ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1. Agriculture - Common organization of the markets - Beef and veal - Private storage aid - Conditions for granting - Taking into stock after conclusion of the storage contract - Commencement of storage - Concept

(Commission Regulation No 1071/68, Art. 3(2))

2. Agriculture - Common organization of the markets - Beef and veal - Private storage aid - Early storage - Loss of entitlement to the aid - Exception dictated by the principle of proportionality

(Commission Regulation No 1071/68, Art. 3(2))

3. Agriculture - Common organization of the markets - Beef and veal - Private storage aid - Storage of boned meat - Quantity to take into consideration in order to determine entitlement to the aid - Conversion method applied to meat in the unaltered state - Application of standard yield rates

(Commission Regulations No 2471/77, Art. 4(3) and No 1045/78, Art. 4(2))

Summary

1. Article 3(2) of Regulation No 1071/68 laying down detailed rules for granting private storage aid for beef and veal is to be interpreted as meaning that a private storer may not begin the process of storing the agreed quantity until after the storage contract has been concluded. The activity with which the storage process begins for the purposes of that provision is the placing of the meat to be stored in the cold storage room before freezing takes place.

2. The requirement that storage should not begin until after the storage contract has been concluded, which stems from Article 3(2) of Regulation No 1071/68 laying down detailed rules for granting private storage aid for beef and veal constitutes a primary obligation, infringement of which entails in principle loss of entitlement to the grant of aid for the quantity of meat concerned. However, the principle of proportionality precludes loss of such entitlement in a situation where the private storer has notified the intervention agency by telephone of his intention to take the agreed quantity into store early, without the agency expressing any reservations, and where that operation has not affected the possibility for the agency effectively to supervise compliance by the private storer with his obligations.

3. In calculating, in the case of boned meat, the quantity to be taken into consideration as regards entitlement to storage aid for beef and veal, the standard rates provided for in Article 4(3) of Regulation No 2471/77 on the granting at a standard rate fixed in advance of private storage aid in respect of carcases, half-carcases and compensated quarters and in Article 4(2) of Regulation No 1405/78 on the granting at a standard rate fixed in advance of private storage aid for forequarters must be applied.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1. Community law - Principles - Fundamental rights - Observance by Member States when implementing Community rules

2. Agriculture - Common organization of the markets - Milk and milk products - Additional levy on milk - Allocation of reference quantities exempt from the levy - Transfer to the lessor, on expiry of a lease, of the reference quantity allocated to the tenant - No obligation for Member States to introduce a system for compensation of an outgoing tenant by a lessor - Entitlement to such compensation not conferred directly by Community law - Right to property - Principle of non-discrimination - Prohibition of unjust enrichment - Breach - None

(EEC Treaty, Art. 40(3); Council Regulations Nos 856/84 and 857/84; Commission Regulation No 1371/84)

Summary

1. The requirements flowing from the protection of fundamental rights in the Community legal order are also binding on Member States when they implement Community rules, with the result that Member States must, as far as possible, apply those rules in accordance with those requirements.

Where reference is made to the Court for a preliminary ruling, it must provide all the criteria of interpretation needed by the national court to determine whether rules falling within the scope of Community law are compatible with the fundamental rights whose observance the Court ensures.

2. The Community rules on the additional levy on milk introduced by Regulations No 856/84, No 857/84 and No 1371/84 do not require a Member State to introduce a scheme for the payment by a landlord of compensation to an outgoing tenant and do not confer directly on a tenant a right to such compensation in respect of the reference quantity transferred to the landlord on the expiry of a lease.

The general principles of Community law do not provide for an obligation or right of that kind either.

The right to property safeguarded by the Community legal order does not include the right to dispose, for profit, of an advantage, such as the reference quantities allocated in the context of the common organization of a market, which does not derive from the assets or occupational activity of the person concerned.

The fact that other tenants may have received compensation later as a result of an amendment to national legislation cannot allow the principle of equal treatment to be successfully pleaded. That principle, which is expressly set out in Article 40(3) of the Treaty, cannot bring about retroactive modification of the relations between the parties to a lease to the detriment of the lessor by imposing on him an obligation to compensate the outgoing lessee, whether under national provisions which the Member State in question might be required to adopt, or by means of direct effect.

