ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . PROCEDURE - APPLICATION FOR ANNULMENT - DECISIONS OF THE HIGH AUTHORITY - INDIVIDUAL CHARACTER

2 . APPLICATION FOR ANNULMENT - CLAIM MADE OUT OF TIME - INADMISSIBILITY

3 . DECISIONS OF THE HIGH AUTHORITY - OBLIGATION TO GIVE REASONS - CONSIDERATION OF THE COURT'S OWN MOTION

4 . DECISIONS OF THE HIGH AUTHORITY - INSUFFICIENT REASONS - INFRINGEMENT OF AN ESSENTIAL PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENT

Summary

1 . ( A ) A DECISION BY WHICH THE HIGH AUTHORITY AUTHORIZES COMMERCIAL RULES AND OTHER AGREEMENTS SUBMITTED TO IT AND THUS GIVES A RULING ON THE LEGAL VALIDITY OF ACTUAL DECISIONS TAKEN BY INDIVIDUAL UNDERTAKINGS IS INDIVIDUAL WITH REGARD TO THE UNDERTAKINGS WHICH IT CONCERNS . A DECISION WHICH IS PARTICULAR TO UNDERTAKINGS TO WHICH IT IS ADDRESSED CANNOT AT THE SAME TIME BE REGARDED WITH REGARD TO THIRD PARTIES . ( B ) GENERAL DECISIONS ARE QUASI-LEGISLATIVE MEASURES WHICH ISSUE FROM A PUBLIC AUTHORITY AND HAVE A LEGISLATIVE EFFECT ERGA OMNES . WHERE THE HIGH AUTHORITY AUTHORIZES JOINT-SELLING AND JOINT-BUYING AGREEMENTS SIMPLY ON THE BASIS OF ARTICLE 65 ( 2 ) AND IN DEROGATION OF THE GENERAL PROHIBITION CONTAINED IN ARTICLE 65 ( 1 ) IT IS TAKING AN INDIVIDUAL DECISION . AGREEMENTS MADE BY PRIVATE UNDERTAKINGS WHICH HAVE ONLY BEEN AUTHORIZED BY THE HIGH AUTHORITY DO NOT LOSE THEIR CHARACTER AS ACTS OF PRIVATE LAW . AS A RESULT THEIR AUTHORIZATION CANNOT BE REGARDED AS A QUASI-LEGISLATIVE MEASURE TAKEN BY THE PUBLIC AUTHORITY IN THE EXERCISE OF ITS POWER TO ADOPT PROVISIONS BINDING GENERALLY ( ARTICLES 33 AND 65 ( 2 ) OF THE ECSC TREATY ).

2 . ARTICLE 22 OF THE STATUTE OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE ECSC AND ARTICLE 29 ( 3 ) OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE PROVIDE THAT THE ORIGINATING APPLICATION MUST CONTAIN A BRIEF STATEMENT OF THE GROUNDS ON WHICH THE APPLICATION IS BASED . THESE PROVISIONS LEAD TO THE INADMISSIBILITY OF GROUNDS WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN STATED IN THE APPLICATION .

3 . THE OBJECT OF THE OBLIGATION TO GIVE REASONS WHICH ARTICLE 15 OF THE ECSC TREATY IMPOSED ON THE HIGH AUTHORITY IS NOT ONLY THE PROTECTION OF PARTIES BUT ALSO TO ENABLE THE COURT TO EXAMINE THE DECISIONS FULLY FROM THE LEGAL POINT OF VIEW AS IS REQUIRED BY THE TREATY . AS A RESULT THE COURT MAY AND MUST OF ITS OWN MOTION TAKE EXCEPTION TO ANY DEFICIENCIES IN THE REASONS WHICH WOULD MAKE THIS EXAMINATION MORE DIFFICULT ( ARTICLE 15 OF THE ECSC TREATY ).

4 . WHERE THE GROUNDS OF CONTESTED DECISIONS DO NOT EITHER THEMSELVES OR BY REFERENCE TO PREVIOUS DECISIONS ADEQUATELY INDICATE THE FACTS AND LAW ON WHICH THEY ARE BASED THEY DO NOT ALLOW THE COURT TO CHECK THEM AND IN PARTICULAR ASCERTAIN WHETHER THE HIGH AUTHORITY HAS FULLY OBSERVED ARTICLE 65 ( 2 ). SUCH DECISIONS THUS INFRINGE ARTICLE 15 OF THE ECSC TREATY . INSUFFICIENT GROUNDS ARE EQUIVALENT TO LACK OF GROUNDS ( ARTICLES 15 AND 65 ( 2 ) OF THE ECSC TREATY ).
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . PROCEDURE - ADMISSIBILITY - TIME-LIMITS - DATE FOR LODGING AT THE REGISTRY

