larimo/cjeu-paragraph-retrieval huggingface dataset:
Irmtraud Junk v Wolfgang Kühnel.
Date: 2005-01-27
29. In this connection, the need for uniform application of Community law and the principle of equality require that the terms of a provision of Community law which makes no express reference to the law of the Member States for the purpose of determining its meaning and scope must normally be given an autonomous and uniform interpretation throughout the Community, which must take into account the context of the provision and the purpose of the legislation in question (see, inter alia, Case C-287/98 Linster and Others  [2000] ECR I-6917, paragraph 43, and Case C-55/02 Commission  v Portugal  [2004] ECR I-0000, paragraph 45).
33. It must be borne in mind in this regard that, according to settled case-law, the necessity for uniform application and accordingly for uniform interpretation of a Community measure makes it impossible to consider one version of the text in isolation, but requires that it be interpreted on the basis of both the real intention of its author and the aim he seeks to achieve, in the light, in particular, of the versions in all languages (see, inter alia, Case 29/69 Stauder  [1969] ECR 419, paragraph 3; Case 55/87 Moksel  [1988] ECR 3845, paragraph 15; and Case C‑268/99 Jany and Others  [2001] ECR I-8615, paragraph 47).
36. The case in which the employer ‘is contemplating’ collective redundancies and has drawn up a ‘project’ to that end corresponds to a situation in which no decision has yet been taken.  By contrast, the notification to a worker that his or her contract of employment has been terminated is the expression of a decision to sever the employment relationship, and the actual cessation of that relationship on the expiry of the period of notice is no more than the effect of that decision.
37. Thus, the terms used by the Community legislature indicate that the obligations to consult and to notify arise prior to any decision by the employer to terminate contracts of employment.
38. Finally, this interpretation is confirmed, in regard to the procedure for consultation of workers’ representatives, by the purpose of the directive, as set out in Article 2(2), which is to avoid terminations of contracts of employment or to reduce the number of such terminations. The achievement of that purpose would be jeopardised if the consultation of workers’ representatives were to be subsequent to the employer’s decision.
43. It thus appears that Article 2 of the directive imposes an obligation to negotiate.
45. A contract of employment may therefore be terminated only after the conclusion of the consultation procedure, that is to say, after the employer has complied with the obligations set out in Article 2 of the directive.
48. Article 4(2) states that the competent authority must use the period provided for in Article 4(1) for the purpose of seeking such solutions.
Guy Denuit and Betty Cordenier v Transorient - Mosaïque Voyages et Culture SA.
Date: 2005-01-27
12. In order to determine whether a body making a reference is a court or tribunal of a Member State for the purposes of Article 234 EC, the Court takes account of a number of factors, such as whether the body is established by law, whether it is permanent, whether its jurisdiction is compulsory, whether its procedure is inter partes , whether it applies rules of law and whether it is independent (see, in particular, Case C-54/96 Dorsch Consult [1997] ECR I-4961, paragraph 23, and the case-law there cited, and Case C-516/99 Schmid [2002] ECR I-4573, paragraph 34).
13. Under the Court’s case-law, an arbitration tribunal is not a ‘court or tribunal of a Member State’ within the meaning of Article 234 EC where the parties are under no obligation, in law or in fact, to refer their disputes to arbitration and the public authorities of the Member State concerned are not involved in the decision to opt for arbitration nor required to intervene of their own accord in the proceedings before the arbitrator (Case 102/81 ‘ Nordsee’ Deutsche Hochseefischerei  [1982] ECR 1095, paragraphs 10 to 12, and Case C-126/97 Eco Swiss [1999] ECR I-3055, paragraph 34).
Optiver BV and Others v Stichting Autoriteit Financiële Markten.
Date: 2005-03-10
30. It follows that such a duty, payable pursuant to a legal rule laid down by the State, is paid by private persons to an entity carrying out a public mission in order to finance that mission.
31. As the Commission correctly contends, while it is true that, in the light of those characteristics, it cannot be validly maintained that the duty is not a tax, the fact remains that that duty does not constitute a tax prohibited by Directive 69/335, since it does not fall within the scope of that directive.
