ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . TRANSPORT - COMMON POLICY - OBJECTIVES - MEANS OF ACHIEVING - POSSIBLE RESTRICTIONS ON THE PRINCIPLE OF FREE COMPETITION

( EEC TREATY , ARTS . 3 ( E ) AND 75 )

2 . TRANSPORT - ROAD TRANSPORT - TRANSPORT RATES - BRACKET TARIFFS - COMPULSORY NATURE - RESTRICTION ON THE PRINCIPLE OF FREE COMPETITION - APPLICATION OF PENALTIES PRESCRIBED BY MEMBER STATES

( COUNCIL REGULATIONS NOS 1174/68 AND 2831/77 )

Summary

1 . ALTHOUGH APPLICATION OF ARTICLES 3 ( E ) AND 75 IS DESIGNED TO LIBERALIZE TRADE AND TO ESTABLISH A COMPETITIVE ECONOMY WITHIN THE COMMUNITY , BOTH THE FOURTH PARAGRAPH OF THE PREAMBLE TO THE TREATY AND THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE OF A COMMON TRANSPORT POLICY REQUIRE THAT THE COMMUNITY ALSO GUARANTEE BALANCED TRADE AND FAIR COMPETITION , AND TO ACHIEVE THOSE AIMS DUTIES AND RESTRICTIONS MAY BE IMPOSED ON TRANSPORT UNDERTAKINGS IN THE COMMUNITY .

2 . THE GENERAL CONTEXT OF REGULATIONS NOS 1174/68 AND 2831/77 MAKES IT CLEAR THAT MEMBER STATES NOT ONLY HAVE THE RIGHT BUT ARE UNDER AN OBLIGATION TO PROVIDE FOR APPROPRIATE PENALTIES DESIGNED TO ENSURE THAT THEIR CARRIERS OBSERVE THE TARIFF BRACKETS FIXED IN PURSUANCE OF THOSE REGULATIONS . THE APPLICABILITY OF SUCH PENALTIES CANNOT THEREFORE BE CONTESTED ON THE BASIS OF A PRINCIPLE OF FREE COMPETITION WHICH APPLIES IN COMMUNITY LAW ONLY WITHIN THE COMPULSORY LIMITS ESTABLISHED BY THE APPLICATION OF THE SYSTEM OF BRACKET TARIFFS PROVIDED FOR BY THOSE REGULATIONS .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

FREE MOVEMENT OF PERSONS - WORKERS - DEROGATIONS - RESTRICTIVE INTERPRETATION - ACT OF ACCESSION OF THE HELLENIC REPUBLIC - TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS - WORK PERMIT - FIRST GRANT TO A GREEK NATIONAL - CONDITIONS - STRENGTHENING OF NATIONAL RESTRICTIONS AFTER THE ENTRY INTO FORCE OF THE ACT OF ACCESSION - PROHIBITED

( EEC TREATY , ART . 48 ; ACT OF ACCESSION , ARTS 44 AND 45 ( 1 ))

Summary

THE TRANSITIONAL PROVISION CONTAINED IN THE SECOND SUBPARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 45 ( 1 ) OF THE ACT CONCERNING THE CONDITIONS OF ACCESSION OF THE HELLENIC REPUBLIC AND THE ADJUSTMENTS TO THE TREATIES CONSTITUTES A DEROGATION FROM THE PRINCIPLE OF THE FREE MOVEMENT OF WORKERS LAID DOWN IN ARTICLE 48 OF THE EEC TREATY . AS SUCH IT MUST BE INTERPRETED RESTRICTIVELY , AS IS APPARENT FROM ARTICLE 44 OF THE ACT OF ACCESSION WHICH LAYS DOWN THE PRINCIPLE THAT ARTICLE 48 OF THE EEC TREATY IS IMMEDIATELY APPLICABLE , SUBJECT TO THE TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS CONTAINED INTER ALIA IN ARTICLE 45 OF THE ACT .

FROM THAT IT FOLLOWS THAT ARTICLE 45 ( 1 ) OF THE ACT OF ACCESSION MUST BE INTERPRETED AS NOT PERMITTING NATIONAL PROVISIONS CONCERNING THE FIRST GRANT OF A WORK PERMIT TO A GREEK NATIONAL TO BE MADE MORE RESTRICTIVE AFTER THE ENTRY INTO FORCE OF THE ACT OF ACCESSION .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS - JURISDICTION OF THE COURT - LIMITS - JURISDICTION OF NATIONAL COURT - ASSESSMENT OF THE RELEVANCE OF THE QUESTIONS RAISED AND THE NECESSITY FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING

( EEC TREATY , ART . 177 )

