ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 Tax provisions - Harmonisation of laws - Turnover taxes - Common system of value added tax - Tax refunds for taxpayers not established in the country concerned - Obligations of the taxpayer - Submission of original invoices or import documents - Possibility for Member States to allow submission of duplicate invoices or import documents where original lost for reasons beyond the control of the taxpayer - Whether permissible - Conditions

(Council Directive 79/1072, Art. 3(a))

2 Tax provisions - Harmonisation of laws - Turnover taxes - Common system of value added tax - Tax refunds for taxpayers not established in the country concerned - Documents to be produced in order to obtain a refund - Principle of non-discrimination - Obligation of Member States to allow taxpayers, regardless of the place where they are established, to use means of proof which only taxpayers established in the country concerned are permitted to rely on

(EC Treaty, Art. 6; Council Directive 79/1072)

Summary

3 Article 3(a) of the Eighth Directive 79/1072 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes - Arrangements for the refund of value added tax to taxable persons not established in the territory of the country - is to be interpreted as not precluding Member States from providing in their national law that a taxable person who is not established in that Member State may prove his entitlement to a refund by submitting a duplicate invoice or import document where the original has been lost for reasons beyond his control, provided that the transaction which led to the application for a refund occurred and there is no risk of further applications for a refund.

Secondary law must comply with the general principles of law, and in particular the principle of proportionality. Exclusion of the possibility for a Member State to allow an application for a refund in such exceptional circumstances is not necessary to achieve the general aim of the Eighth Directive, which is to prevent fraud or tax evasion.

4 Where a taxable person established in a Member State may prove his entitlement to a refund of value added tax by submitting a duplicate or photocopy of the invoice if the original which he received has been lost for reasons beyond his control, the principle of non-discrimination set out in Article 6 of the Treaty and referred to in the fifth recital in the preamble to the Eighth Directive 79/1072 requires that the same possibility be extended to taxable persons not established in that Member State if the transaction which led to the application for a refund occurred and there is no risk of further applications for a refund.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 Agriculture - Common organisation of the markets - Eggs - Marketing standards - Marking of eggs or packaging - Rules on terms used to indicate the type of farming of laying hens - Scope - Statements concerning the type of feed given to the animals - Not included

(Council Regulation No 1907/90, Art. 10(3); Commission Regulation No 1274/91, Art. 18)

2 Agriculture - Common organisation of the markets - Eggs - Marketing standards - Marking of eggs or packaging - Statements intended to promote sales - Prohibition on misleading the consumer - Assessment by the national court of misleading nature - Criteria

(Council Regulation No 1907/90, Art. 10(2)(e))

Summary

1 Article 10(3) of Regulation No 1907/90 and Article 18 of Regulation No 1274/91, which concern the terms used to indicate the type of farming of laying hens, do not preclude egg packs from bearing a description such as `six-grain - 10 fresh eggs'. Such a statement, which concerns the type of feed given to the animals, does not fall within the scope of those provisions, which are confined to regulating the description of the type of farming which packaging may bear.

2 In order to determine whether a statement or description designed to promote sales of eggs is liable to mislead the purchaser, in breach of Article 10(2)(e) of Regulation No 1907/90 on certain marketing standards for eggs, the national court must take into account the presumed expectations which it evokes in an average consumer who is reasonably well informed and reasonably observant and circumspect. However, Community law does not preclude the possibility that, where the national court has particular difficulty in assessing the misleading nature of the statement or description in question, it may have recourse, under the conditions laid down by its own national law, to a consumer research poll or an expert's report as guidance for its judgment.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 Approximation of laws - Procedures for the award of public works contracts - Directives 71/305 and 93/37 - Scope - Contracting authority - State - Definition - Bodies exercising legislative, executive and judicial powers - Bodies of the federal authorities of a federal State - Included

(Council Directive 71/305, Art. 1(b), as amended by Directives 89/440, Art. 1(1), and 93/37, Art. 1(b))

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

(EC Treaty, Art. 169)

Summary

1 The term `the State' referred to in the definition of contracting authority in Article 1(b) of Directive 71/305, as amended by Article 1(1) of Directive 89/440, and in Article 1(b) of Directive 93/37 necessarily encompasses all the bodies which exercise legislative, executive and judicial powers. The same is true of the bodies which, in a federal State, exercise those powers at federal level.

