Category: European

Euro Tombesi, Santella etc: ECJ 25 Jun 1997

ECJ (Environment And Consumers) Waste – Definition – Council Directives 91/156/EEC and 91/689/EEC – Council Regulation (EEC) No 259/93

Judges:

G.F. Mancini, P

Citations:

C-342/94, [1997] EUECJ C-342/94

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Council Regulation (EEC) No 259/93, Council Directive 91/156/EEC, Council Directive 91/689/EEC

Cited by:

See Also – Tombesi and Others ECJ 25-Jun-1997
ECJ (Environment And Consumers) Waste – Definition – Council Directives 91/156/EEC and 91/689/EEC – Council Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 . .
See Also – Tombesi ECJ 25-Jun-1997
(Environment And Consumers) Waste – Definition – Council Directives 91/156/EEC and 91/689/EEC – Council Regulation (EEC) No 259/9 . .
See Also – Criminal proceedings against Tombesi and others ECJ 25-Jun-1997
ECJ Waste – Definition – Council Directives 91/156/EEC and 91/689/EEC – Council Regulation (EEC) No 259/93
Waste includes substances discarded by their owners, even if they ”have a commercial value and are . .
Cited – Attorney-General’s Reference (No 5 of 2000) CACD 6-Jun-2001
Waste products could become ‘controlled waste’ and subject to licensing procedures without there being a recovery or disposal operation being involved. A rendering process produced a condensate which the company wished to spread on farm land without . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Environment, Crime

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215814

Sylvie Lair v Universitat Hannover: ECJ 21 Jun 1988

European law draws a distinction between member state nationals who have not yet entered into an employment relationship in the host member state where they are looking for work and those who are already working in that state or who, having worked there but no longer being in an employment relationship, are nevertheless considered to be workers.
‘the rights guaranteed to migrant workers do not necessarily depend on the actual or continuing existence of an employment relationship’.

Judges:

Lord Mackenzie Stuart, P

Citations:

C-39/86, R-39/86, [1988] EUECJ R-39/86, [1988] ECR 3161

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 of the Council of 15 October 1968 on freedom of movement for workers within the Community

Cited by:

Cited – Collins v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions CA 4-Apr-2006
The claimant had dual Irish and US nationality. He therefore also was a citizen of the EU. He complained that the British rules against payment of job seekers’ allowance were discriminatory. The matter had already been to the ECJ.
Held: The . .
Cited – Prix v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions SC 31-Oct-2012
The claimant had come from France to England, and worked as a teaching assistant. She set out on a course to train as a teacher but became pregnant, gave up the course, and eventually gave up work temporarily. Her claim to Income Support was refused . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Benefits

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215610

The Queen v Royal Pharmaceutical Society Of Great Britain, Ex Parte Association Of Pharmaceutical Importers And Others: ECJ 18 May 1989

ECJ (Free Movement Of Goods) 1. Measures adopted by a professional body for pharmacy, in whose register all pharmacists must be enrolled in order to carry on their business, which lays down rules of ethics applicable to the members of the profession and which has a committee upon which national legislation has conferred disciplinary powers that could involve the removal from the said register, may, if they are capabe of affecting trade between the Member States, constitute ‘measures’ within the meaning of Article 30 of the EEC Treaty.
2. A national rule of a Member State requiring a pharmacist, in response to a prescription calling for a medicinal product by its trade mark or proprietary name, to dispense only a product bearing that trade mark or proprietary name may be justified under Artice 36 of the Treaty on grounds of the protection of public health even where the effect of such a rule is to prevent the pharmacist from dispensing a therapeutically equivalent product licensed by the competent national authorities pursuant to rules adopted in conformity with Community law and manufactured by the same company or group of companies or by a licensee of that company but bearing a trade mark or proprietary name applied to it in another Member State which differs from the trade mark or proprietary name appearing in the prescription.
Such a provision does not go beyond what is necessary to achieve the objective in view, which is to leave the entire responsibility for the treatment of the patient in the hands of the doctor treating him, who may often prescribe a given medicinal product for psychosomatic reasons .

Citations:

R-267/87, [1989] EUECJ R-267/87

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215694

Vereniging Happy Family Rustenburgerstraat v Inspecteur Der Omzetbelasting: ECJ 5 Jul 1988

ECJ Tax provisions – Harmonization of laws – Turnover tax – Common system of value-added tax – Tax on the supply of goods within the territory of a Member State – Application to unlawful traffic in narcotic drugs – Not permissible – Criminal sanctions for offences – Powers of the Member States – Policy of selective prosecution with regard to supplies of hemp-based drugs – Circumstance not justifying the imposition of tax.

Citations:

R-289/86, [1988] EUECJ R-289/86

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Council Directive 77/388 2

European, VAT

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215627

Union Nationale Interprofessionnelle Des Legumes De Conserve (Unilec) v Etablissements Larroche Freres: ECJ 22 Sep 1988

ECJ 1. The rules of the common organization of the market set up by Regulation No 1035/72 must be applied to fruit and vegetables coming within the scope of that organization, irrespective of the use to which they are ultimately to be put . The fact that they are intended for processing does not mean that at the marketing stage they fall within the ambit of Regulation No 516/77 on the common organization of the market in products processed from fruit and vegetables.
2. Regulation No 1035/72 on the common organization of the market in fruit and vegetables, in the version applicable prior to the entry into force of Regulation No 3284/83, must be interpreted as leaving the Member States no power to extend to national producers and processors who are not affiliated to an intertrade organization in the sector the rules adopted by that organization under agreements fixing minimum purchase prices for certain vegetables.
3. The obligation imposed on non-affiliated producers to contribute to the financing of funds established by a producers’ organization in the fruit and vegetables sector is unlawful in so far as it serves to finance activities which are themselves held to be contrary to Community law.

Citations:

R-212/87, [1988] EUECJ R-212/87

Links:

Bailii

European, Agriculture

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215648

Sprl Arcado v Sa Haviland: ECJ 8 Mar 1988

ECJ The concept of ‘matters relating to a contract’ in article 5(1) of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters is to be regarded as an independent concept which, for the purpose of the application of the convention, must be interpreted by reference principally to the system and objectives of the Convention in order to ensure that it is fully effective.
Proceedings relating to the wrongful repudiation of an independent commercial agency agreement and the payment of commission due under such an agreement are proceedings in matters relating to a contract within the meaning of article 5(1) of the Convention.

Citations:

[1989] ECC 1, [1988] ECR 1539, R-9/87, [1988] EUECJ R-9/87

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215577

W J R Mol v Inspecteur Der Invoerrechten En Accijnzen: ECJ 5 Jul 1988

ECJ Tax provisions – Harmonization of laws – Turnover tax – Common system of value-added tax – Tax on the supply of goods within the territory of a Member State – Application to unlawful traffic in narcotic drugs – Not permissible – Criminal sanctions for offences – Powers of the Member States – Illegal supplies of amphetamines – Not liable to value-added tax

Citations:

R-269/86, [1988] EUECJ R-269/86

Links:

Bailii

European, VAT

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215628

A Ahlstrom Osakeyhtio And Others v Commission Of The European Communities: ECJ 27 Sep 1988

The court considered the territorial scope of Articles 81 and 82. in the context of producers outside the Community selling to purchasers established in the Community. The external producers had engaged in price fixing and therefore restricted competition. The Commission had determined that there had been an infringement of Article 85. On appeal they argued that such a finding was inconsistent with public international law.
Held: The contention was not accepted. Infringement of Article 81 involved two elements, namely the agreement, decision or concerted practice on the one hand and its implementation on the other: ‘If the applicability of prohibitions laid down under competition law were made to depend on the place where the agreement, decision or concerted practice was formed, the result would obviously be to give undertakings an easy means of evading those prohibitions. The decisive factor is therefore the place where it is implemented.
The producers in this case implemented their pricing agreement within the common market. It is immaterial in that respect whether or not they had recourse to subsidiaries, agents, sub-agents, or branches within the Community in order to make their contacts with purchasers within the Community.
Accordingly the Community’s jurisdiction to apply its competition rules to such conduct is covered by the territoriality principle as universally recognized in public international law.’