2 . PROCEDURE - APPLICATION FOR ANNULMENT - ADMISSIBILITY - GENERAL DECISION OF THE HIGH AUTHORITY - CONCEPT

3 . PROCEDURE - APPLICATION FOR ANNULMENT - ADMISSIBILITY - GENERAL DECISION - UNDERTAKING - GROUNDS RAISED

4 . FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENTS - EQUALIZATION - ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - LEGALITY - PREVIOUS CASE-LAW - INTERPRETATION

Summary

1 . UNDER ARTICLE 33 ( 3 ) OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE COURT OF 4 MARCH 1953, AS REGARDS PROCEDURAL TIME-LIMITS THE DATE OF LODGING AT THE REGISTRY SHALL ALONE BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION, AND NOT THE DATE OF POSTING ( ARTICLE 33 OF THE ECSC TREATY ).

2 . A NEW DECISION, IN SO FAR AS IT PERMITS A MODIFICATION OF A GENERAL DECISION, IS CLOTHED WITH THE GENERAL CHARACTER OF THE LATTER .

THE GENERAL CHARACTER OF A DECISION MAY RESULT DIRECTLY FROM ITS CONTENT, IN PARTICULAR WHERE IT ESTABLISHES A SERIES OF LEGISLATIVE PRINCIPLES, LAYS DOWN IN ABSTRACT FORM THE CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH THEY ARE TO APPLY AND SPECIFIES THE LEGAL CONSEQUENCES FLOWING FROM THEM .

GENERAL DECISIONS INCLUDE A DECISION WHICH CONTAINS GENERAL RULES WHICH MAY BE OF IMPORTANCE IN THE SAME WAY FOR AN INDETERMINATE NUMBER OF CASES AND WHICH ARE TO BE APPLICABLE TO ALL PERSONS FINDING THEMSELVES IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES SPECIFIED FOR THE APPLICATION OF SUCH RULES ( SECOND PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 33 OF THE ECSC TREATY ).

3 . UNDER THE SECOND PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 33 OF THE TREATY, UNDERTAKINGS MAY ONLY INSTITUTE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST GENERAL DECISIONS IF THEY CONSIDER THAT THE SAID DECISIONS INVOLVE A MISUSE OF POWERS AFFECTING THEM . THAT SUBMISSION ALONE MAY BE RAISED IN SUPPORT OF SUCH AN APPLICATION ( SECOND PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 33 OF THE ECSC TREATY ).

4 . IN ITS JUDGMENT IN CASE 9/56, THE COURT DID NOT DECLARE THAT ESTIMATED ASSESSMENTS ARE ILLEGAL, BUT FOUNDED THAT A LEVY BY WAY OF AN ESTIMATE WAS A REMEDY WHERE UNDERTAKINGS FAILED TO SEND IN RETURNS, AND WAS A NECESSARY AND INEVITABLE CONSEQUENCE OF THE SYSTEM OF COMPULSORY CONTRIBUTIONS ( ARTICLE 53 OF THE ECSC TREATY ).
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . COURT OF JUSTICE - GENERAL JURISDICTION - APPLICATION AND INTERPRETATION OF NATIONAL LAW

( ECSC TREATY, ARTICLE 31 )

2 . VESTED RIGHTS - MAINTENANCE NOT GUARANTEED BY THE LAW OF THE ECSC

3 . AGREEMENTS - AUTHORIZATION - GROUNDS FOR AUTHORIZATION

( ECSC TREATY, ARTICLE 65 ( 2 ))

4 . COAL - SELLING AGENCIES - FIRST-HAND TRADER - UNJUSTIFIED LIMITATION

Summary

1 . THE COURT HAS JURISDICTION OVER THE LEGALITY OF DECISIONS TAKEN BY THE HIGH AUTHORITY, BUT IT IS NOT THE FUNCTION OF THE COURT TO ENSURE RESPECT FOR NATIONAL LAW IN FORCE IN A MEMBER STATE, AND THIS IS TRUE EVEN OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAWS . THEREFORE THE COURT MAY NEITHER INTERPRET NOR APPLY NATIONAL LAW .

2 . COMMUNITY LAW, SUCH AS IT ARISES UNDER THE ECSC TREATY, DOES NOT CONTAIN ANY GENERAL PRINCIPLE, WHETHER EXPLICIT OR OTHERWISE, GUARANTEEING THE MAINTENANCE OF VESTED RIGHTS .