2 A Member State cannot rely on provisions, practices or circumstances existing in its internal legal order in order to justify its failure to comply with the obligations and time-limits laid down by a directive.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Procedure - Proceedings brought before the Court on the basis of an arbitration clause - Jurisdiction of the Court - Scope and limits

(EC Treaty, Art. 181)

Summary

The Court's jurisdiction under an arbitration clause derogates from the ordinary rules of law and must therefore be interpreted restrictively. The Court may hear and determine only claims arising from the contract concluded with the Community which contains the arbitration clause, or claims that are directly connected with the obligations arising from that contract.

That condition is not satisfied, in the case of contracts in the conclusion of which the Community is represented by the Commission and which concern the performance of a particular project, by a plea in law which alleges defamatory conduct by a Commission official - to the detriment of the other party to the contract - in the course of meetings between the Commission and third parties, which are unrelated to the contract at issue but concern rather a request for the funding of a separate project. Such a plea must accordingly be regarded as inadmissible.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Common Customs Tariff - Community tariff quotas - Import quotas for rice introduced to compensate for the increase in certain rates following the accession of new Member States - Regulation No 1522/96 - Legality in the light of the relevant GATT rules and the principles of proportionality and the obligation to state reasons - Misuse of powers - None

(General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, Art. XXIV(6); Understanding on the Interpretation of Article XXIV, para. 5 et seq.; Council Regulation No 1522/96, Arts 3, 4 and 9)

Summary

Under Regulation No 1522/96 on certain tariff quotas for imports of rice and broken rice, which was adopted pursuant to agreements concluded with Australia and Thailand following negotiations conducted pursuant to Article XXIV(6) of GATT, Articles 3 and 4 provide that import licences are to be issued solely to traders holding an export licence obtained in the country of origin, whilst Article 9 sets out the criteria for intervention where there is a risk to the Community rice sector and fixes in particular a quantitative threshold for certain products. Since, by adopting those arrangements, the Community sought to implement a particular obligation entered into within the framework of GATT, namely to agree with the third countries concerned upon mutually satisfactory compensatory adjustments to take account of the increase in certain customs duty rates ensuing from the application of the Common Customs Tariff by the new Member States, that obligation must be regarded as fulfilled and cannot therefore serve as a basis for examining the legality of the Regulation if the Community and the third countries have reached the agreements referred to above.

Nor, moreover, does it appear that the management system provided for in Articles 3 and 4 or the intervention system provided for in Article 9 of the Regulation are contrary to the principle of proportionality, or that the intervention system is vitiated by defective reasoning or constitutes misuse of powers.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

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

(EC Treaty, Art. 169)

Summary

A Member State cannot rely on provisions, practices or situations arising in its own internal legal order to justify its failure to respect the obligations and time-limits laid down by a directive.
Keywords



Keywords

Member States - Obligations - Implementation of directives - Failure to fulfil obligations not contested

(EC Treaty, Art 169)
Keywords



Keywords

Acts of the institutions - Directives - Implementation by the Member States - Need for full transposition
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Approximation of laws - Public procurement procedures in the water, energy, transport and telecommunications sectors - Directive 92/13 - Provision requiring Member States to establish review bodies - Non-transposition - Consequences - Power for the review bodies having competence in relation to public works contracts and public supply contracts also to hear applications for review in the water, energy, transport and telecommunications sectors - Not a necessary consequence - Obligation on the part of national courts to determine whether it is possible to bring review proceedings under domestic law

(Council Directive 92/13)

Summary

Article 1(1) to (3), Article 2(1), and (7) to (9) and the other provisions of Council Directive 92/13 coordinating the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the application of Community rules on the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and telecommunications sectors cannot be interpreted as meaning that, where the directive has not been transposed by the end of the period prescribed for that purpose, the review bodies of the Member States having competence in relation to procedures for the award of public works contracts and public supply contracts may also hear applications for review relating to procedures for the award of public contracts in the water, energy, transport and telecommunications sectors. However, in order to observe the requirement that domestic law be interpreted in conformity with Directive 92//13 and the requirement that the rights of individuals be protected effectively, the national court must determine whether the relevant provisions of its domestic law allow recognition of a right for individuals to bring review proceedings in relation to awards of public contracts in the water, energy, transport and telecommunications sectors. The national court must, in particular, verify whether that right to bring review proceedings can be exercised before the same bodies as those established to hear applications for review concerning the award of public supply contracts and public works contracts.