33. Second, as the taxable base is made up of the gross profits made by the securities intermediaries in the exercise of various activities, the duty is more in the nature of a direct tax on income and therefore falls within a category of taxes not covered by Directive 69/335 (see, in particular, Case C-287/94 Frederiksen  [1996] ECR I‑4581, paragraph 21, and Case C-113/99 P.P. Handelsgesellschaft  [2000] ECR I-471, paragraphs 24 and 27).
Commission of the European Communities v United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
Date: 2005-03-10
16. It must first be recalled in this connection that the provisions of Article 17 specify the conditions giving rise to the right to deduct and the extent of the right to deduct.  They do not leave the Member States any discretion as regards their implementation (Case C-62/93 BP Soupergaz  [1995] ECR I-1883, paragraph 35, and Case C-388/98 Commission  v Netherlands  [2001] ECR I-8265, paragraph 43).
25. As regards the United Kingdom Government’s argument that the practice adopted by the tax authorities guarantees the existence of an obligatory link between the employer’s right to deduct VAT and the use of the fuel by the employees for the employer’s taxed operations, it must be borne in mind that it is settled case-law that the incompatibility of national legislation with Community provisions can be finally remedied only by means of national provisions of a binding nature which have the same legal force as those which must be amended. Mere administrative practices cannot be regarded as constituting the proper fulfilment of obligations under Community law (Case C-197/96 Commission  v France  [1997] ECR I-1489, paragraph 14; Case C-358/98 Commission  v Italy  [2000] ECR I-1255, paragraph 17, and Case C-145/99 Commission  v Italy  [2002] ECR I-2235, paragraph 30).
QDQ Media SA v Alejandro Omedas Lecha.
Date: 2005-03-10
13. In order to answer the national court, it should be recalled that, according to settled case-law, when applying national law, whether adopted before or after a directive, the national court having to interpret that law must do so, as far as possible, in the light of the wording and the purpose of the directive so as to achieve the result it has in view and thereby comply with the third paragraph of Article 249 EC (see, in particular, Case C-343/98 Collino and Chiappero [2000] ECR I-6659, paragraph 21).
16. In such a case, which relates to a dispute between individuals, as in the main proceedings, a directive cannot of itself impose obligations on an individual and cannot be relied upon as such against an individual (see, in particular, Case 152/84 Marshall  [1986] ECR 723, paragraph 48, and Joined Cases C-397/01 to C-403/01 Pfeiffer  [2004] ECR I-0000, paragraph 108).
easyCar (UK) Ltd v Office of Fair Trading.
Date: 2005-03-10
16. In that regard, it should be recalled that the Court may order that the oral procedure be reopened, in accordance with Article 61 of its Rules of Procedure, if it considers that it lacks sufficient information, or that the case must be dealt with on the basis of an argument which has not been debated between the parties (see Joined Cases C-270/97 and C‑271/97 Deutsche Post  [2000] ECR I-929, paragraph 30, and Case C‑299/99 Philips  [2002] ECR I-5475, paragraph 20).
20. In that regard, it must be stated from the outset that neither the directive nor the documents relevant for its interpretation, such as the travaux préparatoires , provide clarification of the exact scope of the concept of ‘transport services’ mentioned in Article 3(2) of the directive. Similarly, the general scheme of the directive shows only that its objective is to entitle consumers to extensive protection by conferring on them certain rights, including the right of withdrawal, and that Article 3(2) provides for an exemption from those rights in four closely‑related sectors of economic activity, including that of transport services.
21. It is settled case‑law that the meaning and scope of terms for which Community law provides no definition must be determined by considering their usual meaning in everyday language, while also taking into account the context in which they occur and the purposes of the rules of which they are part (Case C-128/94 Hönig  [1995] ECR I-3389, paragraph 9, and Case C-164/98 P DIR International Film and Others  v Commission [2000] ECR I-447, paragraph 26). When those terms appear, as in the main proceedings, in a provision which constitutes a derogation from a principle or, more specifically, from Community rules for the protection of consumers, they must, in addition, be interpreted strictly (Case C‑83/99 Commission  v Spain [2001] ECR I-445, paragraph 19, and Case C‑481/99 Heininger  [2001] ECR I-9945, paragraph 31).