Citations:

C-129/85, [1988] EUECJ C-129/85, [1988] ECR 5193

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Gencor Ltd v Commission ECFI 25-Mar-1999
ECFI Council Regulation 4064/89, Article 2(3) provided that there should be declared to be incompatible with the common market: ‘A concentration which creates or strengthens a dominant position as a result of . .
Cited – Adidas-Salomon Ag v Drape and others ChD 7-Jun-2006
The claimants had sponsored tennis players to wear their logo. The respondents organised tennis tournaments whose intended rules would prevent the display of the claimant’s logos. The claimants said that the restriction interfered with their rights . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215629

Pretura Unificata Di Torino v X: ECJ 22 Sep 1988

ECJ The authorization to exceed the maximum permitted concentrations set out in Annex I to Directive 80/778/EEC relating to the quality of water intended for human consumption (Article 10 (1)) must be granted only in an urgent situation in which the national authorities are required to cope suddenly with difficulties in the supply of water for human consumption . Such an authorization must be limited to the time normally necessary to restore the quality of the water affected, must not pose any unacceptable risk to human health and may be granted only if the supply of water for human consumption cannot be maintained in any other way.

Citations:

R-228/87, [1988] EUECJ R-228/87

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 80/778/EEC

European, Utilities

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215645

Berg And Busschers v Besselsen: ECJ 5 May 1988

Europa Social Policy – Article 3(1) of Directive 77/187/EEC which concerns the safeguarding of employees’ rights in the event of transfers of undertakings must be interpreted as meaning that after the date of transfer, and by virtue of the transfer alone, the transferor is discharged from all obligations arising under the contract or the employment relationship, even if the workers employed in the undertaking do not consent or if they object, subject however to the power of the Member States to provide for joint liability of the transferor and the transferee after the date of transfer.
Article 1(1) of Directive 77/187/EEC of 14 February 1977 must be interpreted as meaning that the directive applies both to the transfer of an undertaking pursuant to a lease-purchase agreement of the kind available under Netherlands law and to the retransfer of the undertaking upon the termination of the lease-purchase agreement by judicial decision.
The Acquired Rights Directive is ‘intended to safeguard the rights of workers in the event of a change of employer by making it possible for them to continue to work for the transferee under the same conditions as those agreed with the transferor. Its purpose is not, however, to ensure that the contract of employment or the employment relationship with the transferor is continued where the undertaking’s employees do not wish to remain in the transferee’s employ.’

Citations:

C-144/87, R-145/87, [1988] EUECJ R-145/87, [1988] ECR 2559

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 77/187/EEC 3(1)

Cited by:

Cited – North Wales Training and Enterprise Council Ltd v Astley and others HL 21-Jun-2006
Civil servants had been transferred to a private company. At first they worked under secondment from the civil service. They asserted that they had protection under TUPE and the Acquired Rights Directive. The respondent said that there had only been . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Employment

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215597

Ministere Public v Andre Gauchard: ECJ 8 Dec 1987

ECJ Preliminary Questions – Freedom of establishment – Prior authorisation for the operation of a retail outlet.
1. Although the court has no jurisdiction under article 177 of the treaty to apply a rule of community law to a particular case and thus to judge a provision of national law by reference to such a rule it may, in the framework of the judicial cooperation provided for by that article and on the basis of the material presented to it, provide a national court with an interpretation of community law which may be useful to it in assessing the effects of that provision.
where the question asked may be understood as requesting an interpretation of community law but does not state which provision or provisions of community law are in issue, the court must extract from all the factors provided by the national court, and in particular from the statement of grounds contained in the reference, the elements of community law requiring an interpretation, having regard to the subject-matter of the dispute.
2. Article 52 of the eec treaty and council directives 68/363/eec and 68/364/eec implementing article 52 in the field of activities of self-employed persons in retail trade do not apply to situations which are purely internal to a member state, such as that of a national of a member state who has never resided or worked in any other member state.

Citations:

R-20/87, [1987] EUECJ R-20/87

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215547

Regina v HM Customs and Excise Ex Parte Imperial Tobacco Ltd: ECJ 19 Jan 1988

ECJ Common customs tariff – tariff headings – classification of products – classification by the commission of tobacco leaf stem as refuse under subheading 24.01 b – legality (Council Regulation no 97/69 as amended by regulation no 2055/84; Commission Regulation no 3517/84)
In view of the wide power of discretion conferred upon it by Regulation no 97/69 on measures to be taken for uniform application of the nomenclature of the Common Customs Tariff, the Commission did not exceed the limits of its powers when, by Regulation no 3517/84, it classified leaf stem of flue-cured virginia tobacco as tobacco refuse falling within subheading 24.01 b. For the purposes of the common customs tariff the term ‘refuse’ does not refer to substances which are completely valueless, since, in any event, such substances do not need to be classified, but to secondary products of less value than other products.

Citations:

R-141/86, [1988] EUECJ R-141/86

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European, Customs and Excise

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215554

Maizena Gesellschaft Mbh And Others v Bundesanstalt Fuer Landwirtschaftliche Marktordnung (BALM): ECJ 18 Nov 1987

ECJ Legal nature of the security lodged in respect of an export licence.
1. Under community rules such as the second indent of article 38*(1)*(c ) of regulation no 3183/80, which requires the provision of fresh security after the release under special arrangements, before exportation actually takes place and at the request of the exporter, of security intended to ensure the performance by the licence holder of his obligation to export within a prescribed time-limit, where the said time-limit has not been complied with, the fresh security ceases to be a guarantee and becomes a penalty when the undertaking has not been complied with and no longer can be complied with.
However, that penalty, which is intended to achieve the same objective as the security itself and whose only effect is to place the defaulting trader in the same position as if he had not voluntarily opted for advance release of the security, is an integral part of the system of security at issue and is not criminal in nature.
2. The forfeiture of two securities relating to the same export transactions but having different purposes, one intended to ensure repayment of the export refund paid in advance if exportation does not take place and the other intended to ensure that the undertaking to export during the validity of the export licence will be honoured, even if it is triggered by the same event, cannot be regarded as disproportionate if the different risks in respect of which the securities were lodged actually materialize.