2 . SOCIAL SECURITY FOR MIGRANT WORKERS - COMMUNITY RULES - PURPOSE - INVALIDITY INSURANCE - DECISION OF A NATIONAL INSTITUTION CONCERNING THE DEGREE OF INVALIDITY OF A WORKER - CONCEPT - DECISION RECOGNIZING INVALIDITY - INCLUSION - LATER DECISION ESTABLISHING THAT THERE IS NO INVALIDITY - EXCLUSION

( EEC TREATY , ARTS 48 AND 51 ; REGULATION NO 1408/71 OF THE COUNCIL , ART . 40 ( 4 ) AND REGULATION NO 574/72 OF THE COUNCIL )

Summary

1 . THE COURT MAY NOT IN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE PROCEDURE FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING GIVE A RULING ON THE APPLICATION OF PROVISIONS OF NATIONAL LAW OR ON THE RELEVANCE OF THE REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING . AS REGARDS THE DIVISION OF JURISDICTION BETWEEN NATIONAL COURTS AND THE COURT OF JUSTICE UNDER ARTICLE 177 OF THE TREATY , IT IS FOR THE NATIONAL COURT TO APPRECIATE , WITH FULL KNOWLEDGE OF THE MATTER BEFORE IT , THE RELEVANCE OF QUESTIONS OF LAW RAISED BY THE DISPUTE BEFORE IT AND THE NECESSITY FOR A PRE LIMINARY RULING SO AS TO ENABLE IT TO GIVE JUDGMENT .

2 . IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLES 48 AND 51 OF THE TREATY , REGULATIONS NOS 1408/71 AND 574/72 OF THE COUNCIL ARE IN PARTICULAR INTENDED TO PREVENT THE MIGRANT WORKER , AS A RESULT OF HIS MIGRATION FROM ONE MEMBER STATE TO ANOTHER , FROM LOSING THE BENEFIT OF HIS PERIODS OF EMPLOYMENT AND THUS BEING PLACED AT A DISADVANTAGE IN RELATION TO THE POSITION IN WHICH HE WOULD HAVE BEEN IF HE HAD COMPLETED HIS ENTIRE CAREER IN ONLY ONE MEMBER STATE . FOR THAT PURPOSE THEY INTRODUCED A SYSTEM OF AGGREGATION OF ALL THE PERIODS OF EMPLOYMENT WHICH MAY THUS BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT FOR THE PURPOSE OF ACQUIRING AND RETAINING THE RIGHT TO BENEFITS OF THE SAME KIND IN DIFFERENT MEMBER STATES AND FOR THE PURPOSE OF CALCULATING THE AMOUNT OF SUCH BENEFITS . BUT THE PURPOSE OF THOSE TEXTS IS NOT TO DETERMINE THE CONDITIONS FOR THE WITHDRAWAL OF SUCH BENEFITS AND THEY CANNOT HAVE THAT EFFECT .

ARTICLE 40 ( 4 ) OF REGULATION NO 1408/71 MUST THEREFORE BE INTERPRETED AS MEANING THAT ' ' THE DECISION . . . CONCERNING THE DEGREE OF INVALIDITY ' ' TO WHICH THAT PROVISION REFERS COVERS EXCLUSIVELY A DECISION RECOGNIZING INVALIDITY AND NOT A DECISION ESTABLISHING THAT THERE IS NO INVALIDITY AT A LATER DATE .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

TAX PROVISIONS - HARMONIZATION OF LAWS - TAXES OTHER THAN TURNOVER TAXES WHICH AFFECT THE CONSUMPTION OF MANUFACTURED TOBACCO - DIRECTIVE NO 72/464 - FIXING OF THE RETAIL SELLING PRICE OF MANUFACTURED TOBACCO BY NATIONAL AUTHORITIES WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE NATIONAL MONOPOLY OF RETAIL SALES - ADVERSE EFFECT UPON THE COMPETITIVE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN IMPORTED TOBACCO AND TOBACCO DISTRIBUTED BY THE NATIONAL MONOPOLY - NOT PERMISSIBLE

( COUNCIL DIRECTIVE NO 72/464 , ART . 5 ( 1 ))

FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS - QUANTITATIVE RESTRICTIONS - MEASURES HAVING EQUIVALENT EFFECT - PRICE SYSTEMS - FIXING OF THE RETAIL SELLING PRICE OF MANUFACTURED TOBACCO BY NATIONAL AUTHORITIES WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE NATIONAL MONOPOLY OF RETAIL SALES - RESTRICTION OF THE FREEDOM TO IMPORT TOBACCO FROM OTHER MEMBER STATES - NOT PERMISSIBLE

