larimo/cjeu-paragraph-retrieval huggingface dataset:
Johannes Gerhardus Klomp v Inspektie der Belastingen.
Date: 1969-02-25
20 QU ' A CET EFFET , IL CONVIENT DE DISTINGUER ENTRE UN IMPOT DESTINE A POURVOIR AUX CHARGES GENERALES DES POUVOIRS PUBLICS ET UNE COTISATION AFFECTEE AU FINANCEMENT D ' UN SYSTEME DE SECURITE SOCIALE , MEME SI LA PERCEPTION D ' UNE TELLE COTISATION SE FAIT DANS DES FORMES EMPRUNTEES A LA PERCEPTION DES REDEVANCES FISCALES ;
Caisse régionale de sécurité sociale du nord de la France v Achille Torrekens.
Date: 1969-05-07
19 ARTICLE 6(2)(E ) PROVIDES, " THE PROVISIONS OF THIS REGULATION NOTWITHSTANDING ", THAT SUCH OTHER PROVISIONS OF SOCIAL SECURITY CONVENTIONS AS ARE LISTED IN ANNEX D SHALL CONTINUE TO APPLY .
20 THE SAID ARTICLE MAKES IT CLEAR THAT THE REGULATION IS NOT INTENDED TO DETRACT FROM THE PROVISIONS OF THESE CONVENTIONS WHICH WERE CONCLUDED BEFORE IT ENTERED INTO FORCE .
21 THE REGULATION THEREFORE CONTINUES TO APPLY TO THE EXTENT TO WHICH THESE CONVENTIONS DO NOT IMPEDE ITS APPLICATION .
Milch-, Fett- und Eierkontor GmbH v Hauptzollamt Saarbrücken.
Date: 1969-06-24
3 AN INTERPRETATION GIVEN BY THE COURT OF JUSTICE BINDS THE NATIONAL COURT IN QUESTION BUT IT IS FOR THE LATTER TO DECIDE WHETHER IT IS SUFFICIENTLY ENLIGHTENED BY THE PRELIMINARY RULING GIVEN OR WHETHER IT IS NECESSARY TO MAKE A FURTHER REFERENCE TO THE COURT .
THIS OBJECTION CANNOT THEREFORE BE SUSTAINED .
Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic.
Date: 1969-07-01
7 IT FOLLOWS FROM THE SYSTEM AS A WHOLE AND FROM THE GENERAL AND ABSOLUTE NATURE OF THE PROHIBITION OF ANY CUSTOMS DUTY APPLICABLE TO GOODS MOVING BETWEEN MEMBER STATES THAT CUSTOMS DUTIES ARE PROHIBITED INDEPENDENTLY OF ANY CONSIDERATION OF THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH THEY WERE INTRODUCED AND THE DESTINATION OF THE REVENUE OBTAINED THEREFROM .
THE JUSTIFICATION FOR THIS PROHIBITION IS BASED ON THE FACT THAT ANY PECUNIARY CHARGE, HOWEVER SMALL, IMPOSED ON GOODS BY REASON OF THE FACT THAT THEY CROSS A FRONTIER CONSTITUTES AN OBSTACLE TO THE MOVEMENT OF SUCH GOODS .
9 THUS, IN ORDER TO ASCRIBE TO A CHARGE AN EFFECT EQUIVALENT TO A CUSTOMS DUTY, IT IS IMPORTANT TO CONSIDER THIS EFFECT IN THE LIGHT OF THE OBJECTIVES OF THE TREATY, IN THE PARTS, TITLES AND CHAPTERS IN WHICH ARTICLES 9, 12, 13 AND 16 ARE TO BE FOUND, PARTICULARLY IN RELATION TO THE FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS .
CONSEQUENTLY, ANY PECUNIARY CHARGE, HOWEVER SMALL AND WHATEVER ITS DESIGNATION AND MODE OF APPLICATION, WHICH IS IMPOSED UNILATERALLY ON DOMESTIC OR FOREIGN GOODS BY REASON OF THE FACT THAT THEY CROSS A FRONTIER, AND WHICH IS NOT A CUSTOMS DUTY IN THE STRICT SENSE, CONSTITUTES A CHARGE HAVING EQUIVALENT EFFECT WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLES 9, 12, 13 AND 16 OF THE TREATY, EVEN IF IT IS NOT IMPOSED FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE STATE, IS NOT DISCRIMINATORY OR PROTECTIVE IN EFFECT AND IF THE PRODUCT ON WHICH THE CHARGE IS IMPOSED IS NOT IN COMPETITION WITH ANY DOMESTIC PRODUCT .