Citations:

R-137/85, [1987] EUECJ R-137/85

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Agriculture

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215538

Landsorganisationen I Danmark For Tjenerforbundet I Danmark v Ny Molle Kro: ECJ 17 Dec 1987

ECJ 1. Social policy – approximation of laws – transfers of undertakings – safeguarding of employees’ rights – directive 77/187 – scope – lease – repossession of business by the owner following breach of the lease by the lessee – included
(council directive 77/187, article 1 (1))
2. Social policy – approximation of laws – transfers of undertakings – safeguarding of employees’ rights – directive 77/187 – transfer – concept
(council directive 77/187, article 1 (1))
3. Social policy – approximation of laws – transfers of undertakings – safeguarding of employees’ rights – directive 77/187 – obligation of transferee to continue to observe the terms and conditions of employment agreed in a collective agreement – beneficiaries – workers not employed by the undertaking at the time of the transfer – excluded
(council directive 77/187, article 3 (2))

Citations:

R-287/86, [1987] EUECJ R-287/86

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215546

Hoffmann v Krieg: ECJ 4 Feb 1988

Europa Convention on Jurisdiction And The Enforcement Of Judgments – A foreign judgment which has been recognized by virtue of article 26 of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must in principle have the same effects in the state in which enforcement is sought as it does in the state in which judgment was given.
A foreign judgment whose enforcement has been ordered in a contracting state pursuant to article 31 of the convention and which remains enforceable in the state in which it was given must not continue to be enforced in the state where enforcement is sought when, under the law of the latter state, it ceases to be enforceable for reasons which lie outside the scope of the convention. The convention does not preclude the court of the state in which enforcement is sought from drawing the necessary inferences from a national decree of divorce when considering the enforcement of the foreign order made in regard to maintenance obligations between spouses.
A foreign judgment ordering a person to make maintenance payments to his spouse by virtue of his conjugal obligations to support her is irreconcilable within the meaning of article 27(3) of the convention with a national judgment pronouncing the divorce of the spouses.
Europa
Article 36 of the Convention must be interpreted as meaning that a party who has not appealed against the enforcement order referred to in that provision is thereafter precluded, at the stage of the execution of the judgment, from relying on a valid ground which he could have pleaded in such an appeal, and that that rule must be applied of their own motion by the courts of the state in which enforcement is sought. However, that rule does not apply when it has the result of obliging the national court to make the effects of a national judgment which lies outside the scope of the convention conditional on its recognition in the state in which the foreign judgment whose enforcement is at issue was given.

Citations:

R-145/86, [1988] EUECJ R-145/86

Links:

Bailii

European, Jurisdiction

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215559

Anthony McNicholl Ltd And Others v Minister For Agriculture: ECJ 8 Mar 1988

ECJ Whilst the concept of force majeure does not presuppose absolute impossibility, it nevertheless requires the non-performance of the act in question to be due to circumstances beyond the control of the person claiming force majeure, which are abnormal and unforeseeable and of which the consequences could not have been avoided despite the exercise of all due care.
The failure of a purchaser of beef held in intervention storage and intended for exportation to fulfil his obligations to export it, as a result of fraud or negligence or a combination of fraud and negligence on the part of an independent carrier to whom the transport of the goods was subcontracted, does not constitute a case of force majeure within the meaning of article 11 of commission regulation (eec) no 1687/76 laying down common detailed rules for verifying the use and/or destination of products from intervention.
Where the fulfilment of an obligation to export a quantity of beef purchased from an intervention agency is guaranteed by the security referred to in regulation no 1687/76, the principle of proportionality is properly applied in the case of a failure to observe this principal obligation if the intervention agency determines the amount of the security to be declared forfeit by reference to the tonnage which was not exported. Except in the case of force majeure, that principle does not require the intervention agency to take into consideration other circumstances such as the moral blame attaching to the exporter, the loss suffered by community funds or the profit which might have been made on a resale within the community.

Citations:

R-296/86, [1988] EUECJ R-296/86

Links:

Bailii

European, Contract

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215572

Saada Zaoui v Caisse Regionale D’Assurance Maladie De L’Ile-De-France (Cramif): ECJ 17 Dec 1987

ECJ Social Security For Migrant Workers – 1. Regulation no 1408/71 does not exclude from its scope ratione materiae a supplementary allowance paid by a national solidarity fund and granted to recipients of old-age, survivors’ or invalidity pensions with a view to providing them with a minimum means of subsistence, provided that the persons concerned have a legally protected right to the grant of such an allowance.
2. Members of the family of a worker can only claim derived rights under regulation no 1408/71, that is to say the rights acquired through their status as members of the worker’ s family. It follows that a member of the family of a worker who is a national of a member state cannot rely on regulation no 1408/71 in order to claim a supplementary allowance connected with a pension which he receives in that member state in a capacity other than that of a member of a worker’s family.
. The community rules on freedom of movement for workers do not apply to cases which have no factor linking them with any of the situations governed by community law. Such is the case with workers who have never exercised the right to freedom of movement within the community. Accordingly, a member of the family of a worker who is a national of a member state cannot rely on regulation no 1612/68 in order to claim the same social advantages as workers who are nationals of that state when the worker of whose family he is a member has never exercised the right to freedom of movement within the community.

Citations:

C-147/87, R-147/87, [1987] EUECJ R-147/87

Links:

Bailii

Benefits, European

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215549

Criminal Proceedings Against Graziano Mattiazzo: ECJ 17 Dec 1987

Directive 77/780 does not detract from the power of the member states to lay down rules on the legal status of credit institutions. The classification of employees of credit institutions as ‘public officials’ or as ‘persons responsible for a public service’ for the purposes of the application of the criminal law of a member state is not contrary to the provisions or the objective of that directive.

Citations:

R-422/85, [1987] EUECJ R-422/85

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215541

Sar Schotte Gmbh v Parfums Rothschild Sarl: ECJ 9 Dec 1987

Article 5(5) of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on jurisdiction and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted as applying to a case in which a legal entity established in a contracting state maintains no dependent branch, agency or other establishment in another contracting state but nevertheless pursues its activities there through an independent company with the same name and identical management which negotiates and conducts business in its name and which it uses as an extension of itself.

Citations:

C-218/86, R-218/86, [1987] EUECJ R-218/86

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215550

Directeur General Des Douanes Et Droits Indirects v Artimport And Others: ECJ 8 Dec 1987

ECJ Common Customs Tariff – 1. Opinions of the committee for common customs tariff nomenclature are an important means of ensuring uniform application of the common customs tariff by the customs authorities of the member states and as such may be regarded as valid aids in its interpretation. However, such opinions are not binding in law, and it may be necessary to consider whether they correspond to the actual provisions of the common customs tariff and do not alter their scope.
2. On 23 may 1979 the common customs tariff was to be interpreted as meaning that suitcases and attache cases made from plastic sheeting composed of styrene resin, butadiene and acrylo-nitril made rigid by moulding or pressing and not by means of a rigid foundation fell within heading 39.07 e iv of the common customs tariff.

Citations:

R-42/86, [1987] EUECJ R-42/86

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215543

Bovo Tours Bv And Van Nood Touringcars Bv v Minister For Transport, Water Control And Construction And Others: ECJ 17 Dec 1987

ECJ 1. Article 16 (1) of regulation no 517/72 must be interpreted as meaning that decisions on applications to introduce a regular service or a special regular service by coach or bus between member states, adopted after a procedure requiring the prior agreement of the member states concerned or, where appropriate, a decision of the commission or council, are to be regarded as national decisions taken by the competent authority of the member state on whose territory the headquarters of the applicant undertaking is situated.
2. National rules which provide for the publication of applications to introduce a regular or special regular service by coach or bus and allow interested parties to submit their observations within 30 days before a decision is taken on those applications satisfy the member states’ obligation under the second subparagraph of article 16 (2) of regulation no 517/72 to ensure that transport undertakings have the opportunity to make representations concerning their interests in respect of such decisions. That provision does not require competing undertakings to be given the opportunity to bring a subsequent appeal.
3. The expression ‘existing passenger transport services’ in article 8 (1) of regulation no 517/72 on the introduction of common rules for regular and special regular services by coach and bus between member states includes all types and modes of transport, in particular other regular bus services partly on a different route or using another method of crossing the sea and passenger transport by rail.