( EEC TREATY , ART . 30 )

NATIONAL MONOPOLIES OF A COMMERCIAL CHARACTER - DUTY TO ADJUST - SCOPE - FIXING OF THE RETAIL SELLING PRICE OF MANUFACTURED TOBACCO BY NATIONAL AUTHORITIES WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE NATIONAL MONOPOLY OF RETAIL SALES - ADVERSE EFFECT UPON THE MARKETING OF TOBACCO IMPORTED FROM OTHER MEMBER STATES - NOT PERMISSIBLE

( EEC TREATY , ART . 37 )

Summary

ALTHOUGH IT REMAINS LAWFUL FOR A MEMBER STATE TO LIMIT THE EFFECT OF THE PRINCIPLE OF THE FREE DETERMINATION OF THE RETAIL SELLING PRICES OF MANUFACTURED TOBACCO BY THE MANUFACTURER OR IMPORTER , ENSHRINED IN ARTICLE 5 ( 1 ) OF DIRECTIVE NO 72/464 , BY THE APPLICATION OF ANY MEASURES OF A GENERAL NATURE INTENDED TO ENSURE CONTROL OF THE INCREASE OF PRICES , THE POWER TO FIX TOBACCO PRICES RESERVED TO THE GOVERNMENT OF THAT STATE BY NATIONAL LEGISLATION WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THE PROVISIONS ORGANIZING THE NATIONAL MONOPOLY OF RETAIL SALES OF MANUFACTURED TOBACCO , IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE SCHEME AND OBJECTIVE OF THE DIRECTIVE AND THE INTERPRETATION OF ARTICLE 5 ( 1 ) THEREOF TO THE EXTENT TO WHICH THAT POWER , BY ALTERING THE SELLING PRICE DETERMINED BY THE MANUFACTURER OR IMPORTER , ALLOWS THE COMPETITIVE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN IMPORTED TOBACCO AND TOBACCO MARKETED BY THE NATIONAL MONOPOLY TO BE ADVERSELY AFFECTED .

THE EXERCISE OF THAT POWER IS ALSO CONTRARY TO ARTICLE 30 OF THE TREATY , INASMUCH AS IT ALLOWS THE PUBLIC AUTHORITY , BY A SELECTIVE INTERVENTION AS REGARDS TOBACCO PRICES , TO RESTRICT THE FREEDOM OF IMPORTATION OF TOBACCO ORIGINATING IN OTHER MEMBER STATES . IT IS FURTHERMORE CONTRARY TO ARTICLE 37 INASMUCH AS THE FIXING OF A PRICE OTHER THAN THAT DETERMINED BY THE MANUFACTURER OR IMPORTER CONSTITUTES AN EXTENSION TO IMPORTED TOBACCO OF A PREROGATIVE TYPICAL OF THE NATIONAL MONOPOLY , OF SUCH A NATURE AS ADVERSELY TO AFFECT THE MARKETING OF IMPORTED TOBACCO UNDER NORMAL CONDITIONS OF COMPETITION .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

AGRICULTURE - COMMON ORGANIZATION OF MARKETS - WINE - WINE SEPARATED FROM ITS LEES - CONCEPT

( REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 816/70 OF THE COUNCIL , ANNEX II , PARAGRAPH 8 , REPLACED BY REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 337/79 , ANNEX II , PARAGRAPH 9 )

Summary

A WINE CONTAINING A PERCENTAGE OF LEES WHICH IS MUCH SMALLER THAN THE AVERAGE PERCENTAGE OF LEES OBTAINED WHEN THE WINE IS FIRST RACKED MAY BE REGARDED AS SEPARATED FROM ITS LEES WITHIN THE MEANING OF PARAGRAPH 8 OF ANNEX II TO REGULATION NO 816/70 ON THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKET IN WINE . IT IS FOR THE NATIONAL COURT TO ASSESS THE PERCENTAGE IN QUESTION BY REFERENCE TO THE TRADITIONAL METHODS OF PRODUCTION OF THE WINE CONCERNED .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . CONVENTION ON JURISDICTION AND THE ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENTS - JURISDICTION BY CONSENT - AGREEMENT CONFERRING JURISDICTION - CONTRACT OF INSURANCE - JURISDICTION CLAUSE FOR THE BENEFIT OF THIRD PARTIES WHO HAVE NOT SIGNED THE CLAUSE - RIGHT OF THIRD PARTIES TO AVAIL THEMSELVES OF THE SAID CLAUSE - CONDITIONS

( CONVENTION OF 27 SEPTEMBER 1968 , ART . 17 )