14 IT IS OF NO CONSEQUENCE FOR ITS DESIGNATION UNDER THE TREATY WHETHER THE DISPUTED CHARGE IS TREATED AS A GENERAL CHARGE OR AS TWO DISTINCT CHARGES, ONE ON EXPORTS AND THE OTHER ON IMPORTS .
AS IT IS IMPOSED UNIVERSALLY ON GOODS CROSSING THE FRONTIER, THE CHARGE IN QUESTION HAMPERS THE INTERPENETRATION AT WHICH THE TREATY AIMS AND THUS HAS AN EFFECT ON THE FREE CIRCULATION OF GOODS EQUIVALENT TO A CUSTOMS DUTY .
THE VERY LOW RATE OF THE CHARGE CANNOT CHANGE ITS CHARACTER WITH REGARD TO THE PRINCIPLES OF THE TREATY WHICH FOR THE PURPOSE OF DETERMINING THE LEGALITY OF THOSE CHARGES, DO NOT ADMIT OF THE SUBSTITUTION OF QUANTITATIVE CRITERIA FOR THOSE BASED ON THE NATURE OF THE CHARGE .
16 THE STATISTICAL INFORMATION IN QUESTION IS BENEFICIAL TO THE ECONOMY AS A WHOLE AND INTER ALIA TO THE RELEVANT ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITIES .
EVEN IF THE COMPETITIVE POSITION OF IMPORTERS AND EXPORTERS WERE TO BE PARTICULARLY IMPROVED AS A RESULT, THE STATISTICS STILL CONSTITUTE AN ADVANTAGE SO GENERAL, AND SO DIFFICULT TO ASSESS, THAT THE DISPUTED CHARGE CANNOT BE REGARDED AS THE CONSIDERATION FOR A SPECIFIC BENEFIT ACTUALLY CONFERRED .
Sociaal Fonds voor de Diamantarbeiders v S.A. Ch. Brachfeld & Sons and Chougol Diamond Co.
Date: 1969-07-01
13 QU ' IL RESULTE DE L ' ENSEMBLE DU SYSTEME , ET DU CARACTERE GENERAL ET ABSOLU DE L ' INTERDICTION DE TOUT DROIT DE DOUANE APPLICABLE AUX MARCHANDISES CIRCULANT ENTRE LES ETATS MEMBRES , QUE LES DROITS DE DOUANE SONT INTERDITS INDEPENDAMMENT DE TOUTE CONSIDERATION DU BUT EN VUE DUQUEL ILS ONT ETE INSTITUES , AINSI QUE DE LA DESTINATION DES RECETTES QU ' ILS PROCURENT ;
18 QUE , DES LORS , UNE CHARGE PECUNIAIRE , FUT-ELLE MINIME , UNILATERALEMENT IMPOSEE , QUELLES QUE SOIENT SON APPELLATION ET SA TECHNIQUE , ET FRAPPANT LES MARCHANDISES NATIONALES OU ETRANGERES A RAISON DU FAIT QU ' ELLES FRANCHISSENT LA FRONTIERE , LORSQU ' ELLE N ' EST PAS UN DROIT DE DOUANE PROPREMENT DIT , CONSTITUE UNE TAXE D ' EFFET EQUIVALENT , AU SENS DES ARTICLES 9 ET 12 DU TRAITE , ALORS MEME QU ' ELLE NE SERAIT PAS PERCUE AU PROFIT DE L ' ETAT , QU ' ELLE N ' EXERCERAIT AUCUN EFFET DISCRIMINATOIRE OU PROTECTEUR , ET QUE LE PRODUIT IMPOSE NE SE TROUVERAIT PAS EN CONCURRENCE AVEC UNE PRODUCTION NATIONALE ;
Italian Republic v Commission of the European Communities.
Date: 1969-07-09
9 A STATEMENT OF REASONS MUST SHOW CLEARLY AND UNAMBIGUOUSLY THE GROUNDS ON WHICH THE MEASURE IS BASED . ALTHOUGH THE STATEMENT OF REASONS IN QUESTION SEEMS FOR THE MOST PART TO SET OUT THE REASONS WHICH LED THE COMMISSION TO AUTHORIZE THE TARIFF IN DISPUTE, RATHER THAN TO JUSTIFY THE LIMITED DURATION OF THE AUTHORIZATION, NEVERTHELESS THE WORDING AND, IN PARTICULAR, THE REFERENCE IN THE NOTES TO PREVIOUS DECISIONS OF THE COMMISSION, WERE SUFFICIENT TO INFORM THE ITALIAN GOVERNMENT, TO WHOM THESE DECISIONS WERE ADDRESSED, OF THE GROUNDS ON WHICH IT WAS BASED AND TO SHOW IN WHAT LIGHT ITS REQUEST FOR AN AUTHORIZATION HAD BEEN EXAMINED AND CONSIDERED .