Citations:

C-88/86, R-517/72, [1987] EUECJ R-517/72

Links:

Bailii

European, Transport

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215539

Deutsche Babcock Handel Gmbh v Hauptzollamt Luebeck-Ost: ECJ 15 Dec 1987

European Communities’ Own Resources – 1. Article 232(1) of the EEC Treaty must be interpreted as meaning that in so far as matters are not the subject of provisions in the ecsc treaty or rules adopted on the basis thereof, the eec treaty and the provisions adopted for its implementation can apply to products covered by the ECSC Treaty.
That is the case in regard to regulation no 1430/79 on the repayment or remission of import or export duties.
2. The second indent of article 2(1) of regulation no 1430/79, which provides that import duties are to be repaid or remitted if it is obvious that the amount of such duties entered in the accounts exceeds for any reason the amount lawfully payable, applies, having regard to the recitals in the preamble to the regulation, to cases of error. It does not apply when the trader liable for the import duties has, at the time of entry of the goods for free circulation, declared a price higher than that which he actually had to pay, taking into account the discounts and bonuses granted to him on account of the quantities ordered, and when the declaration of the higher price was designed to enable the goods to be released for free circulation on the basis of a licence which made no mention of those discounts and bonuses.

Citations:

R-328/85, [1987] EUECJ R-328/85

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215542

Gullung v Conseil De L’Ordre Des Avocats Du Barreau De Colmar Et De Saverne: ECJ 19 Jan 1988

ECJ 1. Freedom of movement for persons, freedom of establishment and freedom to provide services, which are fundamental in the community system, would not be fully realized if a member state were entitled to refuse to grant the benefit of the provisions of community law to those of its nationals who are established in another member state of which they are also a national and who take advantage of the facilities offered by community law in order to pursue their activities in the territory of the first state by way of provision of services. Consequently, a national of two member states who is admitted to practise as a member of the legal profession in one of those states may rely on the provisions of Directive 77/249 in the territory of the other state where the conditions for the application of that directive, as defined therein, are satisfied.
2. Directive 77/249 must be interpreted as meaning that its provisions may not be relied upon by a lawyer established in one member state with a view to pursuing his activities by way of the provision of services in the territory of another member state where he had been barred from access to the legal profession in the latter member state for reasons relating to dignity, good repute and integrity.
3. Article 52 of the EEC Treaty must be interpreted as meaning that a member state whose legislation requires lawyers to be registered at a bar may prescribe the same requirement for lawyers who come from other member states and who take advantage of the right of establishment guaranteed by the treaty in order to establish themselves as members of a legal profession in its territory.

Citations:

R-292/86, [1988] EUECJ R-292/86

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215552

Foto-Frost v Hauptzollamt Luebeck-Ost: ECJ 22 Oct 1987

Europa Lack of jurisdiction of national courts to declare acts of Community institutions invalid – Validity of a decision on the post-clearance recovery of import duties. Case 314/85.

Citations:

R-314/85, [1987] EUECJ R-314/85, [1987] ECR 4199

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – Consorzio Del Prosciutto Di Parma v Asda Stores Limited and others HL 8-Feb-2001
The name ‘Parma Ham’ was controlled as to its use under Italian law, and the associated mark, the ‘corona ducale’, was to be applied to a sale of Parma Ham, including any packaging. Proper Parma Ham was imported and resold through the defendant’s . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215528

Centre Public D’Aide Sociale De Courcelles v Lebon: ECJ 18 Jun 1987

A right to equal treatment with regard to social and tax advantages accorded by article 7(2) of Regulation No. 1612/68 E.E.C. applied only to workers and not to nationals of Member States who move in search of employment. The latter were entitled only to equal treatment in regard to access to employment in accordance with article 48 of the Treaty and articles 2 and 5 of Regulation No. 1612/68 E.E.C.

Citations:

R-316/85, [1987] EUECJ R-316/85, [1987] ECR 2811

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Chief Adjudication Officer v Wolke; Remelien v Secretary of State for Social Security HL 13-Nov-1997
The claimant was an EC national who had become resident here but was not seeking work, since she cared for her children. The Secretary of State said that since she was not seeking work, she was not entitled to remain and should make arrangements to . .
Cited – Collins v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions CA 4-Apr-2006
The claimant had dual Irish and US nationality. He therefore also was a citizen of the EU. He complained that the British rules against payment of job seekers’ allowance were discriminatory. The matter had already been to the ECJ.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215501

Hassan Shenavai v Klaus Kreischer: ECJ 15 Jan 1987

ECJ Whereas in the case of an action based on an obligation under a contract of employment or another contract with the same particularities for work other than on a self-employed basis the relevant obligation for the purpose of determining the place of performance within the meaning of article 5(1) of the convention of 27 September 1968 is the obligation which characterizes that contract, the position is different where no such particularities exist, as in the case of most contracts, where the general rule applies that the relevant obligation is that on which the plaintiff’s action is based. In a dispute concerning proceedings for the recovery of fees commenced by an architect commissioned to draw up plans for the building of houses, therefore, the obligation to be taken into consideration is the contractual obligation which forms the actual basis of the legal proceedings.

Citations:

R-266/85, [1987] EUECJ R-266/85, [1987] ECR 239, [1987] 3 CMLR 782

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Union Transport Plc v Continental Lines Sa and Another HL 15-Jan-1992
Two obligations in a charterparty which had not been fulfilled, namely the obligation to nominate a vessel, to be the subject matter thereof, and the obligation to provide it.
Held: The former was the principal obligation. Lord Goff said: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215478

The Queen, Ex Parte E. D. and F. Man (Sugar) Ltd v Intervention Board For Agricultural Produce: ECJ 24 Sep 1985

ECJ 1. In order to establish whether a provision of community law is in conformity with the principle of proportionality it is necessary to ascertain whether the means which it employs are appropriate and necessary to attain the objective sought. Where community legislation makes a distinction between a primary obligation, compliance with which is necessary in order to attain the objective sought, and a secondary obligation, essentially of an administrative nature, it cannot, without breaching the principle of proportionality, penalize failure to comply with the secondary obligation as severely as failure to comply with the primary obligation.
2. Although, within the context of the standing invitation to tender organized by regulation no 1880/83, in order to determine levies and/or refunds on exports of white sugar, the obligation imposed on successful tenderers to apply within a short period for an export licence in accordance with article 12(b) of that regulation performs a useful administrative function from the commission’s point of view, it cannot be accepted that that obligation is as important as the obligation to export, which remains the essential aim of the community legislation in question.
Article 6(3) of regulation no. 1880/83 is invalid inasmuch as it prescribes forfeiture of the entire security as the penalty for failure to comply with the time-limit imposed for the submission of applications for export licences. That penalty, imposed in respect of an infringement significantly less serious than the failure to fulfil the primary obligation, which the security itself is intended to guarantee, is too drastic in relation to the export licence’s function of ensuring the sound management of the market in question.

Citations:

R-181/84, [1985] EUECJ R-181/84

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215362

Vonk’s Kaas Inkoop En Produktie Holland Bv v Minister Van Landbouw En Visserij Et Produktschap Voor Zuivel: ECJ 12 Dec 1985

ECJ When fixing monetary compensatory amounts, the commission must not only act to prevent disturbances to normal trade caused by the monetary measures adopted by the member states but also see to it that the compensatory amounts themselves are not so constituted as to provoke such disturbances or to create market conditions favourable to the formation of artificial trade flows. It is therefore not only empowered but under a duty to amend its existing legislation if it finds that improper transactions of the type described above have occurred or that there is a risk that they may occur.
In its choice of the measures to be adopted, the commission must be allowed a broad measure of discretion where the product concerned is of very limited importance for trade within the community and with non-member countries and where, furthermore, it occurs in two forms which are administratively difficult to distinguish, one of which is devoid of commercial value while the other is perfectly capable of being processed and reprocessed in a closed circuit without ever reaching the stage of final consumption.