In view of the fact that legal relations between lessees and lessors, in particular on the expiry of a lease, are, as Community law now stands, still governed by the law of the Member State in question, any consequences of unjust enrichment of the lessor on the expiry of a lease are not a matter for Community law.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1. Acts of the institutions - Legislative procedure - Consultation of the Parliament - Further consultation in cases of substantial amendment to the initial proposal

2. Transport - Road transport - Operation by non-resident carriers of national passenger transport services - Regulation No 2454/92 - Substantial departures from the initial Commission proposal - No further consultation of the Parliament - Infringement of essential procedural requirements - Illegality

(EEC Treaty, Art. 75; Council Regulation No 2454/92)

Summary

1. The duty to consult the European Parliament in the course of the legislative procedure, in the cases provided for by the Treaty, includes a requirement that the Parliament be reconsulted on each occasion when the text finally adopted, viewed as a whole, departs substantially from the text on which the Parliament has already been consulted, except where the amendments essentially correspond to the wishes of the Parliament itself.

2. A comparison between the initial Commission proposal on which Regulation No 2454/92 was based and the content of that regulation as adopted by the Council shows that, as regards the operation by non-resident carriers of regular road passenger transport services, the principle of free access to all regular services has been replaced by a regime which limits operations to certain types of road passenger transport and to certain limited frontier areas.

Such amendments are substantial in character. Since they do not correspond to any wish expressly stated by the Parliament in a text that might be held to define its position, whatever opinions might have been expressed by parliamentary committees involved in the consultation procedure, and since they affect the scheme of the proposed regulation as a whole, they are in themselves sufficient to make fresh consultation of the Parliament necessary. The fact that the Parliament was not consulted a second time during the legislative procedure laid down in Article 75 of the Treaty constitutes an infringement of essential procedural requirements which must entail the annulment of Regulation No 2454/92.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Agriculture ° Common agricultural policy ° System of green exchange rates ° Adjustment of representative rates carried out within the framework of the dismantlement of monetary compensatory amounts ° Reduction in agricultural prices expressed in DM ° Authorization under Community rules for special aid for German producers to compensate for the fall in their income ° Grant of the aid to producers having their seat in other Member States for their exports to Germany ° Excluded ° Grant of aid on the basis of national law alone ° Not permissible

(Council Regulation No 855/84, Art. 3)

Summary

The special aid which the Federal Republic of Germany is authorized under Article 3 of Regulation No 855/84 to grant to German agricultural producers through the system of VAT is intended to compensate those producers for the reduction in prices and resultant fall in farm incomes following the alteration of the representative conversion rate used to convert into DM the amounts fixed in ECU by the Community agricultural rules. Since the reduction in prices in DM has no negative effect on producers from other Member States exporting their goods to Germany because of the corresponding and simultaneous dismantlement of the positive compensatory amounts applicable to imports of agricultural products into Germany, the grant of that aid to importers would create an unjustified competitive advantage.

Article 3 of Regulation No 855/84 must for that reason be understood as precluding the grant by the Federal Republic of Germany of special aid to an agricultural producer with its seat in another Member State which exports its products to Germany, where they are sold to German customers. Furthermore, in the light of the principles of the common agricultural policy and the resulting limitation on the competence of the Member States, Regulation No 855/84 precludes the grant to agricultural producers which do not have their seat in a Member State applying positive compensatory amounts of any special aid provided for under the tax law of that Member State.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 Competition - Administrative proceedings - Access to the file - Observance of the rights of the defence - Infringement - Consequences

(Regulation No 17, Art. 19(1); Commission Regulation No 99/63, Arts 3 and 7 to 9)

2 Procedure - Judgments - Whether, in respect of cases concerning the same measure, the Community judicature is obliged to deliver the judgments on the same date - No such obligation

(Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 43; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 50)

3 Appeals - Jurisdiction of the Court - Whether it may review, on grounds of fairness, the appraisal at first instance of the amount of a fine imposed on an undertaking - Excluded

Summary

1 Access to the file in competition cases is intended in particular to enable the addressees of statements of objections to acquaint themselves with the evidence in the Commission's file so that on the basis of that evidence they can express their views effectively on the conclusions reached by the Commission in its statement of objections. The general principles of Community law governing the right of access to the Commission's file are designed to ensure effective exercise of the rights of the defence.

In the case of a decision concerning infringement of the competition rules applicable to undertakings and imposing fines or penalty payments, breach of those general principles of Community law in the procedure prior to the adoption of the decision can, in principle, cause the decision to be annulled if the rights of defence of the undertaking concerned have been infringed.