If the provisions of domestic law are incapable of being interpreted in conformity with Directive 92/13, the persons concerned may, in accordance with the appropriate procedures under domestic law, claim compensation for damage suffered as a result of the failure to transpose the directive within the prescribed time-limit.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Tax provisions - Harmonisation of laws - Turnover taxes - Common system of value added tax - Exemptions provided for in the Sixth Directive - Non-profit-making organisations with aims of a trade-union nature - Definition

(Council Directive 77/388, Art. 13A(1)(l))

Summary

For the purposes of Article 13A(1)(l) of the Sixth Directive 77/388 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes, an organisation with aims of a trade-union nature means an organisation whose main aim is to defend the collective interests of its members - whether they are workers, employers, independent professionals or traders carrying on a particular economic activity - and to represent them vis-à-vis the appropriate third parties, including the public authorities.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Agriculture - Common organisation of the markets - Poultrymeat - Export refunds - Classification in the ad hoc nomenclature of products consisting of cut pieces

(Commission Regulation No 3846/87)

Summary

Poultry cuts made up of two hind quarters of a fowl still attached to one another by the skin of the back constitute `quarters' (code 0207 41 11 000) within the meaning of the nomenclature of agricultural products for export refunds established by Regulation No 3846/87.

First, because of their composition, the products in question correspond exactly to the definition of hind quarters in accordance with the general rules for the interpretation of the combined nomenclature, with one difference, namely that, because of the way in which they are cut, the two quarters are not wholly separated; secondly, that fact does not affect the product's essential characteristic - within the meaning of general rule 2(a) for the interpretation of the combined nomenclature - of being constituted of two hind quarters of chicken.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Agriculture - Common organisation of the markets - Wine - Ban on new planting of vines - Varieties intended for the production of table grapes - Included as a result of Regulation No 1325/90 until 31 August 1996

(Council Regulation No 822/87, Art. 6(1), as amended by Regulation No 1325/90)

Summary

The ban in Article 6(1) of Regulation No 822/87 on the common organisation of the market in wine, as amended by Regulation No 1325/90, on any new planting of vines was extended, under the rules laid down by the second regulation and for a period ending on 31 August 1996, to vines intended for the production of table grapes. During the years 1991 and 1992, that ban therefore applied to varieties intended for the production of such grapes.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

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

(EC Treaty, Art. 169)

2 Approximation of laws - Batteries and accumulators containing certain dangerous substances - Directive 91/157 - Obligation on Member States to draw up specific programmes to achieve certain objectives - Scope

(Council Directive 91/157, Art. 6)

Summary

1 A Member State may not plead provisions, practices or circumstances existing in its internal legal system in order to justify a failure to comply with the obligations and time-limits laid down in a directive.

2 Article 6 of Directive 91/157 on batteries and accumulators containing certain dangerous substances requires Member States, in order to achieve its objectives, to draw up programmes and then to review them and update them regularly.

It is important that the Member States under such an obligation notify the Commission of the measures which they intend to adopt or carry out in the sectors concerned. It is only in the light of such specific figures and timetables that the Commission can then assess whether the measures envisaged in pursuance of the Directive actually contribute to implementing the programmes designed to attain its objectives.

It follows from the wording of Article 6 and from the general scheme of the Directive that the various problems posed by specific waste such as batteries and accumulators are to be resolved in accordance with a precise timetable. Even if certain results relating to the objectives of the Directive have been achieved before the deadline prescribed for the implementation of programmes, Member States are not thereby excused from drawing up the programmes required.