Citations:

R-208/84, [1985] EUECJ R-208/84

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215399

Telefunken Fernseh Und Rundfunk Gmbh v Oberfinanzdirektion Muenchen: ECJ 7 Oct 1985

ECJ 1. The functional unit principle referred to in the customs cooperation council’s explanatory notes is intended to allow classification under a given heading of machines or appliances made up of components falling under several tariff headings, in cases where those components as a whole are designed to perform the single clearly-defined function referred to in the tariff heading in question. The principle does not apply where some of the components making up a product may be used independently of the other components and for functions other than those which may be performed by all the components together.
2. An apparatus described as a timer/tuner which consists of a colour-television reception component with a 12-programme memory and of a timer that can be pre-set to switch the apparatus on and off up to 10 days in advance and which must be combined with a video recorder of a specific design in order to convert into visible form transmissions received must be regarded as a part or accessory within the meaning of subheading 92.13 d of the common customs tariff.

Citations:

R-223/84, [1985] EUECJ R-223/84

Links:

Bailii

European, Customs and Excise

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215384

Hauptzollamt Itzehoe v HJ Repenning Gmbh: ECJ 12 Jun 1986

ECJ Article 3(1) of Council Regulation No 1224/80 on the valuation of goods for customs purposes must be interpreted as meaning that where goods bought free of defects are damaged before being released for free circulation the price actually paid or payable, on which the transaction value is based, must be reduced in proportion to the damage suffered.

Citations:

R-183/85, [1986] EUECJ R-183/85

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Council Regulation No 1224/80 3(1)

Cited by:

Applied – Asda Stores Ltd v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 3-May-2012
FTTTx IMPORT DUTY – customs value – clothing imported together with hangers etc -hangers supplied to overseas supplier of clothing by separate overseas hanger supplier nominated by UK importer – price for hangers . .
Cited – Asda Stores Ltd v Revenue and Customs CA 27-Mar-2014
The appellant imported clothing manufactured outside the EU, along with hangers supplied by a third party. The manufacturers were re-imbursed the cost of acquiring the hangers, but the appellants had agreed an inflated price with the hanger . .
Cited – HMRC v Asda Stores Ltd UTTC 8-May-2013
UTTC IMPORT DUTY – customs value – Articles 29 and 32 of Community Customs Code (Regulation 2913/92). . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Customs and Excise

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215443

Eberhard Haug-Adrion v Frankfurter Versicherungs-Ag.: ECJ 13 Dec 1984

ECJ 1. Although it is essential that national courts explain the reasons why they consider that a reply to their questions is necessary for their decision in the main proceedings, and define the legal context of the request for interpretation, where questions are couched in imprecise terms it is for the court to extract from all the information provided by the national court and from the documents concerning the main proceedings the elements of community law that need to be interpreted, having regard to the subject-matter of the dispute.
2.The general prohibition of discrimination laid down in article 7 and the implementing rules in articles 48, 59 and 65 are intended to eliminate all measures which, in the fields of free movement of workers and freedom to provide services, treat a national of another member state more severely or place him in a situation less advantageous, from a legal or factual point of view, than that of one of the member state ‘ s own nationals in the same circumstances.
They do not, however, preclude the application in motor-vehicle insurance contracts of tariff conditions based on objective actuarial factors under which no-claims bonuses are not granted in respect of vehicles registered under customs plates.
3.Article 34 of the treaty applies only to national measures which have as their specific object or effect the restriction of patterns of exports and thereby the establishment of a difference in treatment between the domestic trade of a member state and its export trade, in such a way as to provide a special advantage for national products or for the domestic market of the state concerned.
National rules do not fall within that category if they merely authorize insurance companies to take into account in their tariff conditions particular circumstances in which vehicles are used which increase or diminish the insurance risk, such as, for example, the use of vehicles registered under customs plates, in respect of which article 34 does not prohibit the refusal of no-claims bonuses.

Citations:

R-251/83, [1984] EUECJ R-251/83

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215278

Hans Moser v Land Baden-Wuerttemberg: ECJ 28 Jun 1984

ECJ Free movement of workers – Concept of worker. 1. As regards the division of jurisdiction between national courts and the court of justice under article 177 of the treaty, it is for the national court, which is alone in having direct knowledge of the facts of the case and of the arguments put forward by the parties and which must assume the responsibility of giving judgment in the case, to assess, with full knowledge of the matter before it, the relevance of the questions of law raised by the dispute before it and the need for a preliminary ruling so as to enable it to give judgment.
2. Article 48 of the eec treaty does not apply to situations which are wholly internal to a member state, such as that of a national of a member state who has never resided or worked in another member state. Such a person may not rely on article 48 to prevent the application to him of legislation of his own country, denying him access to a particular kind of vocational training.

Citations:

R-180/83, [1984] EUECJ R-180/83

Links:

Bailii

European, Employment

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215240

Celestri and Co Spa v Ministry of Finance.: ECJ 21 Mar 1985

ECJ Although article 41 of the EEC Treaty, which is based on a clear separation of functions between the national courts and the Court of Justice, does not permit the court either to assess the facts of the case or to review the grounds on which the question submitted for a preliminary ruling is based, it is none the less for the court to set the measure whose validity is contested in context in community law and to examine the criteria for interpretation established by community law in order to be able to give the national court an appropriate answer for the purpose of resolving the main dispute.
Where that examination reveals that the provision of community law on which the court has been requested to give a ruling is not relevant to the solution of the main dispute, the court will declare that it is unnecessary for it to give a decision on the point at issue.

Citations:

R-172/84, [1985] EUECJ R-172/84

Links:

Bailii

European, Constitutional

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215297

University Of Hamburg v Hauptzollamt Muenchen-West.: ECJ 15 Nov 1984

ECJ 1. Paragraphs 1 and 2 of article 3 of regulation no 1798/75 on the importation free of common customs tariff duties of educational, scientific and cultural materials, considered in conjunction with one another, must be interpreted as meaning that the fact that materials can be regarded as components, spare parts or accessories of an installation or a complex unit of equipment for scientific research does not prevent them from being classified as scientific instruments or apparatus, if it is established that they are capable of performing an independent scientific function and if all the requirements of article 3(1) of the regulation are satisfied.
2. The phrase ‘scientific instruments and apparatus which qualify for duty-free admission’ in article 3(2) of regulation no 1798/75 must be interpreted as meaning that components, spare parts and accessories may be imported free of duty provided that they are intended for scientific instruments or apparatus which are, or have been, admitted free of duty. Duty-free admission may not, however, be granted where the components are intended to be incorporated in a scientific installation constructed in the community.

