTICAL UNDERTAKINGS HAVING THEIR HEADQUARTERS IN THE TERRITORY OF THAT MEMBER STATE IS LIKELY TO HINDER TRADE WITHIN THE COMMUNITY AND IN PARTICULAR PARALLEL IMPORTS , AND MUST BE REGARDED AS A MEASURE HAVING AN EFFECT EQUIVALENT TO A QUANTITATIVE RESTRICTION PROHIBITED BY ARTICLE 30 OF THE TREATY AND NOT JUSTIFIED ON THE GROUND OF THE PROTECTION OF PUBLIC HEALTH WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 36 .

2 . IN THE ABSENCE OF ADEQUATE HARMONIZATION AT COMMUNITY LEVEL , EACH MEMBER STATE IS ENTITLED TO TAKE APPROPRIATE MEASURES IN ORDER TO ENSURE THE PROTECTION OF PUBLIC HEALTH IN ITS TERRITORY . HOWEVER , SUCH MEASURES ARE JUSTIFIED ONLY IF IT IS ESTABLISHED THAT THEY ARE NECESSARY IN ORDER TO ATTAIN THE OBJECTIVE OF THE PROTECTION OF PUBLIC HEALTH REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 36 OF THE TREATY AND THAT THAT OBJECTIVE CANNOT BE OBTAINED BY MEANS WHICH ARE LESS RESTRICTIVE OF TRADE WITHIN THE COMMUNITY .