S.A. Portelange v S.A. Smith Corona Marchant International and others.
Date: 1969-07-09
10 TO TREAT A GIVEN AGREEMENT, OR CERTAIN OF ITS CLAUSES, AS AUTOMATICALLY VOID PRESUPPOSES THAT THAT AGREEMENT FALLS WITHIN THE PROHIBITION OF PARAGRAPH ( 1 ) OF THE SAID ARTICLE AND THAT IT MAY NOT BENEFIT FROM THE PROVISIONS OF PARAGRAPH ( 3 ).
Caisse de maladie des C.F.L. "Entr'aide médicale" and Société nationale des chemins de fer luxembourgeois v Compagnie belge d'assurances générales sur la vie et contre les accidents.
Date: 1969-11-12
4 THE FACT THAT THE SAID PROVISION EVEN REFERS TO PERSONS WHO COME OR HAVE COME UNDER THE LEGISLATION OF A SINGLE MEMBER STATE SHOWS THAT, FAR FROM REFERRING SOLELY TO MIGRANT WORKERS WITHIN THE STRICT MEANING OF THE TERM, THE REGULATION IS APPLICABLE TO ANY WAGE - EARNER OR ASSIMILATED WORKER WHO FINDS HIMSELF IN ONE OF THE SITUATIONS INVOLVING INTERNATIONAL ELEMENTS AS PROVIDED FOR IN THE SAID REGULATION, AS AS TO HIS SURVIVORS .
15 BY THE GENERAL NATURE OF ITS TERMS, THE OBJECT OF ARTICLE 52 IS TO SECURE THE RECOGNITION BY EACH MEMBER STATE OF ANY RIGHT OF ACTION PURSUED BY THE OTHERS IN FAVOUR OF THE INSTITUTION LIABLE FOR PAYMENT OF BENEFIT AGAINST THE THIRD PARTY LIABLE, EITHER BY MEANS OF SUBROGATION OR ANY OTHER LEGAL METHOD .
Erich Stauder v City of Ulm - Sozialamt.
Date: 1969-11-12
3 WHEN A SINGLE DECISION IS ADDRESSED TO ALL THE MEMBER STATES THE NECESSITY FOR UNIFORM APPLICATION AND ACCORDINGLY FOR UNIFORM INTERPRETATION 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 FOUR LANGUAGES .
7 INTERPRETED IN THIS WAY THE PROVISION AT ISSUE CONTAINS NOTHING CAPABLE OF PREJUDICING THE FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHTS ENSHRINED IN THE GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF COMMUNITY LAW AND PROTECTED BY THE COURT .
Società "Eridania" Zuccherifici Nazionali and others v Commission of the European Communities supported by Co. Pro. B. - Cooperativa Produttori Bieticoli and others.
Date: 1969-12-10
7 THE MERE FACT THAT A MEASURE MAY EXERCISE AN INFLUENCE ON THE COMPETITIVE RELATIONSHIPS EXISTING ON THE MARKET IN QUESTION CANNOT SUFFICE TO ALLOW ANY TRADER IN ANY COMPETITIVE RELATIONSHIP WHATEVER WITH THE ADDRESSEE OF THE MEASURE TO BE REGARDED AS DIRECTLY AND INDIVIDUALLY CONCERNED BY THAT MEASURE .
ONLY THE EXISTENCE OF SPECIFIC CIRCUMSTANCES MAY ENABLE A PERSON SUBJECT TO COMMUNITY LAW AND CLAIMING THAT THE MEASURE AFFECTS HIS POSITION ON THE MARKET TO BRING PROCEEDINGS UNDER ARTICLE 173 .
Commission of the European Communities v French Republic.
Date: 1969-12-10
20 A PREFERENTIAL REDISCOUNT RATE FOR EXPORTS, GRANTED BY A STATE IN FAVOUR ONLY OF NATIONAL PRODUCTS EXPORTED AND FOR THE PURPOSE OF HELPING THEM TO COMPETE IN OTHER MEMBER STATES WITH PRODUCTS ORIGINATING IN THE LATTER, CONSTITUTES AN AID WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 92 THE OBSERVANCE OF WHICH IT IS THE COMMISSION'S TASK TO ENSURE .