Citations:

R-236/83, [1984] EUECJ R-236/83

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215274

Raad Van Arbeid v Mme Van Der Bunt Craig: ECJ 5 May 1983

ECJ Irrespective of the characteristics peculiar to the various national laws, social security benefits must be considered to be of the same kind when their purpose and basis of calculation are the same. In that respect, benefits acquired under the legislation of two member states, which seeks to ensure that an aged person deprived of the income of his or her deceased spouse has sufficient means of subsistence, and the respective amounts of which are determined on the basis of the insurance and social security contributions of that spouse, must be considered to be benefits of the same kind by reason of their identical purpose and basis of calculation.
When a worker receives a pension pursuant to national legislation alone, the provisions of regulation no 1408/71 do not prevent that legislation from being applied to him in its entirety, including the national rules against overlapping benefits. If, however, the application of that national legislation is less favourable to the worker than the application of article 46 of regulation no 1408/71, the provisions of that article must be applied. On the latter supposition, paragraph (3) of article 46 is applicable to the exclusion of rules against overlapping laid down by national legislation.
Where benefits of the same kind are granted or awarded in different member states on the basis of analogous national rules, without any reference to the provisions of regulation no 1408/71, there are no grounds for applying the method of currency conversion set out in article 107 of regulation no 574/72.
No provision of community law requires the periodical recalculation, by reason of a variation in the rates of conversion of currencies, of a social security benefit whose amount has been established in another member state.

Citations:

R-238/81, [1983] EUECJ R-238/81

Links:

Bailii

European, Benefits

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215161

Nv Iaz International Belgium And Others v Commission Of The European Communities.: ECJ 8 Nov 1983

ECJ 1. The purpose of the preliminary administrative procedure is to prepare the way for the commission’s decision concerning the infringement of the competition rules although that procedure also provides the undertakings concerned with an opportunity to bring the practices complained of into line with the rules of the treaty.
2. The fact that the commission made a decision public before notifying it to the addressees, however regrettable such conduct might be, does not affect the validity of the decision. Once a decision has been adopted, it cannot be affected by acts subsequent to its adoption.
3. Article 85 (1) of the treaty applies also to associations of undertakings in so far as their own activities or those of the undertakings affiliated to them are calculated to produce the results which it aims to suppress. A recommendation of an association of undertakings, even if it has no binding effect, cannot escape that article where compliance with the recommendation by the undertakings to which it is addressed has an appreciable influence on competition in the market in question.
4. The condition laid down by article 4(2) of regulation no 17 that an agreement must not relate either to imports or to exports between member states if it is to qualify for exemption from notification must be interpreted with reference to the structure of article 4 and its aim of simplifying administrative procedure, which it pursues by not requiring undertakings to notify agreements which, whilst they may be covered by article 85 (1) of the treaty, appear in general, by reason of their special characteristics, to be less harmful from the point of view of the objectives of that provision.
That is not the case where an agreement has as its purpose appreciably to restrict parallel imports into a member state and thus tends to isolate the national market in a manner which is incompatible with the fundamental principles of the common market.
5. The requirement that a decision adversely affecting a person should state the reasons on which it is based, laid down by Article 190 of the eec treaty, is intended to enable the court to review the legality of the decision and to provide the person concerned with details sufficient to allow him to ascertain whether the decision is well founded or whether it is vitiated by a defect which will allow its legality to be contested. Accordingly, that requirement is satisfied where the decision refers to the matters of fact and of law on which the legal justification for the measure is based and to the considerations which led to its adoption.
6. If the parties which took part in the drawing-up of an agreement were aware that the agreement as drafted, regard being had to its terms, to the legal and economic context in which it was concluded and to the conduct of the parties, had as its purpose to restrict parallel imports and that it was capable of affecting trade between member states inasmuch as it was capable of making parallel imports more difficult, if not impossible, they acted deliberately by signing the agreement, whether or not they were aware that, in so doing, they were infringing the prohibition laid down by article 85 (1) of the treaty.
7. In assessing the gravity of an infringement regard must be had to a large number of factors, the nature and importance of which vary according to the type of infringement in question and the particular circum- stances of the case. Those factors may, depending on the circumstances, include the volume and value of the goods in respect of which the infringement was committed and the size and economic power of the undertaking and, consequently, the influence which the undertaking was able to exert on the market.
8. Where an infringement has been committed by a number of undertakings, the prior fixing of a maximum aggregate amount of the fine, fixed in relation to the seriousness of the danger which the agreement represented to competition and trade in the common market, is compatible with the individual fixing of the penalty.
9. The commission is not obliged in calculating the amount of the fine to take account of the adverse financial situation of the undertaking concerned. Recognition of such an obligation would be tantamount to conferring an unjustified competitive advantage on undertakings least well adapted to the conditions of the market.

Citations:

C-96/10, [1983] EUECJ C-96/102, [1983] ECR 3369

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215192

Salvatore Cinciuolo v Union Nationale Des Federations Mutualistes Neutres And Institut National D’Assurance Maladie-Invalidite: ECJ 1 Mar 1984

ECJ Social security for migrant workers – old-age and survivors’ insurance – benefits – adjustment – recalculation – scope of the system
(Regulation no 1408/71 of the council, art. 51)
Article 51 of regulation no 1408/71 must be interpreted as applying to benefits such as those in respect of accidents at work or occupational disease which, by virtue of the national rules against overlapping of benefits, originally affected the amount of the pension fixed pursuant to article 46 and any subsequent adjustments to which might again affect that pension. It is therefore not necessary to recalculate the pension pursuant to article 46 if an adjustment is made to such a benefit on account of the general evolution of the economic and social situation.

Citations:

R-104/83, [1984] EUECJ R-104/83

Links:

Bailii

European, Benefits

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215229

Keurkoop Bv v Nancy Kean Gifts Bv: ECJ 14 Sep 1982

ECJ The protection of designs comes under the protection of industrial and commercial property within the meaning of article 36 inasmuch as its aim to define exclusive rights which are characteristic of that property. In the absence of community standardization or a harmonization of laws the determination of the conditions and procedures under which protection of designs is granted is a matter for the national rules of each member state. In its present state community law does not preclude the adoption of national provisions to the effect that the person who first files the design acquires the exclusive right to it without its being necessary to inquire whether that person is also the author of the design or a person entitled under him and without those concerned being entitled to allege that the person filing the design is not the author, the person commissioning him or his employer. Although a right to a design, as a legal entity, does not as such fall within the class of agreements or concerted practices envisaged by article 85(1), the exercise of that right may be subject to the prohibitions contained in the treaty when it is the purpose, the means or the result of an agreement, decision or concerted practice. The proprietor of a right to a design acquired under the legislation of a member state may prevent the importation of products from another member state which are identical in appearance to the design which has been filed, provided that the products in question have not been put into circulation in the other member state by, or with the consent of, the proprietor of the right or a person legally or economically dependent on him, that as between the natural or legal persons in question there is no kind of agreement or concerted practice in restraint of competition and finally that the respective rights of the proprietors to the right to the design in the various member states were created independently of one another.

Citations:

R-144/81, [1982] EUECJ R-144/81, [1982] ECR 2853

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Mastercigars Direct Ltd v Hunters and Frankau Ltd CA 8-Mar-2007
An allegation was made that Cuban cigars imported by the claimant infringed the trade marks of the respondents being either counterfeit or parallel imports, and were impounded. The claimant sought a declaration of non-infringement and their release, . .
Cited – Oracle America Inc v M-Tech Data Ltd SC 27-Jun-2012
The appellant complained that the respondent had imported into the European Economic Area disk drives bearing its trade marks in breach of the appellant’s rights. The respondent had argued that the appellant had abused its position by withholding . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Intellectual Property

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215100

DM Levin v Staatssecretaris Van Justitie: ECJ 23 Mar 1982

ECJ The concepts of ‘worker’ and ‘activity as an employed person’ define the field of application of one of the fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Treaty and, as such, may not be interpreted restrictively.
The provisions of community law relating to freedom of movement for workers also cover a national of a member state who pursues, within the territory of another member state, an activity as an employed person which yields an income lower than that which, in the latter state, is considered as the minimum required for subsistence, whether that person supplements the income from his activity as an employed person with other income so as to arrive at that minimum or is satisfied with means of support lower than the said minimum , provided that he pursues an activity as an employed person which is effective and genuine.
The motives which may have prompted a worker of a member state to seek employment in another member state are of no account as regards his right to enter and reside in the territory of the latter state provided that he there pursues or wishes to pursue an effective and genuine activity.