3 . BY ARTICLE 65 ( 2 ), THE HIGH AUTHORITY SHALL AUTHORIZE SPECIALIZATION AGREEMENTS OR JOINT-BUYING OR JOINT-SELLING AGREEMENTS IF IT FINDS THAT THE CONDITIONS SET OUT IN PARAGRAPHS 2 ( A ), ( B ) AND ( C ) ARE FULFILLED . SUCH AUTHORIZATION THEREFORE DEPENDS ON A FINDING WHICH, OF ITS VERY NATURE, COMPRISES AN ASSESSMENT OF THE SITUATION CREATED BY THE FACTS OR ECONOMIC CIRCUMSTANCES, AND FOR THIS REASON IS PARTLY IMMUNE FROM REVIEW BY THIS COURT . THEREFORE THE HIGH AUTHORITY HAS AN ABSOLUTE DUTY TO STATE SPECIFIC REASONS FOR THESE AUTHORIZATIONS AND THIS RULE MUST BE STRICTLY OBSERVED . THOSE REASONS MUST ENABLE THE INTERESTED PARTIES, AS ALSO THE COURT SHOULD OCCASION ARISE, TO CHECK THE INFORMATION ON WHICH THE HIGH AUTHORITY HAS RELIED IN FINDING THAT THE REQUIREMENTS NECESSARY FOR THE GRANTING OF ITS AUTHORIZATION ARE MET SO AS TO BE IN A POSITION TO EXAMINE WHETHER THE AUTHORIZATION WAS RIGHTLY GRANTED AS A MATTER BOTH OF FACT AND OF LAW .

4 . THE ADVANTAGES WHICH THE SELLING AGENCIES MAY DERIVE FROM TRADING WITH THE SMALLEST POSSIBLE NUMBER OF WHOLESALERS DO NOT CONSTITUTE A SUFFICIENT REASON TO JUSTIFY THE RESTRICTION WHICH IS THEREBY IMPOSED ON TRADE, PARTICULARLY SINCE THE VERY PURPOSE FOR WHICH THE SELLING AGENCIES HAVE BEEN CREATED IS TO TAKE AWAY FROM THE MINES THE EFFORT INVOLVED OR ORGANIZING THE SALE OF THEIR PRODUCTS ON A COMMERCIAL BASIS AND THEIR FUNCTION, WHICH IS TO FURNISH WHOLESALERS WITH SUPPLIES, CONSTITUTES THE ESSENTIAL REASON FOR THEIR AUTHORIZED JOINT-SELLING AGREEMENT .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . PRICES - NON-DISCRIMINATORY INFRINGEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS RELATING TO PUBLICATION

2 . PRICES - INFRINGEMENTS OF THE PROVISIONS RELATING TO PUBLICATION - JUSTIFICATION OF THE AMOUNT OF THE FINE

Summary

1 . ANY PRICE WHICH DEPARTS FROM THE PRICE LIST, EVEN IF THE LATTER HAS BEEN DEPARTED FROM UNIFORMLY IN ALL COMPARABLE TRANSACTIONS AND THE DEPARTURE FOR THAT REASON IS NOT AN INFRINGEMENT OF THE RULES ON NON-DISCRIMINATION, IS AN INFRINGEMENT OF THE RULES REGARDING PUBLICATION .

( ECSC TREATY, ARTICLES 3 AND 60 )

2 . IN ORDER TO DETERMINE ACCURATELY THE GRAVITY OF THE INFRINGEMENT AND CONSEQUENTLY THE AMOUNT OF THE FINE, IT IS NECESSARY TO CONSIDER WHETHER OR NOT THE FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE RULES REGARDING PUBLICATION ALSO INCLUDES AN INFRINGEMENT OF THE RULES ON NON-DISCRIMINATION . INFRINGEMENT OF THE RULE ON NON-DISCRIMINATION IS A MORE SERIOUS OFFENCE THAN INFRINGEMENT OF THE RULES REGARDING PUBLICATION . THE LATTER INFRINGEMENT CANNOT HOWEVER BE REGARDED AS A MINOR OFFENCE IN VIEW OF THE AIMS OF COMPULSORY PUBLICATION .

A MERE INFRINGEMENT OF THE RULES REGARDING PUBLICATION CALLS THEREFORE FOR THE IMPOSITION OF A FINE WHICH IS APPROPRIATE HAVING REGARD TO THE CONSEQUENCES OF THAT INFRINGEMENT .