2 . CONVENTION ON JURISDICTION AND THE ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENTS - JURISDICTION BY CONSENT - APPEARANCE OF THE DEFENDANT BEFORE THE COURT SEISED OF THE MATTER - APPEARANCE NOT ONLY TO CONTEST JURISDICTION BUT ALSO TO PLEAD AS TO THE SUBSTANCE - APPEARANCE NOT CONFERRING JURISDICTION

( CONVENTION OF 27 SEPTEMBER 1968 , ART . 18 )

Summary

1 . THE FIRST PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 17 OF THE CONVENTION OF 27 SEPTEMBER 1968 ON JURISDICTION AND THE ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENTS IN CIVIL AND COMMERCIAL MATTERS MUST BE INTERPRETED AS MEANING THAT WHERE A CONTRACT OF INSURANCE , ENTERED INTO BETWEEN AN INSURER AND A POLICY-HOLDER AND STIPULATED BY THE LATTER TO BE FOR HIS BENEFIT AND TO ENURE FOR THE BENEFIT OF THIRD PARTIES TO SUCH A CONTRACT , CONTAINS A CLAUSE CONFERRING JURISDICTION RELATING TO PROCEEDINGS WHICH MIGHT BE BROUGHT BY SUCH THIRD PARTIES , THE LATTER , EVEN IF THEY HAVE NOT EXPRESSLY SIGNED THE SAID CLAUSE , MAY RELY UPON IT PROVIDED THAT , AS BETWEEN THE INSURER AND THE POLICY-HOLDER , THE CONDITION AS TO WRITING LAID DOWN BY ARTICLE 17 OF THE CONVENTION HAS BEEN SATISFIED AND PROVIDED THAT THE CONSENT OF THE INSURER IN THAT RESPECT HAS BEEN CLEARLY MANIFESTED .

2 . ARTICLE 18 OF THE CONVENTION OF 27 SEPTEMBER 1968 ON JURISDICTION AND THE ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENTS IN CIVIL AND COMMERCIAL MATTERS MUST BE INTERPRETED AS MEANING THAT IT ALLOWS A DEFENDANT NOT MERELY TO CONTEST JURISDICTION BUT AT THE SAME TIME TO SUBMIT , IN THE ALTERNATIVE , A DEFENCE ON THE SUBSTANCE OF THE CASE WITHOUT THEREBY LOSING THE RIGHT TO RAISE AN OBJECTION OF WANT OF JURISDICTION .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . SOCIAL POLICY - MALE AND FEMALE WORKERS - ACCESS TO EMPLOYMENT AND WORKING CONDITIONS - EQUALITY OF TREATMENT - DIRECTIVE 76/207 - SCOPE - NON-BINDING COLLECTIVE AGREEMENTS - INCLUSION

( COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 76/207 , ART . 4 ( B ))

2.SOCIAL POLICY - MALE AND FEMALE WORKERS - ACCESS TO EMPLOYMENT AND WORKING CONDITIONS - EQUALITY OF TREATMENT - DIRECTIVE 76/207 - POWER OF MEMBER STATES TO EXCLUDE CERTAIN OCCUPATIONAL ACTIVITIES - EMPLOYMENT IN PRIVATE HOUSEHOLDS AND SMALL UNDERTAKINGS - GENERAL EXCLUSION - NOT PERMISSIBLE

( COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 76/207 , ART . 2 ( 2 ))

3.SOCIAL POLICY - MALE AND FEMALE WORKERS - ACCESS TO EMPLOYMENT AND WORKING CONDITIONS - EQUALITY OF TREATMENT - DIRECTIVE 76/207 - POWER OF MEMBER STATES TO EXCLUDE CERTAIN OCCUPATIONAL ACTIVITIES - OCCUPATION OF MIDWIFE - EXCLUSION PERMISSIBLE

( COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 76/207 , ART . 2 ( 2 ) AND ART . 9 ( 2 ))