In such a case, the infringement committed is not remedied by the mere fact that access was made possible at a later stage, in particular during the judicial proceedings relating to an action in which annulment of the contested decision is sought. However, such an infringement does not bring about the annulment of the decision in question unless the undertaking concerned shows that it could have used the documents to which it was denied access for its defence.

2 No provision requires the Community judicature to deliver on the same date its judgments on applications for annulment of the same measure. On the contrary, Article 43 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court and Article 50 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance make it clear that joinder of cases concerning the same subject-matter is merely a discretionary power and that, having once been joined, cases may subsequently be disjoined.

3 It is not for the Court of Justice, where it is deciding questions of law in the context of an appeal, to substitute, on grounds of fairness, its own appraisal for that of the Court of First Instance adjudicating, in the exercise of its unlimited jurisdiction, on the amount of a fine imposed on an undertaking by reason of its infringement of Community competition law.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1. Preliminary rulings ° Jurisdiction of the Court ° Obligation to rule ° Refusal to rule owing to risk that national court' s application of Community law will result in a legal vacuum in national law ° Not permissible

(EEC Treaty, Art. 177)

2. Social policy ° Equal pay for men and women ° National rule restricting overtime supplements for both part-time and full-time employees to hours worked in excess of the normal full-time hours ° Whether permissible

(EEC Treaty, Art. 119; Council Directive 75/117, Art. 1)

Summary

1. The Court of Justice is in principle bound to give a preliminary ruling if the questions raised by the national court or tribunal, which is best placed to appreciate, in the light of the circumstances of the case, the necessity of obtaining a preliminary ruling, have to do with the interpretation of a provision of Community law. In particular, the Court cannot refuse to supply the national court with the elements of Community law which it seeks on the basis of the argument that the ruling might lead the court to annul national provisions and thus create a legal vacuum in national law.

2. Article 119 of the Treaty and Article 1 of Directive 75/117 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the application of the principle of equal pay for men and women does not prevent collective agreements from restricting payment of overtime supplements, for both part -time and full-time employees, to cases where the normal working hours fixed by them are exceeded, excluding hours worked in excess of the hours fixed by individual contracts.

Such rules do not result in part-time employees being treated differently to full-time employees because the former receive the same overall pay as full-time employees for the same number of hours worked, whether or not the normal working hours fixed by collective agreement are exceeded, overtime supplements being paid to all categories of employees only when those normal working hours are exceeded.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Member States ° Obligations ° Failure to fulfil ° Failure to fulfil specific obligations under a directive and failure to fulfil a general obligation under Article 5 of the Treaty

(EEC Treaty, Arts 5 and 169)

Summary

Where a Member State has failed to fulfil its specific obligations under a directive, it serves no purpose to consider the question whether it has thereby also failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 5 of the Treaty.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Common Customs Tariff - Tariff headings - Travel goods in PVC internally reinforced with fabric - Classification within Chapter 42 of the Combined Nomenclature as articles with outer surface of plastic - Criteria

Summary

For the purposes of the application of the subheadings in Chapter 42 of the Combined Nomenclature, travel goods in cellular plastic (PVC), internally reinforced with fabric, are to be regarded as goods with outer surface of plastic and not of textile material, if the textile material merely acts as reinforcement. Textile products which are untreated, unbleached, bleached or uniformly dyed, where applied to one surface only of plates, sheets and strips of cellular plastic, merely act as reinforcement.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Free movement of goods ° Quantitative restrictions ° Measures having equivalent effect ° National rules prohibiting the marketing of telecommunications terminals which have not been approved, even where those are stated to be intended for re-export ° Whether permissible ° Corollary of the power conferred on the Member States by Directive 88/301

(EEC Treaty, Art. 30; Commission Directive 88/301/EEC, Art. 3)

Summary

Neither Article 30 of the EEC Treaty nor Directive 88/301 on competition in the markets in telecommunications terminal equipment, certain provisions of which implement Article 30, precludes national rules which prohibit traders, with penalties for infringement, from importing terminal equipment which has not been approved for release for consumption, possessing it with a view to sale, selling, distributing or advertising it, even if the importer, holder or vendor has clearly stated that such equipment is intended solely for re-export, where there is no certainty that it will actually be re-exported, and is therefore not suitable for connection to the public network, but where on the contrary the findings of the national court indicate that most of it is not re-exported.