Positive measures in relation to the objectives referred to in the first paragraph of Article 6, which constitute no more than a series of legislative provisions or ad hoc measures and which do not possess the characteristics of an organised and coordinated system of objectives, cannot be regarded as programmes within the meaning of that provision.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Own resources of the European Communities - Repayment or remission of import or export duties - Existence of a special situation, within the meaning of Article 905 of Regulation No 2454/93, making it obligatory for the national customs authorities to forward the file to the Commission - Criteria

(Council Regulation No 2913/92, Art. 239; Commission Regulation No 2454/93, Arts 900(1)(a) and 905(1))

Summary

Factors `which might constitute a special situation resulting from circumstances in which no deception or obvious negligence may be attributed to the person concerned', within the meaning of Article 905(1) of Regulation No 2454/93 laying down provisions for the implementation of Regulation No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code exist, necessitating examination of the file by the Commission, where, having regard to the objective of fairness underlying Article 239 of Regulation No 2913/92, factors liable to place the applicant in an exceptional situation as compared with other operators engaged in the same business are found to exist and the conditions laid down in Article 900(1)(a) of Regulation No 2454/93, for remission of customs duties in favour of an applicant, are not fulfilled.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Free movement of goods - Quantitative restrictions - Measures having equivalent effect - Restrictions on the transport of live animals for slaughter - Obstacle to international transport - Not permissible - Justification put forward - Protection of health of animals - No justification

(EC Treaty, Arts 30, 34 and 36 (now, after amendment, Arts 28 to 30 EC))

Summary

On a correct interpretation of Articles 30, 34 and 36 of the Treaty (now, after amendment, Articles 28 to 30 EC), a Member State is prevented from restricting the transport by road of animals for slaughter by requiring such transport to be carried out only as far as the nearest suitable abattoir within national territory and under conditions such that, upon observance of the motor vehicle and traffic regulations, a total journey time of six hours and a distance of 130 kilometres are not exceeded, account being taken of only half of the kilometres actually travelled on a motorway.

Such a measure constitutes an obstacle to international transport as regards both journeys to or from national territory and transit through it and is not justified on grounds of the protection of the health and life of animals, given that measures appropriate to that objective and less restrictive of the free movement of goods are conceivable.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 Freedom to provide services - Restrictions - Quota on moorings reserved for users resident in another Member State - Not permissible - Whether justifiable - No justification

(EC Treaty, Art. 59)

2 Community law - Direct effect - Conflict between Community law and a provision of national law - Obligation not to apply the national law - Types of national authority concerned - Types of measure covered - Administrative decision finalised in a Member State before its accession to the Community and entailing a prohibition incompatible with Community law - Penalty imposed after accession - Not permissible

(EC Treaty, Art. 59)

Summary

1 Article 59 of the EC Treaty must be interpreted as precluding a Member State from prohibiting the manager of a boat harbour, on pain of prosecution, from renting moorings in excess of a specified quota to boat-owners who are resident in other Member States.

A restriction of that kind on moorings infringes the prohibition under the first paragraph of Article 59 of the Treaty of all discrimination, even indirect, with regard to providers of services. It cannot be justified by a need to reserve access to the moorings for local boat-owners because of the risk of such moorings being monopolised by persons resident in other Member States and willing to pay higher rental charges, since economic reasons of that nature cannot constitute grounds of public policy, public security or public health capable of rendering discriminatory national legislation compatible with Community law.

2 Since the provisions of the EC Treaty are directly applicable in the legal systems of all Member States and Community law takes precedence over national law, those provisions create rights for the persons concerned which the national authorities must observe and safeguard, and any conflicting provision of national law therefore ceases to be applicable.

The obligation not to apply any conflicting provision of national law is incumbent not only on the national courts but also on all administrative bodies, including decentralised authorities. Moreover, provisions of national law which conflict with such a provision of Community law may be legislative or administrative, the latter category comprising not only general abstract rules but also specific individual administrative decisions.

Consequently, in so far as Article 59 of the Treaty becomes a direct source of law in new Member States upon their accession, a prohibition which is contrary to the freedom to provide services, laid down before the accession of a Member State to the European Union not by a general abstract rule but by a specific individual administrative decision that has become final, must be disregarded when assessing the validity of a fine imposed for failure to comply with that prohibition after the date on which the act of accession entered into force.