Kingdom of Spain v Council of the European Union.
Date: 2005-03-10
19. However, as the Court has already made clear, that preference is by no means a legal requirement infringement of which could result in the invalidity of the measure concerned (Case C-353/92 Greece  v Council  [1994] ECR I-3411, paragraph 50).
47. Any trader on the part of whom an institution has inspired reasonable expectations may rely on the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations. Further, there is nothing to prevent a Member State from claiming in an action for annulment that an act of the institutions frustrates the legitimate expectations of particular traders (Case C‑284/94 Spain  v Council  [1998] ECR I‑7309, paragraph 42, and Joined Cases C-37/02 and C-38/02 Di Lenardo and Dilexport  [2004] ECR I‑0000, paragraph 70).
48. However, if those traders can foresee the adoption of the Community measure which affects their interests, the benefit of the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations cannot be invoked (Case C‑22/94 Irish Farmers Association and Others  [1997] ECR I‑1809, paragraph 25, and Di Lenardo and Dilexport , cited above, paragraph 70).
49. In this case, since the Community institutions enjoy a margin of discretion in the choice of the means needed to achieve the common commercial policy, traders cannot claim to have a legitimate expectation that an existing situation will be maintained (see, to that effect, Spain  v Council , cited above, paragraph 43).
54. The statement of reasons required by Article 253 EC must show clearly and unequivocally the reasoning of the institution which enacted the measure, so as to inform the persons concerned of the justification for the measure adopted and to enable the Court to exercise its powers of review ( Greece  v Council , cited above, paragraph 19, and Case C‑301/97 Netherlands  v Council [2001] ECR I-8853, paragraph 187).
55. In the case of a measure intended to have general application, as here, the preamble may be limited to indicating the general situation which led to its adoption, on the one hand, and the general objectives which it is intended to achieve, on the other ( Spain  v Council , paragraph 28, and Netherlands  v Council , paragraph 189).
64. As the Court has held time and again, a measure is only vitiated by misuse of powers if it appears, on the basis of objective, relevant and consistent evidence to have been taken with the exclusive or main purpose of achieving an end other than that stated or evading a procedure specifically prescribed by the Treaty for dealing with the circumstances of the case (Case C-48/96 P Windpark Groothusen  v Commission  [1998] ECR I-2873, paragraph 52, and Case C‑110/97 Netherlands  v Council  [2001] ECR I‑8763, paragraph 137).
Criminal proceedings against Filomeno Mario Miraglia.
Date: 2005-03-10
30. Now, a judicial decision, such as that at issue in the case in the main proceedings, taken after the public prosecutor has decided not to pursue the prosecution on the sole ground that criminal proceedings have been initiated in another Member State against the same defendant and in respect of the same acts, but where no determination has been made as to the merits of the case, cannot constitute a decision finally disposing of the case against that person within the meaning of Article 54 of the CISA.
32. It is in fact settled case-law that the objective of Article 54 of the CISA is to ensure that no one is prosecuted on the same facts in several Member States on account of his having exercised his right to freedom of movement (Joined Cases C-187/01 and C-385/01 Gözütok and Brügge [2003] ECR I-1345, paragraph 38).
33. Now, the consequence of applying that article to a decision to close criminal proceedings, such as that in question in the main proceedings, would be to make it more difficult, indeed impossible, actually to penalise in the Member States concerned the unlawful conduct with which the defendant is charged.
34. First, that decision to close proceedings was adopted by the judicial authorities of a Member State when there had been no assessment whatsoever of the unlawful conduct with which the defendant was charged.  Next, the bringing of criminal proceedings in another Member State in respect of the same facts would be jeopardised even when it was the very bringing of those proceedings that justified the discontinuance of the prosecution by the Public Prosecutor in the first Member State.  Such a consequence would clearly run counter to the very purpose of the provisions of Title VI of the Treaty on European Union, as set out in the fourth indent of the first subparagraph of Article 2 EU, namely: ‘to maintain and develop the Union as an area of freedom, security and justice, in which the free movement of persons is assured in conjunction with appropriate measures with respect to  … prevention and combating of crime’.