21 NEITHER THE FACT THAT THE PREFERENTIAL RATE IN QUESTION IS APPLICABLE TO ALL NATIONAL PRODUCTS EXPORTED AND ONLY TO THEM NOR THE FACT THAT IN ESTABLISHING IT THE FRENCH GOVERNMENT MAY HAVE RESOLVED TO APPROXIMATE THE RATE TO THOSE APPLIED IN THE OTHER MEMBER COUNTRIES CAN REMOVE FROM THE MEASURE IN QUESTION THE CHARACTER OF AN AID WHICH IS PROHIBITED EXCEPT IN THE CASES AND PROCEDURES PROVIDED FOR BY THE TREATY .
36 THIS OPINION CONSTITUTES ONLY THE PRE - LITIGIOUS STAGE OF A PROCEDURE WHICH MAY LEAD TO AN ACTION BEFORE THE COURT OF JUSTICE AND THE ASSESSMENT OF THE VALIDITY OF THIS OPINION MERGES WITH THAT OF THE VALIDITY OF THE ACTION ITSELF WHICH THE COMMISSION HAS BROUGHT BEFORE THE COURT OF JUSTICE UNDER ARTICLE 169 .
43 THE SECOND SUBPARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 67(2 ) OF THE ECSC TREATY IN PROVIDING FOR SITUATIONS ENABLING THE COMMISSION TO AUTHORIZE MEMBER STATES, IN DEROGATION FROM ARTICLE 4, TO GRANT AID, DOES NOT DISTINGUISH BETWEEN AID SPECIFIC TO THE COAL AND STEEL SECTOR AND AID WHICH APPLIES TO IT AS THE RESULT OF A GENERAL MEASURE .
44 A PREFERENTIAL REDISCOUNT RATE FOR EXPORTS THEREFORE CONSTITUTES AID WHICH, WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 67, MUST BE AUTHORIZED BY THE COMMISSION IN SO FAR AS IT CONCERNS THE COAL AND STEEL SECTOR .
Gustav Wonnerth v Commission of the European Communities.
Date: 1969-12-10
6 THE PURPOSE OF HIS SEEKING THESE RULINGS IS EITHER TO OBTAIN ACCEPTANCE OF THE VALIDITY OF CERTAIN OF THE SUBMISSIONS PUT FORWARD IN SUPPORT OF THE APPLICATION FOR ANNULMENT, OR TO INDUCE THE COURT AT THIS STAGE TO GIVE INSTRUCTIONS TO THE AUTHORITY RESPONSIBLE FOR ENFORCING THE JUDGMENT TO BE DELIVERED IN THIS INSTANCE .
Caisse d'assurance vieillesse des travailleurs salariés de Paris v Jeanne Duffy.
Date: 1969-12-10
9 IN THE ABSENCE OF SUCH A COUNTERBALANCE, SUCH LIMITATIONS CANNOT BE JUSTIFIED SINCE THEY WOULD RESULT IN PLACING THE WORKER IN A SITUATION LESS FAVOURABLE THAN THAT WHICH, WERE IT NOT FOR THE REGULATIONS, WOULD FOLLOW FROM THE APPLICATION OF NATIONAL LAW OR OF THE SPECIAL CONVENTIONS BETWEEN MEMBER STATES .
August Joseph van Eick v Commission of the European Communities.
Date: 1970-02-04
3 TAKING ACCOUNT OF THE SPECIAL FEATURES INHERENT IN THE SUBJECT-MATTER GOVERNED BY ANNEX IX TO THE STAFF REGULATIONS AND HAVING REGARD TO THE OTHER PROVISIONS OF THAT ANNEX APPLICABLE TO DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS, THE TIME-LIMIT LAID DOWN BY THE ABOVE-MENTIONED ARTICLE CANNOT BE REGARDED AS A MANDATORY PERIOD OF LIMITATION THE FAILURE TO OBSERVE WHICH ENTAILS THE NULLITY OF THE MEASURES ADOPTED AFTER ITS EXPIRY .
4 BY FIXING THIS TIME-LIMIT THAT ARTICLE LAYS DOWN A RULE OF GOOD ADMINISTRATION, THE PURPOSE OF WHICH IS TO AVOID IN THE INTERESTS BOTH OF THE ADMINISTRATION AND OF OFFICIALS UNJUSTIFIED DELAY ON THE PART OF THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY IN ADOPTING THE DECISION TERMINATING THE DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS .
5 HOWEVER, TO ADMIT THAT IT IS OF NO EFFECT WOULD DEVEST THIS PROVISION OF ITS LEGAL CONTENT .
6 PROMPTED BY THE NECESSITY TO ENSURE THE EFFICIENT AND EQUITABLE WORKING OF DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS, THAT PROVISION IMPOSES ON THE INSTITUTION THE OBLIGATION TO USE ITS BEST ENDEAVOURS TO OBSERVE THE TIME-LIMIT FIXED .