Summary

1 . DIRECTIVE 76/207 COVERS ALL COLLECTIVE AGREEMENTS WITHOUT DISTINCTION AS THE NATURE OF THE LEGAL EFFECTS WHICH THEY DO OR DO NOT PRODUCE . THE REASON FOR THAT GENERALITY LIES IN THE FACT THAT , EVEN IF THEY ARE NOT LEGALLY BINDING AS BETWEEN THE PARTIES WHO SIGN THEM OR WITH REGARD TO THE EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIPS WHICH THEY GOVERN , COLLECTIVE AGREEMENTS NEVERTHELESS HAVE IMPORTANT DE FACTO CONSEQUENCES FOR THE EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIPS TO WHICH THEY REFER , PARTICULARLY IN SO FAR AS THEY DETERMINE THE RIGHTS OF THE WORKERS AND , IN THE INTERESTS OF INDUSTRIAL HARMONY , GIVE UNDERTAKINGS SOME INDICATION OF THE CONDITIONS WHICH EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIPS MUST SATISFY OR NEED NOT SATISFY . THE NEED TO ENSURE THAT THE DIRECTIVE IS COMPLETELY EFFECTIVE THEREFORE REQUIRES THAT ANY CLAUSES IN SUCH AGREEMENTS WHICH ARE INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE OBLIGATIONS IMPOSED BY THE DIRECTIVE UPON THE MEMBER STATES MAY BE RENDERED INOPERATIVE , ELIMINATED OR AMENDED BY APPROPRIATE MEANS .

2.WHILST ARTICLE 2 ( 2 ) OF DIRECTIVE 76/207 ALLOWS MEMBER STATES TO EXCLUDE FROM THE FIELD OF APPLICATION OF THE DIRECTIVE THOSE OCCUPATIONAL ACTIVITIES FOR WHICH , BY REASON OF THEIR NATURE OR THE CONTEXT IN WHICH THEY ARE CARRIED OUT , THE SEX OF THE WORKER CONSTITUTES A DETERMINING FACTOR , THE FACT THAT A LAW OF A MEMBER STATE EXCLUDES FROM THE PROHIBITION OF DISCRIMINATION BETWEEN SEXES ALL KINDS OF EMPLOYMENT IN PRIVATE HOUSEHOLDS OR IN SMALL UNDERTAKINGS WITH NOT MORE THAN FIVE EMPLOYEES NEVERTHELESS GOES BEYOND THE OBJECTIVE WHICH MAY BE LAWFULLY PURSUED WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE PROVISION IN QUESTION , BY REASON OF THE GENERALITY OF THE EXCLUSION .

3.AS REGARDS ACCESS TO THE OCCUPATION OF MIDWIFE AND TO THE TRAINING RELATING THERETO , THE MEMBER STATES ARE UNDER AN OBLIGATION TO IMPLEMENT THE PRINCIPLE OF EQUALITY OF TREATMENT LAID DOWN BY DIRECTIVE 76/207 . IT MUST HOWEVER BE RECOGNIZED THAT AT THE PRESENT TIME PERSONAL SENSITIVITIES MAY PLAY AN IMPORTANT ROLE IN RELATIONS BETWEEN MIDWIFE AND PATIENT . IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES , BY FAILING AT THE PRESENT TIME FULLY TO APPLY THE PRINCIPLE LAID DOWN IN THE DIRECTIVE , A MEMBER STATE HAS NOT EXCEEDED THE LIMITS OF THE POWER GRANTED TO THE MEMBER STATES BY ARTICLES 9 ( 2 ) AND 2 ( 2 ) OF THE DIRECTIVE .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . COMMON CUSTOMS TARIFF - COMMUNITY TARIFF QUOTAS - DIVISION INTO NATIONAL QUOTAS - PERMISSIBILITY - CONDITION - FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS NOT HINDERED BY GOODS ADMITTED TO FREE CIRCULATION

( COUNCIL REGULATION NO 1699/82 , ART . 4 ( 2 ))

2.COMMUNITY LAW - INTERPRETATION - METHODS

Summary

1 . WHILE DIVISION OF A GLOBAL TARIFF QUOTA INTO NATIONAL QUOTAS MAY , IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES , BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE TREATY , THAT IS SUBJECT TO THE EXPRESS CONDITION THAT IT DOES NOT HINDER THE FREE MOVEMENT OF THE GOODS FORMING PART OF THE QUOTAS AFTER THEY HAVE BEEN ADMITTED TO FREE CIRCULATION IN THE TERRITORY OF ONE OF THE MEMBER STATES .

ARTICLE 4 ( 2 ) OF REGULATION NO 1699/82 IS IN CONFORMITY WITH THE TREATY SINCE IT DOES NOT REQUIRE THE UNITED KINGDOM TO OTHER MEMBER STATES BUT MERELY TO ENSURE THAT THE QUANTITIES IMPORTED INTO THE UNITED KINGDOM ARE LIMITED TO THOSE CORRESPONDING TO ITS DOMESTIC CONSUMPTION REQUIREMENTS .