35. Consequently, the reply to be given to the question referred has to be that the principle ne bis in idem , enshrined in Article 54 of the CISA, does not fall to be applied to a decision of the judicial authorities of one Member State declaring a case to be closed, after the Public Prosecutor has decided not to pursue the prosecution on the sole ground that criminal proceedings have been started in another Member State against the same defendant and for the same acts, without any determination whatsoever as to the merits of the case.
Ottmar Hermann v Stadt Frankfurt am Main.
Date: 2005-03-10
16. It is important to note, as a preliminary point, that Article 3(2) of Directive 92/12 lays down strict requirements for indirect taxes imposed by Member States in the case of products subject to excise duty, such as alcoholic beverages. That provision states that indirect taxes, other than excise duty, must have ‘specific purposes’, namely purposes other than purely budgetary purposes (Case C-434/97 Commission v France [2000] ECR I‑1129, paragraph 19, and Case C-437/97 EKW and Wein & Co. [2000] ECR I‑1157, paragraph 31), and that they must also comply with ‘the tax rules applicable for excise duty and VAT purposes as far as determination of the tax base, calculation of the tax, chargeability and monitoring of the tax are concerned’.
21. In order to determine whether the tax imposed by the GetrStS applies to products subject to excise duty for the purposes of Article 3(2) of Directive 92/12 or, rather, to the services supplied in relation to such products for the purposes of the second subparagraph of Article 3(3), regard must be had to the predominant feature of the transaction on which it is imposed (see, by analogy, Faaborg-Gelting Linien , cited above, paragraphs 12 to 14).
22. Where the marketing of a product is always accompanied by a minimal supply of services (such as the displaying of the products on shelves, the issuing of an invoice, etc.), only services other than those which necessarily accompany the marketing of a product may be taken into account in assessing the part played by the supply of services within the whole of a complex transaction also involving the supply of a product.
26. The supply of alcoholic beverages to customers in a catering context is accompanied by a series of services other than the operations which are necessarily connected with the marketing of such products. Those services consist in placing an infrastructure at the customer’s disposal, including a dining room with furniture and appurtenances (cloakrooms, toilets, etc.), providing the customer with advice and explanations concerning the beverages served, serving them to him in a suitable container, serving at table and, finally, clearing the tables and cleaning after the food and drink have been consumed (see, to that effect, Faaborg-Gelting Linien , paragraph 13).
27. A supply of alcoholic beverages in a catering context is characterised by an array of features and acts, of which the supply of the product itself is only one component and in which services predominate.
29. Finally, it must be held that such a tax cannot be ‘characterised as [a] turnover tax …’ within the meaning of that provision where it applies only to a defined category of products, namely alcoholic beverages (see, inter alia, Case 252/86 Bergandi  [1988] ECR 1343, paragraphs 15 and 16; EKW and Wein & Co ., paragraphs 22 and 23, and Case C-308/01 GIL Insurance and Others  [2004] ECR I‑0000, paragraphs 33 and 35).
Kingdom of Spain v Eurojust.
Date: 2005-03-15
38. Moreover, Article 41 EU does not provide that Article 230 EC is to apply to the provisions on police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters in Title VI of the Treaty on European Union, the jurisdiction of the Court in such matters being defined in Article 35 EU, to which Article 46(b) EU refers.
Commission of the European Communities v AMI Semiconductor Belgium BVBA and Others.
Date: 2005-03-17
75. In the first place, they infringe the requirements of Article 38 of the Rules of Procedure. According to that article, parties are required to state the subject-matter of the proceedings in their originating application. Even though Article 42 of the Rules of Procedure allows new pleas in law to be introduced in certain circumstances, a party may not alter the actual subject-matter of the action in the course of the proceedings (see Case 232/78 Commission  v France  [1979] ECR 2729, paragraph 3, and Case 125/78 GEMA  v Commission  [1979] ECR 3173, paragraph 26). New claims put forward for the first time at the hearing could not be allowed without depriving defendants of an opportunity to prepare a response and thereby breaching the rights of the defence.