7 ALTHOUGH FAILURE TO OBSERVE THE TIME-LIMIT DOES NOT ENTAIL THE NULLITY OF THE MEASURES TAKEN AFTER IT HAS BEEN EXCEEDED, SUCH FAILURE MAY AS REGARDS THE INSTITUTION AMOUNT TO AN OMISSION CAPABLE OF RENDERING IT LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGE CAUSED TO THOSE CONCERNED .
Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic.
Date: 1970-02-17
9 A FAILURE TO ACT, LIKE A POSITIVE ACT, MAY CONSTITUTE A FAILURE ON THE PART OF A MEMBER STATE TO FULFIL AN OBLIGATION .
FURTHERMORE THE EXISTENCE OF REMEDIES AVAILABLE THROUGH THE NATIONAL COURTS CANNOT IN ANY WAY PREJUDICE THE MAKING OF THE APPLICATION REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 169 SINCE THE TWO PROCEDURES HAVE DIFFERENT OBJECTIVES AND EFFECTS .
FINALLY, WHEN THE APPLICATION OF COMMUNITY REGULATIONS IN EACH MEMBER STATE REQUIRES A MODIFICATION OF CERTAIN PUBLIC SERVICES OR OF THE RULES GOVERNING THEM, THE FAILURE OF THE AUTHORITIES CONCERNED TO TAKE THE NECESSARY MEASURES CONSTITUTES A FAILURE WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 169 AND CONSEQUENTLY COMES WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE COURT .
10 THE SUBMISSION MUST BE REJECTED .
12 DESPITE THE GENERAL NATURE OF ITS WORDING, THE COMMISSION' S LETTER OF 12 JULY 1968 REQUESTING THE ITALIAN GOVERNMENT TO SUBMIT ITS OBSERVATIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 169 CANNOT RELATE TO DELAYS IN PAYMENT FOR PRODUCTS WHICH WERE NOT THEN SUBJECT TO THE SYSTEM OF UNIFORM REFUNDS OR WHICH HAD AT MOST ONLY BEEN SO FOR SEVERAL DAYS .
13 EVEN IF THE MEMBER STATE CONCERNED DOES NOT CONSIDER IT NECESSARY TO AVAIL ITSELF OF THE OPPORTUNITY TO SUBMIT ITS OBSERVATIONS, SUCH AN OPPORTUNITY CONSTITUTES AN ESSENTIAL GUARANTEE REQUIRED BY THE TREATY AND AMOUNTS TO AN ESSENTIAL PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENT IN PROCEEDINGS RELATING TO THE FINDING OF A FAILURE ON THE PART OF A MEMBER STATE .
14 RESPECT FOR THIS GUARANTEE MEANS THAT THE ALLEGED FAILURE TO FULFIL AN OBLIGATION UNDER REGULATIONS ISSUED DURING OR AFTER THE MONTH OF JUNE 1968 MUST BE EXCLUDED FROM THESE PROCEEDINGS .
SUBSTANCE
19 IN THE FIRST HALF OF 1969 IT PAID 6 950 MILLION LIRE, 1 169 MILLION OF WHICH RELATE TO THE THREE PREVIOUS SIX-MONTHLY PERIODS .
NEVERTHELESS AMONGST THE SUMS QUOTED AS REFUNDS PAID IN ARREARS DURING THIS SIX-MONTHLY PERIOD THERE APPEARS AN AMOUNT OF 718 800 000 LIRE WHICH PLAINLY RELATES TO THE OPTIONAL SYSTEM OF REFUNDS IN FORCE BEFORE 1 JULY 1968 RELATING TO MILK AND MILK PRODUCTS AND BEEF AND VEAL AND WHICH IS CONSEQUENTLY IRRELEVANT TO THE DISPUTE .
Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic.
Date: 1970-02-18
7 FOR ITS PART, THE COMMISSION PRODUCES THE DRAFT MINUTES OF THE SAME MEETING AND CONCLUDES THAT THE STATEMENT MADE BY THE ITALIAN DELEGATION MERELY EXPRESSED THE WISH THAT THE ACCELERATION DECISION SHOULD NOT HINDER THE POSSIBLE APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 226 AND ADDS THAT IN REPLY TO THIS STATEMENT IT RESERVED ITS ASSESSMENT OF THE CRITERIA FOR THE APPLICATION OF POSSIBLE PROTECTIVE MEASURES WITHIN THE MEANING OF THAT ARTICLE .
11 IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, A MEASURE WHICH IS IN THE NATURE OF A COMMUNITY DECISION ON THE BASIS OF ITS OBJECTIVE AND OF THE INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK WITHIN WHICH IT HAS BEEN DRAWN UP CANNOT BE DESCRIBED AS AN " INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENT ".
Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Oberelbe v Firma Paul G. Bollmann.
Date: 1970-02-18
4 SINCE REGULATION NO 22/62, IN CONFORMITY WITH THE SECOND PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 189 OF THE TREATY, IS DIRECTLY APPLICABLE IN ALL MEMBER STATES, THE LATTER, UNLESS OTHERWISE EXPRESSLY PROVIDED, ARE PRECLUDED FROM TAKING STEPS, FOR THE PURPOSES OF APPLYING THE REGULATION, WHICH ARE INTENDED TO ALTER ITS SCOPE OR SUPPLEMENT ITS PROVISIONS . TO THE EXTENT TO WHICH MEMBER STATES HAVE TRANSFERRED LEGISLATIVE POWERS IN TARIFF MATTERS WITH THE OBJECT OF ENSURING THE SATISFACTORY OPERATION OF A COMMON MARKET IN AGRICULTURE THEY NO LONGER HAVE THE POWERS TO ADOPT LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS IN THIS FIELD .
Theo Nebe v Commission of the European Communities.
Date: 1970-04-14
8 AS REGARDS THE EXPRESS DECISION OF REJECTION CONTAINED IN THE LETTER OF 14 MARCH 1969, WHILST THIS LETTER SETS OUT THE GROUNDS FOR ADHERING TO THE PREVIOUS DECISION, IT NEVERTHELESS CONTAINS NO NEW FACTOR RELATING TO THE POSITION IN LAW OR IN FACT EXISTING AT THE TIME OF THE IMPLIED REJECTION OF THE ORIGINAL DECISION .
ACCORDINGLY IT AMOUNTS TO A MEASURE LIMITED TO CONFIRMING THE PREVIOUS MEASURE AND FOR THAT REASON NOT CAPABLE OF ADVERSELY AFFECTING THE PERSON CONCERNED .
Bundesknappschaft v Élisabeth Brock.
Date: 1970-04-14
6 UNDER ARTICLE 53 ( 3 ) OF REGULATION NO 3, " BENEFIT SHALL BE PAYABLE UNDER THIS REGULATION EVEN IF IT RELATES TO AN EVENT BEFORE THE DATE ON WHICH IT COMES INTO FORCE ". ON THE OTHER HAND UNDER PARAGRAPH ( 4 ) OF THAT ARTICLE THE RIGHTS OF PERSONS FOR WHOM A PENSION WAS CALCULATED BEFORE REGULATION NO 3 ENTERED INTO FORCE MAY BE REVIEWED AT THEIR REQUEST .
7 ALTHOUGH THESE PROVISIONS ORIGINALLY GOVERNED THE SITUATION EXISTING ON 1 JANUARY 1959, THE DATE WHEN THE REGULATION WAS BROUGHT INTO FORCE IN ITS ORIGINAL FORM, THEY ARE NEVERTHELESS GENERAL IN SCOPE SO THAT THEY ALSO APPLY TO THE AMENDED VERSION OF THAT REGULATION AND IN PARTICULAR TO ANNEX G, AS AMENDED BY REGULATION NO 130/63, WITH THE RESERVATION THAT THE DATE WHEN THEIR RULES TAKE EFFECT IS BROUGHT FORWARD TO 1 JANUARY 1964, THE DATE WHEN THAT AMENDMENT ENTERED INTO FORCE . THIS PROVISION IS IN FACT ONLY AN APPLICATION OF THE PRINCIPLE THAT AMENDING LEGISLATION APPLIES, EXCEPT WHERE OTHERWISE PROVIDED, TO THE EFFECTS IN THE FUTURE OF SITUATIONS WHICH HAVE ARISEN UNDER THE LAW AS IT STOOD BEFORE AMENDMENT .
La compagnie française commerciale et financière SA, v Commission of the European Communities.
Date: 1970-04-16
11 WHERE A MEASURE HAS THE CHARACTER OF A REGULATION THAT CHARACTER IS NOT CALLED IN ISSUE BY VIRTUE OF THE FACT THAT THE NUMBER AND EVEN THE IDENTITY OF THE PERSONS TO WHOM IT APPLIES AT A GIVEN MOMENT MAY BE DETERMINED MORE OR LESS PRECISELY, PROVIDED THAT IT IS CLEAR THAT THIS APPLICATION DEPENDS ON AN OBJECTIVE LEGAL OR FACTUAL SITUATION DEFINED BY THE MEASURE WITH REFERENCE TO ITS PURPOSE .