( ECSC TREATY, ARTICLES 36, 60 AND 64 )
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . ADMINISTRATIVE MEASURE CONFERRING SUBJECTIVE RIGHTS OR SIMILAR ADVANTAGES - ILLEGALITY OF THAT MEASURE - RETROACTIVE WITHDRAWAL OR WITHDRAWAL EX NUNC - ACTUAL SITUATION OF THE PARTIES CONCERNED AS THE CRITERION OF CHOICE

2 . ADMINISTRATIVE MEASURE CONFERRING SUBJECTIVE RIGHTS OR SIMILAR ADVANTAGES - ILLEGALITY OF THAT MEASURE - RETROACTIVE WITHDRAWAL OR WITHDRAWAL EX NUNC - ABSENCE OF FALSE OR INCOMPLETE INFORMATION GIVEN BY THE BENEFICIARIES AS A CRITERION OF CHOICE

3 . ADMINISTRATIVE MEASURE CONFERRING SUBJECTIVE RIGHTS OR SIMILAR ADVANTAGES - ILLEGALITY OF THAT MEASURE - RETROACTIVE WITHDRAWAL - DECISIONS WHICH CREATE AND THOSE DECLARATORY OF SUBJECTIVE RIGHTS - REASONABLE PERIOD OF TIME FOR WITHDRAWAL - RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF THIS FACTOR

4 . DECISIONS OF THE HIGH AUTHORITY - SUFFICIENT REASONING - CRITERIA

( ECSC TREATY, ARTICLES 15 AND 33 )

Summary

1 . IN THE CONTEXT OF THE BALANCING OF INTERESTS UPON WHICH THE CHOICE BETWEEN RETROACTIVE WITHDRAWAL AND WITHDRAWAL EX NUNC OF AN ILLEGAL DECISION DEPENDS, THE ACTUAL SITUATION OF THE PARTIES CONCERNED MUST BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT .

2 . IN THE CONTEXT OF THE BALANCING OF INTERESTS UPON WHICH THE CHOICE BETWEEN RETROACTIVE WITHDRAWAL AND WITHDRAWAL EX NUNC OF AN ILLEGAL DECISION DEPENDS, THE FACT THAT THE BENEFICIARY HAS NOT PROVOKED THAT DECISION BY MEANS OF FALSE OR INCOMPLETE INFORMATION IS ONE OF THE CRITERIA TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT, BUT IT DOES NOT IN LAW EXCLUDE RETROACTIVE WITHDRAWAL .

3 . THE PRINCIPLE THAT RETROACTIVE WITHDRAWAL OF AN ILLEGAL ADMINISTRATIVE MEASURE CAN ONLY BE MADE WITHIN A REASONABLE PERIOD OF TIME IS ONLY OF LIMITED IMPORTANCE WHERE DECLARATORY DECISIONS ARE CONCERNED; IT THEREFORE CONSTITUTES ONLY ONE OF THE CRITERIA TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT IN THE BALANCE OF INTERESTS .

4 . A STATEMENT OF REASONS MUST BE DEEMED ADEQUATE, UNDER THE TERMS OF ARTICLES 15 AND 33 OF THE TREATY, WHEN IT ENABLES BOTH THE PARTIES CONCERNED AND THE COURT TO DISCOVER THE ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF THE HIGH AUTHORITY'S REASONING .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . PROCEDURE - APPLICATION FOR ANNULMENT - APPLICATION BY NATURAL AND LEGAL PERSONS AGAINST EEC REGULATIONS - ADMISSIBILITY

( EEC TREATY, ARTICLE 173 )

2 . PROCEDURE - APPLICATION FOR ANNULMENT - DECISION WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE SECOND PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 173 OF THE EEC TREATY - CONCEPT

( EEC TREATY, ARTICLES 173 AND 189 )

3 . ADMINISTRATIVE MEASURES - MEASURES OF THE INSTITUTIONS OF THE EEC - DECISION AND REGULATION - DISTINCTION - CRITERIA

( EEC TREATY, ARTICLE 189 )

4 . ADMINISTRATIVE MEASURES - NATURE - CRITERIA

( EEC TREATY, ARTICLES 173 AND 189 )

5 . PROCEDURE - APPLICATION FOR ANNULMENT - APPLICATION BY NATURAL AND LEGAL PERSONS - REGULATIONS - PROVISIONS HAVING THE NATURE OF A DECISION - ADMISSIBILITY

( EEC TREATY, ARTICLE 173 )

6 . PROCEDURE - APPLICATION FOR ANNULMENT - EEC ACTS - PERSONS INDIVIDUALLY CONCERNED - MEASURES AFFECTING THE GENERAL INTERESTS OF A CATEGORY OF NATURAL OR LEGAL PERSONS - ASSOCIATION REPRESENTING THAT CATEGORY

( EEC TREATY, ARTICLE 173 )

Summary

1 . NATURAL AND LEGAL PRSONS OTHER THAN MEMBER STATES ARE NOT ENTITLED TO MAKE AN APPLICATION FOR ANNULMENT OF REGULATIONS ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OR THE COMMISSION .