2 . WHERE THE WORDING OF SECONDARY COMMUNITY LAW IS OPEN TO MORE THAN ONE INTERPRETATION , PREFERENCE SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE INTERPRETATION WHICH RENDERS THE PROVISION CONSISTENT WITH THE TREATY RATHER THAN THE INTERPRETATION WHICH LEADS TO ITS BEING INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE TREATY .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . COMMUNITY LAW - INTERPRETATION - METHODS

2 . AGRICULTURE - PROCESSED PRODUCTS NOT COVERED BY ANNEX II TO THE TREATY - EXPORT REFUNDS - PURPOSE - EQUAL CONDITIONS OF COMPETITION BETWEEN THE COMMUNITY INDUSTRY AND NON-MEMBER COUNTRIES - OVERLAPPING OF EXPORT REFUNDS WITH OTHER COMMUNITY AID - WHETHER PERMISSIBLE - LIMITS

Summary

1 . IN INTERPRETING A PROVISION OF COMMUNITY LAW IT IS NECESSARY TO CONSIDER NOT ONLY ITS WORDING BUT ALSO THE CONTEXT IN WHICH IT OCCURS AND THE OBJECTS OF THE RULES OF WHICH IT IS PART .

2.THE PURPOSE OF THE REFUNDS ON EXPORTS TO NON-MEMBER COUNTRIES OF GOODS WHICH ARE NOT COVERED BY ANNEX II TO THE TREATY BUT WHICH ARE MADE FROM AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS ORIGINATING IN THE COMMUNITY IS TO OFFSET THE PRODUCTION COSTS OF THE COMMUNITY PROCESSING INDUSTRY IN SO FAR AS THESE ARE CAUSED BY THE FACT THAT AGRICULTURAL PRICES ARE HIGHER IN THE COMMUNITY THAN ON THE WORLD MARKET . THE GRANT OF THE REFUNDS IS THEREFORE MEANT TO ENSURE THAT THE COMMUNITY INDUSTRY AND THE INDUSTRIES OF NON-MEMBER COUNTRIES WHICH OBTAIN SUPPLIES OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS ON THE WORLD MARKET COMPETE UNDER EQUAL CONDITIONS .

IN CREATING SUCH EQUAL CONDITIONS OF COMPETITION IT IS NECESSARY HOWEVER TO AVOID OVER-COMPENSATION DUE TO THE FACT THAT EXPORT REFUNDS MAY BE GRANTED IN ADDITION TO OTHER AID GRANTED TO THE COMMUNITY INDUSTRY , IN PARTICULAR IN THE FORM OF PRODUCTION REFUNDS .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . COMMUNITY LAW - GENERAL PRINCIPLES - FORCE MAJEURE - CONCEPT

2.PROCEDURE - TIME-LIMIT FOR INSTITUTING PROCEEDINGS - BARRING - CASES OF FORCE MAJEURE - CONCEPT - LIMITS

( STATUTE OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE ECSC , ART . 39 , FIRST AND THIRD PARAS )

Summary

1 . APART FROM SPECIAL CASES IN SPECIFIC AREAS IN WHICH IT IS USED , THE CONCEPT OF FORCE MAJEURE REQUIRES BASICALLY UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES MAKING ACCOMPLISHMENT OF THE MATTER IN HAND IMPOSSIBLE . EVEN THOUGH IT DOES NOT PRESUPPOSE ABSOLUTE IMPOSSIBILITY IT NEVERTHELESS REQUIRES ABNORMAL DIFFICULTIES , INDEPENDENT OF THE WILL OF THE PERSON CONCERNED AND APPARENTLY INEVITABLE EVEN IF ALL DUE CARE IS TAKEN .

2 . THE TEMPORARY CLOSURE OF AN UNDERTAKING , WHICH DOES NOT MEAN EITHER ITS WINDING-UP OR THE TERMINATION OF THE RESPONSIBILITY OF ITS MANAGEMENT FOR THE NORMAL CONDUCT OF BUSINESS , CANNOT BE REGARDED AS A CASE OF FORCE MAJEURE WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE THIRD PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 39 OF THE STATUTE OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE ECSC JUSTIFYING DISREGARD OF THE TIME-LIMIT FOR INSTITUTING PROCEEDINGS LAID DOWN IN THE FIRST PARAGRAPH THEREOF .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . MEASURES ADOPTED BY THE INSTITUTIONS - DIRECTIVES - DIRECT EFFECT - CONDITIONS

( COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 65/65 , ART . 21 )

2.APPROXIMATION OF LAWS - PROPRIETARY MEDICINAL PRODUCTS - DIRECTIVE 65/65 - PURPOSE - PROTECTION OF PUBLIC HEALTH - REGULATION OF PRICES - EXCLUDED

( COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 65/65 )

3.APPROXIMATION OF LAWS - PROPRIETARY MEDICINAL PRODUCTS - AUTHORIZATION TO MARKET - REFUSAL , SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION OF AUTHORIZATION - GROUNDS - PROTECTION OF PUBLIC HEALTH

( COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 65/65 , ART . 21 )

Summary

1 . THE PROVISIONS OF DIRECTIVE 65/65 LAYING DOWN THE CONDITIONS FOR THE GRANT , SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION OF AUTHORIZATION TO MARKET , PROPRIETARY MEDICINAL PRODUCTS , IN PARTICULAR ARTICLE 21 , ARE UNCONDITIONAL AND SUFFICIENTLY PRECISE FOR THEM TO BE RELIED UPON BEFORE A NATIONAL COURT BY THE PERSONS CONCERNED IN ORDER TO CHALLENGE ANY NATIONAL PROVISION LAID DOWN BY LAW , REGULATION OR ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION WHICH IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE DIRECTIVE .

2 . DIRECTIVE 65/65 SEEKS TO APPROXIMATE PROVISIONS LAID DOWN BY LAW , REGULATION OR ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION IN MEMBER STATES RELATING TO PROPRIETARY MEDICINAL PRODUCTS ONLY IN SO FAR AS SUCH PROVISIONS ARE CONNECTED WITH PUBLIC HEALTH . IT DOES NOT CONTAIN ANY PROVISION AIMED AT LIMITING THE POWER OF THE MEMBER STATES TO REGULATE THE PRICES OF THOSE PRODUCTS . IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY PROVISION TO THAT EFFECT , SUCH A LIMITATION CANNOT BE INFERRED .

3 . ARTICLE 21 OF DIRECTIVE 65/65 MUST BE INTERPRETED AS MEANING THAT THE AUTHORIZATION TO MARKET A PROPRIETARY MEDICINAL PRODUCT MAY BE REFUSED , SUSPENDED OR REVOKED ONLY ON THE GROUND OF THE PROTECTION OF PUBLIC HEALTH REFERRED TO BY THE DIRECTIVE .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

OFFICIALS - RECRUITMENT - PROBATIONARY PERIOD - DISMISSAL - DISCRETION OF THE ADMINISTRATION - REVIEW BY THE COURT - LIMITS

( STAFF REGULATIONS , ART . 34 )

Summary

AS REGARDS DISMISSAL PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 34 OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY HAS A WIDE DISCRETION AND THE COURT ' S POWER OF REVIEW EXTENDS ONLY TO MANIFEST ERRORS OR THE POSSIBILITY OF MISUSE OF POWERS .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

TAX PROVISIONS - HARMONIZATION OF LAWS - TURNOVER TAX - COMMON SYSTEM OF VALUE-ADDED TAX - TAX ON IMPORTATION - APPLICATION TO THE UNLAWFUL TRAFFIC IN DRUGS - NOT PERMISSIBLE - CRIMINAL SANCTIONS FOR OFFENCES - POWER OF THE MEMBER STATES

( COUNCIL DIRECTIVES 67/228 , ART . 2 AND 77/388 , ART . 2 )

Summary

ILLEGAL IMPORTS OF DRUGS INTO THE COMMUNITY , WHICH CAN GIVE RISE ONLY TO PENALTIES UNDER THE CRIMINAL LAW , ARE ALIEN TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE SIXTH DIRECTIVE ON THE HARMONIZATION OF THE LAWS OF THE MEMBER STATES RELATING TO TURNOVER TAXES - COMMON SYSTEM OF VALUE-ADDED TAX : UNIFORM BASIS OF ASSESSMENT . ACCORDINGLY ARTICLE 2 THEREOF MUST BE INTERPRETED AS MEANING THAT NO IMPORT TURNOVER TAX ARISES UPON THE UNLAWFUL IMPORTATION INTO THE COMMUNITY OF DRUGS WHICH ARE NOT CONFINED WITHIN ECONOMIC CHANNELS STRICTLY CONTROLLED BY THE COMPETENT AUTHORITIES FOR USE FOR MEDICAL AND SCIENTIFIC PURPOSES . THAT INTERPRETATION APPLIES ALSO TO ARTICLE 2 OF THE SECOND DIRECTIVE ON THE HARMONIZATION OF VALUE-ADDED TAX .