Citations:

C-53/81, R-53/81, [1982] EUECJ R-53/81, [1982] ECR 1035

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Ali v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 3-May-2006
The applicants sought asylum. Their child had a right of residence as a European citizen.
Held: The applicants could not rely upon their child’s right of residence to establish one for themselves. . .
Cited – Barry v London Borough of Southwark CA 19-Dec-2008
The claimant a citizen of the Netherlands, appealed against the refusal to grant him housing assistance. He had been unemployed save for taking casual work during the Wimbledon championships, but the Authority had denied that he was a worker. He had . .
Cited – Prix v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions SC 31-Oct-2012
The claimant had come from France to England, and worked as a teaching assistant. She set out on a course to train as a teacher but became pregnant, gave up the course, and eventually gave up work temporarily. Her claim to Income Support was refused . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Employment

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215053

Kommanditgesellschaft In Der Firma Hans-Otto Wagner Gmbh Agrarhandel v Bundesanstalt Fuer Landwirtschaftliche Marktordnung: ECJ 23 Feb 1983

ECJ 1. Sugar which is in transit between one approved warehouse and another does not fulfil the requirement as to storage in a warehouse within the meaning of article 3(1) of regulation no 1358/77 laying down general rules for offsetting storage costs for sugar.
The special rule contained in article 11(1) of regulation no 1998/78, which provides that reimbursement of storage costs shall be granted for sugar which is in transit at the beginning of the month, must not be regarded as merely interpreting the above-mentioned article 3(1) to the effect that sugar in transit between approved warehouses fulfils, in principle, the requirement that the product be stored in a warehouse.
2. Discrimination consists in treating differently situations which are identical, or treating in the same way situations which are different.
3. The fact that reimbursement is granted in respect of storage costs for sugar which, at the beginning of the month, is in transit between two approved warehouses situated in the same member state but is not granted in respect of sugar which is in transit between two approved warehouses situated in different member states does not amount to discrimination prohibited by community law. The difference of treatment is based on requirements of supervision which may be justified objectively.

Citations:

R-8/82, [1983] EUECJ R-8/82

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215139

Fromancais Sa v Fonds D’Orientation Et De Regularisation Des Marches Agricoles (Forma): ECJ 23 Feb 1983

‘In order to establish whether a provision of community law is consonant with the principle of proportionality it is necessary to establish, in the first place, whether the means it employs to achieve its aim correspond to the importance of the aim and, in the second place, whether they are necessary for its achievement.’

Citations:

R-66/82, [1983] EUECJ R-66/82, [1983] ECR 395

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Zalewska v Department for Social Development HL 12-Nov-2008
(Northern Ireland) The claimant challenged the rules restricting payment of benefits to nationals from the 8 latest European Accession states to those with an unbroken 12 month working record. The applicant came from Poland and worked at two . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215138

Board of The Sociale Verzekeringsbank v Heirs or Assigns of GT Kuijpers: ECJ 23 Sep 1982

It follows from the provisions of title II of regulations no 3/58 and no 1408/71 that the application of national legislation is determined by reference to criteria drawn from the rules of community law. Although it is for the legislature of each member state to lay down the conditions creating the right or the obligation to become affiliated to a social security scheme or to a particular branch under that scheme the member states are not entitled to determine the extent to which their own legislation or that of another member state is applicable.
Article 13(c) of regulation no 3 and article 14 (1)(c)(i) of regulation no 1408/71 must be interpreted as meaning that a national provision of a member state is incompatible with those provisions if its effect is such that a worker residing in that member state is not insured for the purposes of an old-age pension because he is insured for such purposes under the legislation of another member state , even if he resided in the territory of the first-mentioned member state and is there engaged in gainful employment concurrently with his activities in the territory of the other member state. That answer is not affected by the fact that the employment in the state of residence is secondary to the main activity of the person concerned which is pursued in the other member state.

Citations:

R-276/81, [1982] EUECJ R-276/81

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215094

Caisse De Pension Des Employes Prives v Bodson: ECJ 18 Mar 1982

The purpose of calculating the actuarial equivalent in pursuance of article 11(2) of annex viii to the staff regulations of officials for the transfer of pension rights acquired under national schemes is to capitalize the value of a future contingent periodic benefit. The calculation is therefore based on a calculation of the capital corresponding to the pension to which the person concerned will be entitled at national level by the application of a discount rate by reason of the anticipated nature of the payment as compared with the due date, together with a reduction coefficient proportionate to the risk of the death of the recipient before the due date, determined as a function of the age of the insured and of death rates, both factors being calculated on the basis of the time due to elapse between the date of the award of the actuarial equivalent and that of the grant of the pension.
The calculation of the sums repaid on the other hand may be effected in contributory insurance schemes by adding up the contributions paid by the insured person, together, where appropriate, with those paid by his employer ; interest may be added to these contributions.

Citations:

R-212/81, [1982] EUECJ R-212/81

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215052

Societe RuMi v Fonds D’Orientation Et De Regularisation Des Marches Agricoles: ECJ 2 Dec 1982

Agriculture – common organization of the markets – milk and milk products – special aid for the denaturing of skimmed-milk powder intended for feed for animals other than young calves – denaturing not carried out in conformity with community provisions – loss of the benefit of the aid in its entirety – principle of proportionality – breach – none.
(Commission Regulation (EEC) no 1844/77)
In view of the fact that the special aid granted for the denaturing of skimmed-milk powder intended for feed for animals other than young calves is considerably higher than the amount granted in the case of feed for calves, and in view of the risk that it might be used for other, unauthorized purposes where the denaturing departs even to a slight extent from the method referred to in Regulation no 1844/77, the commission was legally justified in adopting provisions which entail witholding of the aid and loss of the security for failure to fulfil the obligation to carry out denaturing laid down by the regulation and was not obliged to vary the severity of the measure in question according to the gravity of the failure to comply with the obligation. Such a measure cannot be regarded as out of proportion to the objective pursued and the fact that the denaturing departs even to a slight extent from the above-mentioned method is capable of depriving the trader of the entire benefit of the special aid.

Citations:

R-272/81, [1982] EUECJ R-272/81

Links:

Bailii

European, Agriculture

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215132

Hugues Desmedt v Commission Of The European Communities: ECJ 25 Jun 1981

ECJ Officials – staff regulations – conditions of employment of other servants – distinct fields of application – appointment of member of the local staff as probationary official – end of previous employment relationships
The staff regulations and the conditions of employment of other servants each cover a clearly defined range of persons and it is not possible, except where there is an express derogation, for a servant to come simultaneously within the scope of both of those acts laid down by regulation.
It follows from those considerations that a member of the local staff who accepts an appointment as a probationary official is subject to the staff regulations alone, the application of which automatically terminates the relationship formerly governed by the conditions of employment of other servants without its being necessary for the employment relationships thereunder to be terminated expressly by the administration.