While Article 3 confers on traders the right to import and market terminal equipment, it permits the Member States to check the equipment in order to establish whether it satisfies certain essential requirements, that is to say in particular, user safety, safety of employees of public telecommunications network operators, protection of public telecommunications networks from harm and interworking of terminal equipment in justified cases. The power so conferred on the Member States would be rendered ineffective if it were possible to undertake the abovementioned activities without any guarantee that the equipment in question will actually be re-exported.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1. Actions for annulment of measures ° Measures against which actions may be brought ° Definition ° Measures having binding legal effects ° Administrative procedure applying the competition rules ° Commission letter closing the file ° Admissibility of an action brought by the complainant

(EEC Treaty, Art. 173; Council Regulation No 17, Art. 3(2))

2. Actions for annulment of measures ° Measures against which actions may be brought ° Decision to close the file on a complaint in the course of the Commission' s application of the competition rules ° Decision lacking a statement of reasons ° No effect

(EEC Treaty, Art. 173; Council Regulation No 17, Art. 3(2))

Summary

1. An institution empowered to find that there has been an infringement and to inflict a sanction in respect of it and to which private persons may make complaint necessarily adopts a measure producing legal effects when it terminates an investigation initiated upon a complaint by such a person. That decision to close the file cannot be described as preliminary or preparatory. In fact, unlike a communication which is intended to afford to the undertakings concerned the opportunity of making known their point of view and which does not prevent the Commission from altering its position, the decision to close the file is the final step in the administrative procedure; it cannot be followed by any other decision amenable to annulment proceedings. A letter closing the file on a complaint may be analysed as a preliminary or preparatory statement of position only if the Commission has clearly indicated that its conclusion is valid only subject to the submission by the parties of supplementary observations.

2. At the stage when the admissibility of a action brought against a letter closing the file on a complaint in a competition matter is being examined, it matters little whether the contested letter contains an assessment under one of the articles of the Treaty of the conduct complained of. That question is of relevance only in order to verify in the course of the examination as to substance whether the Commission has performed its duty to provide a statement of reasons.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Officials ° Remuneration ° Expatriation allowance ° Habitual residence in the Member State to which the official is posted during the reference period ° Definition ° Episodic and brief absence from that State at the beginning of the reference period ° Circumstance having no effect on the habitual character of the residence

(Staff Regulations, Annex VII, Article 4(1)(a))

Summary

The purpose of the expatriation allowance is to compensate officials for the extra expense and inconvenience of taking up employment with the Communities if they have been thereby obliged to change their residence and move to the country of employment and to integrate themselves in a new environment. Furthermore, the concept of expatriation also depends on the personal position of an official, that is to say, on the extent to which he is integrated in his new environment, which is demonstrated, for example, by habitual residence or by the main occupation pursued.

Having regard to the purpose underlying the expatriation allowance and to the wording of Article 4(1)(a) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations, the criterion for awarding an expatriation allowance is habitual residence, which is the place in which the official concerned has established, with the intention that it should be of a lasting character, the permanent or habitual centre of his interests. However, for the purposes of determining such residence, all the factual circumstances which constitute it must be taken into account. In that connection, a brief and episodic absence from the Member State to which the official is posted, at the beginning of the reference period preceding his entry into service, does not mean that the official concerned has moved the centre of his interests and cannot be regarded as terminating, for the purposes of the Staff Regulations, his habitual residence in that State.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Freedom to provide services ° Principle of non-discrimination ° Undertaking established in one Member State transferring employees who are nationals of non-member countries to another Member State for as long as necessary to carry out the work ° Application by the host Member State of its rules on access to employment for workers from non-member countries ° Not permissible with regard to workers lawfully employed in the Member State in which the employer is established

(EEC Treaty, Arts 59 and 60)

Summary

Articles 59 and 60 of the EEC Treaty must be interpreted as precluding a Member State from requiring undertakings which are established in another Member State and enter the first Member State in order to provide services, and which lawfully and habitually employ nationals of non-member countries, to obtain work permits for those workers from a national immigration authority and to pay the attendant costs, with the imposition of an administrative fine as the penalty for infringement.

The requirements of such a system are more onerous for undertakings established in another Member State than they are for providers of services established within the host State and go beyond what may be laid down as a precondition for the provision of services, with regard to workers who are nationals of a non-member country lawfully employed in the Member State in which the employer is established, where they have been issued with work permits, and who hold valid documents permitting them to remain in the Member State where services are to be provided for as long as necessary to carry out the work and who do not in any way seek access to the labour market in that second State, if they return to their country of origin or residence after completion of their work.