THAT FINDING IS WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE POWERS OF MEMBER STATES TO IMPOSE APPROPRIATE PENALTIES IN RESPECT OF CONTRAVENTIONS OF THEIR DRUGS LAWS , WITH ALL THE ATTENDANT CONSEQUENCES , IN PARTICULAR FINES .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . AGRICULTURE - COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKETS - WINE - QUALITY WINES PRODUCED IN SPECIFIED REGIONS - RULES ON PRODUCTION - DEROGATIONS - TRADITIONAL PRACTICES - SCOPE - OBLIGATION TO PROCESS GRAPES AND MUST WITHIN THE REGION WHERE THE GRAPES WERE HARVESTED - RULES GOVERNING THE DEROGATION - POWERS OF THE COMMISSION - RESTRICTION TO UNDERTAKINGS SITUATED IN THE IMMEDIATE PROXIMITY OF THE REGION WHERE THE GRAPES WERE HARVESTED - LEGALITY

( COUNCIL REGULATION NO 817/70 , ART . 5 ; COMMISSION REGULATION NO 1698/70 , ART . 2 ( 1 ))

2 . COMMUNITY LAW - PRINCIPLES - PROPORTIONALITY - RELEVANT CRITERIA

3 . AGRICULTURE - COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKETS - WINE - QUALITY WINES PRODUCED IN SPECIFIED REGIONS - RULES ON PRODUCTION - DEROGATIONS - PROCESSING OF GRAPES AND MUST OUTSIDE THE REGION WHERE THE GRAPES WERE HARVESTED - DEROGATION LIMITED TO UNDERTAKINGS SITUATED IN THE IMMEDIATE PROXIMITY OF THE REGION WHERE THE GRAPES WERE HARVESTED - UNDUE RESTRICTION ON THE EXERCISE OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS - NONE

( COMMISSION REGULATION NO 1698/70 , ART . 2 ( 1 ))

Summary

1 . THE SECOND SUBPARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 5 ( 1 ) ( A ) OF REGULATION NO 817/70 , CONCERNING QUALITY WINES PRODUCED IN SPECIFIED REGIONS ' ACCORDING TO TRADITIONAL PRACTICES ' , CONSTITUTES AN EXCEPTION TO THE RULE CONCERNING THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF CERTAIN VINE VARIETIES . THAT PROVISION CANNOT BE INTERPRETED AS MEANING THAT THE MEMBER STATES ARE AUTHORIZED , IN THE CASE OF TRADITIONAL PRACTICES , TO SET ASIDE THE RULE THAT THE PROCESSING OF GRAPES INTO MUST AND MUST INTO WINE HAS TO BE CARRIED OUT WITHIN THE REGION WHERE THE GRAPES WERE HARVESTED .

ARTICLE 5 ( 3 ) OF THE REGULATION EMPOWERS THE COMMISSION TO LAY DOWN RULES GOVERNING THE AUTHORIZATION BY THE MEMBER STATES OF DEROGATIONS FROM THE RULE THAT THE PROCESSING MUST TAKE PLACE WITHIN THE REGION WHERE THE GRAPES WERE HARVESTED . BY LIMITING THE EXCEPTIONS SOLELY TO UNDERTAKINGS SITUATED IN THE IMMEDIATE PROXIMITY OF THE REGION WHERE THE GRAPES WERE HARVESTED , THE COMMISSION NEITHER DISREGARDED THE PRINCIPLE OF PROPORTIONALITY NOR EXCEEDED THE LIMITS OF THE POWERS CONFERRED BY THE COUNCIL .

2 . THE PRINCIPLE OF PROPORTIONALITY REQUIRES THE MEASURES IMPOSED BY THE COMMUNITY INSTITUTIONS TO BE APPROPRIATE TO ACHIEVE THE INTENDED OBJECTIVE AND NOT TO EXCEED THE LIMITS OF WHAT IS NECESSARY TO THAT END .

3 . ARTICLE 2 ( 1 ) OF REGULATION NO 1698/70 , WHICH , WITH REGARD TO THE PRODUCTION OF QUALITY WINES PRODUCED IN SPECIFIED REGIONS , RESTRICTS THE POSSIBILITY OF GRANTING AUTHORIZATION FOR PROCESSING TO TAKE PLACE OUTSIDE THE REGION WHERE THE GRAPES WERE HARVESTED SOLELY TO UNDERTAKINGS SITUATED IN THE IMMEDIATE PROXIMITY OF THE REGION IN QUESTION , DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN UNDUE RESTRICTION ON THE EXCERCISE OF THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF THE PRODUCERS OF SUCH WINES . THE PROVISION DOES NOT AFFECT THE EXISTENCE OF SUCH UNDERTAKINGS OR THE SUBSTANCE OF THE FREEDOM TO CHOOSE A TRADE OR A PROFESSION SINCE IT MERELY AFFECTS THE PURSUIT OF A TRADE OR A PROFESSION AND SEEKS TO ACHIEVE AN OBJECTIVE OF GENERAL INTEREST TO THE COMMUNITY , NAMELY THE QUALITY OF WINE PRODUCTION .