Kingdom of Spain v Council of the European Union.
Date: 2005-03-17
43. It is settled case-law that the principle of non-discrimination requires that comparable situations must not be treated differently unless such treatment is objectively justified (Joined Cases 201/85 and 202/85 Klensch and Others  [1986] ECR 3477, paragraph 9).
Staatssecretaris van Financiën v J. H. M. Feron.
Date: 2005-03-17
11. In that respect, it is sufficient to recall that the Court has repeatedly held that it has jurisdiction to give preliminary rulings on questions concerning Community provisions in situations where the facts of the cases being considered by the national courts were outside the scope of Community law but where those provisions had been rendered applicable by domestic law (see, in particular, Case C-28/95 Leur-Bloem  [1997] ECR I-4161, paragraph 27, Case C-130/95 Giloy [1997] ECR I-4291, paragraph 23, and Case C‑247/97 Schoonbroodt  [1998] ECR I‑8095, paragraph 14).
20. Second, by virtue of the same provision, what is really essential is that the personal property is not such as might indicate, by its nature or quantity, that it is being imported for commercial reasons.
26. It follows from the need for uniform application of Community law and the principle of equality that the terms of a provision of Community law which makes no express reference to the law of the Member States for the purpose of determining its meaning and scope must normally be given an autonomous and uniform interpretation throughout the Community (Case 327/82 Ekro [1984] ECR 107, paragraph 11; Case C-287/98 Linster [2000] ECR I-6917, paragraph 43, and Case C‑357/98 Yiadom  [2000] ECR I‑9265, paragraph 26).
Ikegami Electronics (Europe) GmbH v Oberfinanzdirektion Nürnberg.
Date: 2005-03-17
17. It is settled case‑law that, in the interests of legal certainty and for ease of verification, the decisive criterion for the classification of goods for customs purposes is in general to be sought in their objective characteristics and properties as defined in the wording of the relevant heading of the CN. The Explanatory Notes to the CN formulated by the Commission, and those drawn up within the World Customs Organisation as regards the Harmonised Commodity Description and Coding System (hereinafter ‘the HS’), may be an important aid to the interpretation of the scope of the various tariff headings but do not have legally binding force (see Case C‑130/02 Krings  [2004] ECR I‑0000, paragraph 28).
23. It is important also to make clear that, according to the Court’s case‑law, the intended use of a product may constitute an objective criterion in relation to tariff classification if it is inherent in the product, and such inherent character must be capable of being assessed on the basis of the product’s objective characteristics and properties (Case C‑201/99 Deutsche Nichimen  [2001] ECR I-2701, paragraph 20, and Krings , cited above, paragraph 30).
25. The national court states also that, except for the automatic data processing which the basic equipment it contains enables it to perform, the machine, as equipped, cannot be used for purposes other than the recording and reproduction of images and sounds in the course of video surveillance, as it lacks sufficient software.
26. That particular intended use, which is inherent in the objective characteristics of the components with which the machine in question in the main proceedings is equipped, supports the argument that the machine fulfils a specific function other than automatic data processing.
Criminal proceedings against Annic Andréa Raemdonck and Raemdonck-Janssens BVBA.
Date: 2005-03-17
19. It should be noted that that interpretation is supported by the wording of the provision in issue, by the context in which it appears, as well as by the purpose of the legislation of which it forms part.
22. Finally, as regards consideration of the purpose of the legislation in issue in the main proceedings, it is appropriate to note not only the purpose of the exception provided for in Article 13(1)(g) of Regulation No 3820/85, but also the objectives of that regulation as well as of Regulation No 3821/85. It is common ground that the aim of those regulations is to improve road safety and the working conditions of long distance drivers. Those objectives are reflected in particular in the requirement that road transport vehicles should be equipped with tachographs, so that the driving time and rest periods of the drivers can be checked.