2 . THE TERM 'DECISION' USED IN ARTICLE 173 HAS THE TECHNICAL MEANING EMPLOYED IN ARTICLE 189, WHICH IN PARTICULAR MAKES A CLEAR DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE CONCEPT OF A 'DECISION' AND THAT OF A 'REGULATION '.

3 . THE CRITERION FOR THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE TERMS 'DECISION' AND 'REGULATION' SHOULD BE SOUGHT IN THE GENERAL 'APPLICATION' OR OTHERWISE OF THE MEASURE IN QUESTION .

A DECISION IS OF INDIVIDUAL CONCERN TO SPECIFIC INDIVIDUALS; ITS ESSENTIAL CHARACTERISTICS ARISE FROM THE RESTRICTION OF THE CLASS OF PERSONS TO WHOM IT IS ADDRESSED .

A REGULATION, BEING ESSENTIALLY OF A LEGISLATIVE NATURE, IS NOT ADDRESSED TO A RESTRICTED NUMBER OF PERSONS, DEFINED OR IDENTIFIABLE, BUT APPLIES TO OBJECTIVELY DETERMINED SITUATIONS . IT INVOLVES IMMEDIATE LEGAL CONSEQUENCES IN ALL MEMBER STATES FOR CATEGORIES OF PERSONS VIEWED IN A GENERAL AND ABSTRACT MANNER .

4 . THE DETERMINATION OF THE LEGAL NATURE OF A MEASURE EMANATING FROM THE COUNCIL OR THE COMMISSION DOES NOT DEPEND ONLY ON ITS OFFICIAL DESIGNATION, BUT SHOULD FIRST TAKE INTO ACCOUNT ITS OBJECT AND CONTENT .

5 . WHEN A MEASURE, WHICH AS A WHOLE CONSTITUTES A REGULATION, INCLUDES PROVISIONS WHICH ARE CAPABLE OF BEING OF DIRECT AND INDIVIDUAL CONCERN TO CERTAIN NATURAL OR LEGAL PERSONS, SUCH PROVISIONS DO NOT HAVE THE CHARACTER OF A REGULATION AND MAY THEREFORE BE IMPUGNED BY THOSE CONCERNED .

6 . AN ASSOCIATION WHICH REPRESENTS A CATEGORY OF NATURAL OR LEGAL PERSONS IS NOT CONCERNED INDIVIDUALLY BY A MEASURE AFFECTING THE GENERAL INTERESTS OF THE PERSONS IN THAT CATEGORY .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

WRONGFUL ACT OR OMISSION INDUCING ERROR ON THE PART OF A PARTY CONCERNED - RESULTING INJURY - DIRECT CAUSALITY - CRITERIA

( ECSC TREATY, ARTICLE 40 )

Summary

THE EXISTENCE OF A DIRECT RELATIONSHIP OF CAUSE AND EFFECT BETWEEN CONDUCT OF THE ADMINISTRATION CONSTITUTING A WRONGFUL ACT OR OMISSION AND INJURY RESULTING FROM THE FACT THAT SUCH CONDUCT INDUCED AN ERROR ON THE PART OF A PERSON CONCERNED PRESUPPOSES THAT SUCH CONDUCT COULD AND SHOULD CAUSE SUCH AN ERROR IN THE MIND OF A PRUDENT PERSON .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . APPLICATION FOR ANNULMENT - LEGAL INTEREST IN TAKING PROCEEDINGS - ASSESSMENT

2 . COMMON MARKET - FERROUS SCRAP - EQUALIZATION - EFFECTS - COMMON CRITERION TO BE ADOPTED FOR THE COMMENCEMENT OF THOSE EFFECTS

3 . FERROUS SCRAP - EQUALIZATION WITHIN THE MEANING OF DECISION N . 22/54 - BOUGHT FERROUS SCRAP - CONCEPT - COMMUNITY ALLOCATION AS CRITERION

4 . COSTS - PAYMENT OF OWN COSTS - EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES

( RULES OF PROCEDURE, ARTICLE 69 ( 2 ))

Summary

1 . A LEGAL INTEREST IN MAKING AN APPLICATION FOR ANNULMENT IS ASSESSED AT THE DAY ON WHICH THE APPLICATION IS MADE .

2 . IT IS NECESSARY TO ADOPT A COMMON CRITERION TO DETERMINE THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE EFFECTS OF THE EQUALIZATION SYSTEM, BOTH FOR THE APPLICATION OF THE LEVY ON BOUGHT FERROUS SCRAP AND FOR THE ALLOCATION OF GRANTS FOR IMPORTED FERROUS SCRAP .