12 THE FACT THAT A TRANSITIONAL PROVISION IS APPLICABLE ONLY TO CERTAIN SITUATIONS ARISING BEFORE A DATE FIXED BY IT AND, THEREFORE, OFTEN ESTABLISHED BEFORE IT COMES INTO FORCE, DOES NOT PREVENT THAT PROVISION FROM BEING AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE FORMER AND NEW PROVISIONS WHICH IT IS DESIGNED TO RECONCILE AND, CONSEQUENTLY, FROM PARTAKING OF THEIR GENERAL NATURE .
Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Belgium.
Date: 1970-05-05
15 THE OBLIGATIONS ARISING FROM ARTICLE 95 OF THE TREATY DEVOLVE UPON STATES AS SUCH AND THE LIABILITY OF A MEMBER STATE UNDER ARTICLE 169 ARISES WHATEVER THE AGENCY OF THE STATE WHOSE ACTION OR INACTION IS THE CAUSE OF THE FAILURE TO FULFIL ITS OBLIGATIONS, EVEN IN THE CASE OF A CONSTITUTIONALLY INDEPENDENT INSTITUTION .
Hauptzollamt Bremen-Freihafen v Waren-Import-Gesellschaft Krohn & Co.
Date: 1970-06-18
4 SINCE REGULATION NO 19/62 IS, IN CONFORMITY WITH THE SECOND PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 189 OF THE TREATY, DIRECTLY APPLICABLE IN ALL THE MEMBER STATES, THERE CAN BE NO QUESTION, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY PROVISIONS TO THE CONTRARY, THAT THE STATES MAY, FOR THE PURPOSE OF ENSURING THE APPLICATION OF THAT REGULATION, TAKE MEASURES THE PURPOSE OF WHICH IS TO AMEND ITS SCOPE OR TO ADD TO ITS PROVISIONS . IN SO FAR AS THE MEMBER STATES HAVE CONFERRED ON THE COMMUNITY LEGISLATIVE POWERS IN TARIFF MATTERS, IN ORDER TO ENSURE THE PROPER FUNCTIONING OF THE COMMON MARKET IN AGRICULTURE, THEY NO LONGER HAVE THE POWER TO ISSUE INDEPENDENT PROVISIONS IN THIS FIELD .
6 THEREFORE THE ANSWER TO THE FIRST QUESTION PUT BY THE BUNDESFINANZHOF IS THAT ARTICLE 23 ( 1 ) OF REGULATION NO 19/62 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE EEC IS TO BE INTERPRETED AS MEANING THAT MEMBER STATES ARE NOT PERMITTED TO ADOPT PROVISIONS OF NATIONAL LAW AFFECTING THE SCOPE OF THE REGULATION ITSELF, AND IN PARTICULAR THE DESCRIPTIONS OF GOODS APPEARING THEREIN .
THE SECOND QUESTION
Government of the French Republic v Commission of the European Communities.
Date: 1970-06-25
4 THIS PROVISION, BY THUS TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE CONNEXION WHICH MAY EXIST BETWEEN THE AID GRANTED BY A MEMBER STATE AND THE METHOD BY WHICH IT IS FINANCED THROUGH THE RESOURCES OF THAT STATE, DOES NOT THEREFORE ALLOW THE COMMISSION TO ISOLATE THE AID AS SUCH FROM THE METHOD BY WHICH IT IS FINANCED AND TO DISREGARD THIS METHOD IF, IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE AID IN ITS NARROW SENSE, IT RENDERS THE WHOLE INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE COMMON MARKET .
7 IN ORDER TO DETERMINE WHETHER AN AID " AFFECTS TRADE BETWEEN MEMBER STATES ", " DISTORTS OR THREATENS TO DISTORT COMPETITION BY FAVOURING CERTAIN UNDERTAKINGS OR THE PRODUCTION OF CERTAIN GOODS " AND " ADVERSELY AFFECTS TRADING CONDITIONS TO AN EXTENT CONTRARY TO THE COMMON INTEREST ", IT IS NECESSARY TO CONSIDER ALL THE LEGAL AND FACTUAL CIRCUMSTANCES SURROUNDING THAT AID, IN PARTICULAR WHETHER THERE IS AN IMBALANCE BETWEEN THE CHARGES IMPOSED ON THE UNDERTAKINGS OR PRODUCERS CONCERNED ON THE ONE HAND AND THE BENEFITS DERIVED FROM THE AID IN QUESTION ON THE OTHER .
8 CONSEQUENTLY THE AID CANNOT BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY FROM THE EFFECTS OF ITS METHOD OF FINANCING .