3 . THE FERROUS SCRAP SUBJECTED TO THE EQUALIZATION LEVY BY DECISION N . 22/54 IS THE FERROUS SCRAP PURCHASED FOR USE IN COMMUNITY PRODUCTION; THIS ALLOCATION TO COMMUNITY USE IS NOT DETERMINED UNTIL THE TIME OF RECEIPT BY UNDERTAKINGS .

4 . IF THE DEFECTIVE DRAFTING OF A MEASURE ADOPTED BY AN INSTITUTION HAS BEEN THE DECISIVE FACTOR IN THE MAKING OF AN APPLICATION, THIS AMOUNTS TO AN EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCE ALLOWING THE COURT TO ORDER THAT THE PARTIES BEAR THEIR OWN COSTS .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . MEASURES ADOPTED BY INSTITUTIONS OF THE COMMUNITY - DECISIONS OF THE HIGH AUTHORITY - GENERAL OR INDIVIDUAL NATURE - CRITERIA FOR DISTINGUISHING BETWEEN THEM

( ECSC TREATY, ARTICLE 33 )

2 . PROCEDURE - ACTION AGAINST A GENERAL DECISION OF THE HIGH AUTHORITY - UNDERTAKINGS AS APPLICANTS - MISUSE OF POWERS AFFECTING THE APPLICANT - ADMISSIBILITY

( ECSC TREATY, ARTICLE 33 )

3 . PROCEDURE - ACTION AGAINST A GENERAL DECISION OF THE HIGH AUTHORITY - UNDERTAKINGS AS APPLICANTS - MISUSE OF POWERS AFFECTING THE APPLICANT - CONCEPT

( ECSC TREATY, ARTICLE 33 )

Summary

1 . IN ORDER TO ASCERTAIN WHETHER A DECISION OF THE HIGH AUTHORITY IS GENERAL OR INDIVIDUAL ITS CONTENT MUST IN PARTICULAR BE EXAMINED TO ESTABLISH WHETHER ITS PROVISIONS AFFECT DIRECTLY AND INDIVIDUALLY THE PERSONS BOUND BY THEM .

THE DETERMINATION OF THE LEGAL NATURE OF A MEASURE EMANATING FROM THE COUNCIL OR THE COMMISSION DOES NOT DEPEND ONLY ON ITS OFFICIAL DESIGNATION, BUT SHOULD FIRST TAKE INTO ACCOUNT ITS OBJECT AND CONTENT .

CF . JOINED CASES 16 AND 17/62, JOINED CASES 19 AND 22/62, PARA . 4 OF SUMMARY, REC . 1962, PP . 906 AND 947 .

2 . IN THE CASE OF AN ACTION BROUGHT AGAINST A GENERAL DECISION THE GROUND OF MISUSE OF POWERS IS ONLY ADMISSIBLE IF THE APPLICANT SHOWS THAT THERE HAS BEEN A MISUSE OF POWER ' AFFECTING ' IT BY GIVING CONVINCING REASONS WHY THE ADOPTION OF THE CONTESTED GENERAL DECISION IS DIRECTLY PREJUDICIAL TO ITS INTERESTS .

3 . IF A MEASURE AFFECTS ALL THE PERSONS CONCERNED IN THE SAME DEGREE IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO MAINTAIN THAT IT DIRECTLY DAMAGES THE INDIVIDUAL INTERESTS OF EACH APPLICANT AND THAT IT IS THEREFORE VITIATED BY A MISUSE OF POWERS ' AFFECTING THEM '.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . OFFICIALS - INTEGRATION - INTEGRATION PROCEDURE - DUTY OF THE ADMINISTRATION TO INVESTIGATE ALL SOURCES OF INFORMATION FAVOURABLE TO THE PERSON CONCERNED

( STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS OF THE EEC AND EAEC, ARTICLE 102 )

2 . OFFICIALS - INTEGRATION - ESTABLISHMENT REPORT - POWERS OF THE ESTABLISHMENT BOARD

( STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS OF THE EEC AND EAEC, ARTICLE 102 )

Summary

1 . IN CASES OF INTEGRATION UNDER THE STAFF REGULATIONS, THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY AND THE ESTABLISHMENT BOARD ARE OBLIGED TO INVESTIGATE ALL THE RELIABLE INFORMATION FAVOURABLE TO THE PERSON CONCERNED .

2 . THE ESTABLISHMENT BOARD IS NOT BOUND BY THE ESTABLISHMENT REPORTS BUT IS ENTITLED TO OBTAIN FURTHER INFORMATION, IN PARTICULAR BY HEARING ANY PERSON CAPABLE OF PROVIDING IT WITH INFORMATION HELPFUL IN MAKING ITS ASSESSMENT .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . OFFICIALS - RECRUITMENT - PROCEDURE - PLURALITY OF STEPS - APPEAL AGAINST LATER STEPS - POSSIBILITY OF CONTESTING THE LEGALITY OF EARLIER STEPS

( STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS OF THE EEC, TITLE III, CHAPTER I, ARTICLE 91 )

2 . OFFICIALS - RECRUITMENT - POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE ADMINISTRATION

( STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS OF THE EEC, ARTICLE 29 )

3 . OFFICIALS - RECRUITMENT - PROCEDURE - PROMOTION - DECISION NOT TO FILL A VACANT POST BY MEANS OF PROMOTION - NO DUTY TO STATE REASONS

4 . OFFICIALS - RECRUITMENT - PROCEDURE - INTERNAL COMPETITION - DECISION NOT TO HOLD AN INTERNAL COMPETITION - TRANSFER - DECISION TO PROCEED TO TRANSFER - NO DUTY TO STATE REASONS FOR SUCH DECISIONS .

Summary

1 . SINCE THE VARIOUS STEPS COMPRISING THE RECRUITMENT PROCEDURE FORM A SINGLE ENTITY, IT MUST BE ACCEPTED THAT IN AN ACTION CONTESTING LATER STEPS IN SUCH A PROCEDURE THE APPLICANT MAY CONTEST THE LEGALITY OF EARLIER STEPS WHICH ARE CLOSELY LINKED TO THEM . A SUBMISSION OF INADMISSIBILITY ON THE GROUND THAT AN APPEAL AGAINST THESE STEPS WAS OUT OF TIME IS THEREFORE INADMISSIBLE .

2 . THE USE OF THE TERM ' WHETHER ' AS IT APPEARS IN ARTICLE 29(1 ) OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS OF THE EEC CLEARLY INDICATES THAT THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY, WHERE A VACANT POST IS TO BE FILLED, IS NOT BOUND TO PROCEED TO PROMOTION OR TRANSFER OR HOLD AN INTERNAL COMPETITION, BUT MERELY TO CONSIDER IN EACH CASE WHETHER THESE MEASURES ARE CAPABLE OF RESULTING IN THE APPOINTMENT OF A PERSON OF THE HIGHEST STANDARD OF ABILITY, EFFICIENCY AND INTEGRITY .

IN SO CONSIDERING THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY MUST TAKE INTO ACCOUNT BOTH THE PARTICULAR REQUIREMENTS OF THE POST TO BE FILLED, VIEWED WITHIN THE GENERAL FRAMEWORK OF THE DEPARTMENTS AND THE AVAILABLE OFFICIALS .

3 . THE DECISION NOT TO FILL A VACANT POST BY MEANS OF PROMOTION DOES NOT REQUIRE A STATEMENT OF REASONS . SUCH STATEMENTS OF REASONS, WHICH ARE NOT REQUIRED FOR DECISIONS OF PROMOTION, ARE ALL THE LESS IMPERATIVE FOR THE OUTCOME OF THE QUESTION WHETHER TO ADOPT PROMOTION .

4 . THE DECISION NOT TO HOLD A COMPETITION AND TO PROCEED TO TRANSFER HAVE THE AIM OF FOLLOWING THE RECRUITMENT PROCEDURE PROVIDED FOR IN ARTICLE 29 OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS AND ARE ONLY OF AN INTERNAL NATURE . IT IS THEREFORE UNNECESSARY FOR THEM TO BE PROVIDED WITH A STATEMENT OF REASONS .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . OBLIGATIONS OF MEMBER STATES - FAILURE TO FULFIL SUCH OBLIGATIONS - MEASURES ADOPTED BY THE COMMISSION - SUBJECT-MATTER - GROUNDS

( EEC TREATY, ARTICLE 169 )

2 . POLICY OF THE EEC - TAX PROVISIONS - EXPORT OF PRODUCTS TO ANOTHER MEMBER STATE - INTERNAL TAXATION - TAXATION IMPOSED DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY ON THE PRODUCTS - CONCEPT - REPAYMENT - LEGALITY

( EEC TREATY, ARTICLE 96 )

3 . POLICY OF THE EEC - TAX PROVISIONS - EXPORT OF PRODUCTS TO ANOTHER MEMBER STATE - INTERNAL TAXATION - REPAYMENT - FLAT RATE SYSTEM - LEGALITY - PROOF - ONUS OF PROOF

Summary

1 . IN THE CASE OF A FAILURE OF A MEMBER STATE TO FULFIL ITS OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE TREATY, THE VARIOUS MEASURES ADOPTED BY THE COMMISSION IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAGE OF THE PROCEDURE AND THAT BEFORE THE COURT MUST RELATE TO THE SAME FAILURE AND BE BASED ON THE SAME GROUNDS .