9 THE COMMISSION THEREFORE HAD POWER TO DECIDE WHETHER THE FRENCH REPUBLIC SHOULD ABOLISH OR ALTER THE DISPUTED SYSTEM OF AID AS A WHOLE .
THE SECOND SUBMISSION
13 THE FACT THAT A NATIONAL MEASURE COMPLIES WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ARTICLE 95 DOES NOT IMPLY THAT IT IS VALID IN RELATION TO OTHER PROVISIONS, SUCH AS THOSE OF ARTICLES 92 AND 93 .
16 IT MAY BE THAT AID PROPERLY SO-CALLED, ALTHOUGH NOT IN CONFORMITY WITH COMMUNITY LAW, DOES NOT SUBSTANTIALLY AFFECT TRADE BETWEEN STATES AND MAY THUS BE ACKNOWLEDGED AS PERMISSIBLE BUT THAT THE DISTURBANCE WHICH IT CREATES IS INCREASED BY A METHOD OF FINANCING IT WHICH WOULD RENDER THE SCHEME AS A WHOLE INCOMPATIBLE WITH A SINGLE MARKET AND THE COMMON INTEREST .
17 IN ITS APPRAISAL THE COMMISSION MUST THEREFORE TAKE INTO ACCOUNT ALL THOSE FACTORS WHICH DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY CHARACTERIZE THE MEASURE IN QUESTION, THAT IS, NOT ONLY AID, PROPERLY SO-CALLED, FOR SELECTED NATIONAL ACTIVITIES, BUT ALSO THE INDIRECT AID WHICH MAY BE CONSTITUTED BOTH BY THE METHOD OF FINANCING AND BY THE CLOSE CONNEXION WHICH MAKES THE AMOUNT OF AID DEPENDENT UPON THE REVENUE FROM THE CHARGE .
20 BY AUTOMATICALLY INCREASING THE AMOUNT OF NATIONAL AID IN PROPORTION TO THE INCREASE IN THE REVENUE FROM THE CHARGE AND MORE ESPECIALLY THE REVENUE FROM THE CHARGE LEVIED ON COMPETING FOREIGN PRODUCTS, THE METHOD OF FINANCING IN QUESTION HAS A PROTECTIVE EFFECT WHICH GOES BEYOND AID PROPERLY SO-CALLED .
21 IN PARTICULAR, THE MORE COMMUNITY UNDERTAKINGS SUCCEED IN INCREASING SALES IN A MEMBER STATE BY MARKETING EFFORTS AND BY PRICE-CUTTING, THE MORE THEY HAVE TO CONTRIBUTE UNDER THE SYSTEM OF THE SERVICING CHARGE TO AN AID WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY INTENDED FOR THOSE OF THEIR OWN COMPETITORS WHO HAVE NOT MADE SUCH EFFORTS .
Anneliese Fiehn v Commission of the European Communities.
Date: 1970-07-09
22 HOWEVER, WHILE IT MAY BE POSSIBLE TO DOUBT THE EXISTENCE OF A WRONGFUL ACT CONCERNING THE SUPPLY OF INCORRECT INFORMATION, THE SAME CANNOT BE SAID OF THE DEPARTMENTS' DELAY IN RECTIFYING THE INFORMATION .
ALTHOUGH SUCH RECTIFICATION WAS POSSIBLE AS EARLY AS APRIL 1968 IT WAS DEFERRED WITHOUT ANY JUSTIFICATION UNTIL THE END OF 1968 .
WHILST IT WOULD HAVE BEEN SIMPLE BY MEANS OF A GENERAL ANNOUNCEMENT OR AN INDIVIDUAL NOTICE TO RECTIFY AN ERROR OF INTERPRETATION WHICH WAS CAPABLE OF INVALIDATING A WHOLE GROUP OF STATEMENTS, THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED IN APRIL 1968 GIVES THE IMPRESSION THAT IT CONCERNS SOLELY POSSIBLE ARITHMETICAL OR SIMILAR ERRORS DIFFICULT TO IDENTIFY AND WHICH COULD HAVE BEEN DUE TO THE SPEED WITH WHICH THE SEPARATE STATEMENTS WERE DRAWN UP .
A CORRECTION MADE SHORTLY BEFORE OR AFTER 16 APRIL, THAT IS TO SAY BEFORE THE TIME WHEN THOSE CONCERNED HAD TO MAKE THEIR DECISION, WOULD CERTAINLY HAVE ENABLED THE DEFENDANT TO AVOID ALL LIABILITY FOR THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE WRONG INFORMATION .
THE FAILURE TO ISSUE SUCH A CORRECTION IS, ON THE OTHER HAND, A MATTER OF SUCH A NATURE AS TO RENDER THE COMMUNITIES LIABLE .