2 . AS USED IN ARTICLE 96, THE EXPRESSION ' DIRECTLY ' MUST BE UNDERSTOOD TO REFER TO TAXATION IMPOSED ON THE FINISHED PRODUCT, WHILST THE EXPRESSION ' INDIRECTLY ' REFERS TO TAXATION IMPOSED DURING THE VARIOUS STAGES OF PRODUCTION ON THE RAW MATERIALS OR SEMI-FINISHED PRODUCTS USED IN THE MANUFACTURE OF THE PRODUCT .

DUTIES WHICH ARE NOT IMPOSED DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY ON EXPORTED PRODUCTS CANNOT BE THE SUBJECT OF THE REPAYMENT PROVIDED FOR IN ARTICLE 96 .

3 . IN THE APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 96, IT IS FOR A MEMBER STATE WHICH EMPLOYS A FLAT RATE SYSTEM OF REPAYMENTS OF INTERNAL TAXATION TO ESTABLISH THAT SUCH A SYSTEM REMAINS WITHIN THE MANDATORY LIMITS OF THE ARTICLE, BOTH AS REGARDS THE NATURE OF THE TAXATION TO BE REPAID AND THE AMOUNT OF SUCH REPAYMENT ON EACH OF THE PRODUCTS AFFECTED BY THE MEASURE IN QUESTION .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . OFFICIALS - APPOINTING AUTHORITY ACTING IN THE NAME OF ITS INSTITUTION - MEASURES AFFECTING THE LEGAL POSITION OF OFFICIALS AND OTHER SERVANTS - ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE INSTITUTION

( STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS OF THE EEC AND EAEC, ARTICLE 2 )

2 . OFFICIALS - APPEALS BY OFFICIALS - CITATION OF INSTITUTION FROM WHICH THE ACT ADVERSELY AFFECTING THE PERSON CONCERNED ORIGINATES

( STAFF REGULATIONS OF THE EEC AND EAEC, ARTICLE 91 )

3 . EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES - SEPARATE LEGAL PERSONALITY - COUNCILS OF MINISTERS - INSTITUTIONS LEGALLY SEPARATE

4 . PROCEDURE - JUDGMENT GRANTING ANNULMENT - LEGAL EFFECTS - LIMITED TO THE PARTIES AND TO THE PERSONS DIRECTLY CONCERNED BY THE MEASURE ANNULLED - JUDGMENT CONSTITUTING A NEW FACTOR - CONCEPT

Summary

1 . CF . PARA . 1, SUMMARY, IN CASE 28/64, ( 1965 ) ECR 237 .

IT FOLLOWS FROM ARTICLE 2 OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS THAT THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY ACTS IN THE NAME OF THE INSTITUTION WHICH DESIGNATED IT, SO THAT ACTS CONCERNING THE LEGAL POSITION OF OFFICIALS AND WHICH MAY ADVERSELY AFFECT THEM MUST BE ATTRIBUTED TO THE INSTITUTION TO WHICH THEY ARE ATTACHED .

*/ 664J0028 /*.

2 . CF . PARA . 2, SUMMARY, IN CASE 28/64, ( 1965 ) ECR 237 .

UNLIKE APPEALS THROUGH OFFICIAL CHANNELS WHICH HAVE NO CONTENTIOUS ELEMENT WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 90 OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS, APPEALS TO THE COURT PROVIDED FOR IN ARTICLE 91 OF THOSE REGULATIONS MUST BE BROUGHT AGAINST THE INSTITUTION FROM WHICH THE ACT HAVING AN ADVERSE EFFECT EMANATED .

*/ 664J0028 /*.

3 . CF . PARA . 3, SUMMARY, IN CASE 28/64, ( 1965 ) ECR 237 .

THE MERE FACT OF THE EXISTENCE OF A SINGLE SECRETARIAT CANNOT ESTABLISH THE LEGAL UNITY OF THE COUNCILS OF MINISTERS OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, AS EACH OF THESE COMMUNITIES HAS A SEPARATE LEGAL PERSONALITY AND AS THE TREATIES DID NOT ESTABLISH THE COUNCILS AS A COMMON INSTITUTION .

*/ 664J0028 /*.

4 . APART FROM THE ACTUAL PARTIES IN PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COURT, THE ONLY PERSONS CONCERNED BY THE LEGAL EFFECTS OF A JUDGMENT OF THE COURT ANNULLING A MEASURE ARE, THE PERSONS DIRECTLY AFFECTED BY THE MEASURE WHICH IS ANNULLED . SUCH A JUDGMENT CAN ONLY CONSTITUTE A NEW FACTOR AS REGARDS THOSE PERSONS .