Citations:

R-105/80, [1981] EUECJ R-105/80

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.214992

Criminal Proceedings Against Rene Joseph Kugelmann: ECJ 5 Feb 1981

ECJ Approximation of legislation – preservatives which may be used in foodstuffs intended for human consumption – duty of member states – scope – right of individuals to rely upon the provisions of Directive 64/54/EEC – limits
(Council Directive 64/54/EEC)
At the present stage in the approximation of legislation in the field of preservatives , member states are not bound to authorize for use in foodstuffs all the substances the use of which is permitted by Directive 64/54/EEC. They have retained a certain discretion to determine their own rules concerning the addition of preservatives to foodstuffs, subject to the twofold condition that no preservative may be authorized unless it appears in the list annexed to the directive and that the use of a preservative which is listed there may not be totally prohibited except in special cases where there is no technological necessity.
In these circumstances, an individual who is prosecuted for using sorbic acid in certain foodstuffs intended for human consumption cannot rely upon the provisions of Directive 64/54/eec authorizing the use of that preservative if the applicable national legislation permits the use thereof in other foodstuffs intended for human consumption.

Citations:

R-108/80, [1981] EUECJ R-108/80

Links:

Bailii

European, Crime

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.214967

Criminal Proceedings Against Frans-Nederlandse Maatschappij Voor Biologische Producten Bv: ECJ 17 Dec 1981

ECJ It follows from article 30 in conjunction with article 36 of the EEC Treaty that a member state is not prohibited from requiring plant protection products to be subject to prior approval , even if those products have already been approved in another member state. The authorities of the importing state are however not entitled unnecessarily to require technical or chemical analyses or laboratory tests when the same analyses or tests have already been carried out in another member state and their results are available to those authorities or may at their request be placed at their disposal.
A member state operating an approvals procedure must ensure that no unnecessary control expenses are incurred if the practical effects of the control carried out in the member state of origin satisfy the requirements of the protection of public health in the importing member state. On the other hand , the mere fact that those expenses weigh more heavily on a trader marketing small quantities of an approved product than on his competitor who markets much greater quantities does not justify the conclusion that such expenses constitute arbitrary discrimination or a disguised restriction within the meaning of article 36.

Citations:

R-272/80, [1981] EUECJ R-272/80

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

EEC Treaty 30

European

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215024

Criminal Proceedings v Rinkau: ECJ 26 May 1981

ECJ 1. The concept of an offence which was not intentionally committed appearing in article II of the protocol annexed to the Convention of 27 September 1968 on jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be regarded as an independent concept which must be explained by reference, first, to the objectives and scheme of the convention and, secondly, to the general principles which the national legal systems have in common. It covers any offence the legal definition of which does not require, either expressly or as appears from the nature of the offence defined, the existence of intent on the part of the accused to commit the punishable act or omission.
2. The right to be defended without appearing in person, granted by Article II of the aforementioned protocol, applies in all criminal proceedings concerning offences which were not intentionally committed, in which the accused’s liability at civil law, arising from the elements of the offence for which he is being prosecuted, is in question or on which such liability might subsequently be based.

Citations:

R-157/80, [1981] EUECJ R-157/80

Links:

Bailii

European, Crime

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.214984

Spa Vinal v Spa Orbat: ECJ 14 Jan 1981

ECJ 1. In its present stage of development community law does not restrict the freedom of each member state to lay down tax arrangements which differentiate between certain products on the basis of objective criteria, such as the nature of the raw materials used or the production processes employed. Such differentiation is compatible with community law if it pursues objectives of economic policy which are themselves compatible with the requirements of the treaty and its secondary law and if the detailed rules are such as to avoid any form of discrimination, direct or indirect in regard to imports from other member states or any form of protection of competing domestic products.
2. Tax arrangements which impose heavier charges on denatured synthetic alcohol than on denatured alcohol obtained by fermentation on the basis of the raw materials and the manufacturing processes employed for the two products are not at variance with the first paragraph of article 95 of the eec treaty if they are applied identically to the two categories of alcohol originating in other member states.
Such tax arrangements are justified even though the products in question, whilst derived from different raw materials, are capable of being put to the same uses and have the same practical application.

Where by reason of the taxation of synthetic alcohol, it has been impossible to develop profitable production of that type of alcohol on national territory, the application of such tax arrangements cannot be considered as constituting indirect protection of national production of alcohol obtained by fermentation within the meaning of the second paragraph of article 95 of the eec treaty on the sole ground that their consequence is that the product subject to the heavier taxation is in fact a product which is exclusively imported from other member states of the community.

Citations:

R-46/80, [1981] EUECJ R-46/80, C-46/80

Links:

Bailii

European, Taxes Management, Constitutional

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.214964

Pfizer Inc v Eurim-Pharm Gmbh: ECJ 3 Dec 1981

ECJ The essential function of a trade mark is to guarantee the identity of the origin of the marked product to the consumer or final user by enabling him to distinguish without any possibility of confusion between that product and products which have another origin. This guarantee of origin means that the consumer or final user may be certain that a trade-marked product which is offered to him has not been subject at a previous stage in the marketing process to interference by a third person, without the authorization of the proprietor of the trade mark, affecting the original condition of the product. Therefore, the proprietor of a trade-mark right may not rely on that right in order to prevent an importer from marketing a pharmaceutical product manufactured in another member state by the subsidiary of the proprietor and bearing the latter ‘ s trade mark with his consent, where the importer, in re-packaging the product, confined himself to replacing the external wrapping without touching the internal packaging and made the trade mark affixed by the manufacturer to the internal packaging visible through the new external wrapping, at the same time clearly indicating on the external wrapping that the product was manufactured by the subsidiary of the proprietor and re-packaged by the importer.
As to the exhaustion of rights in the field of trade marks: ‘regard must be had to the main function of the trade mark which is to give the consumer or final buyer a guarantee of the identity of origin of the marked product, by enabling him to distinguish this product, with no risk of confusion, from products of a different origin. This guarantee of origin implies that the consumer or final buyer can be sure that any marked product offered to him has not been interfered with by a third party, at an earlier stage of marketing, in any way which has affected the original condition of the product, without the consent of the trade mark owner.’

Citations:

R-1/81, [1981] EUECJ R-1/81, 1 CMLR 406

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Consorzio Del Prosciutto Di Parma v Asda Stores Limited and others HL 8-Feb-2001
The name ‘Parma Ham’ was controlled as to its use under Italian law, and the associated mark, the ‘corona ducale’, was to be applied to a sale of Parma Ham, including any packaging. Proper Parma Ham was imported and resold through the defendant’s . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Intellectual Property

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215028

International Business Machines Corporation v Commission of The European Communities: ECJ 7 Jul 1981

ECJ 1 The applications in cases 60/81R and 190/81R have the same subject-matter; it is therefore appropriate to join them and to give the decision regarding them in a single order.
2 according to article 185 of the treaty, actions brought before the court of justice do not have suspensory effect. The court may, however, if it considers that circumstances so require, order that application of the contested measures be suspended. It may also in pursuance of article 186 of the treaty prescribe any necessary interim measures.
3 according to article 83(2) of the rules of procedure a suspension of enforcement and the decision ordering provisional measures are subject to the existence of circumstances giving rise to urgency and factual and legal grounds establishing a prima facie case for such measures.
4 it is clear from the consistent case-law of the court that measures of this nature cannot be considered unless the factual and legal grounds relied on to obtain them establish a prima facie case for granting them. In addition there must be urgency in the sense that it is necessary for the measures to be issued and to take effect before the decision of the court on the substance of the case in order to avoid serious and irreversible damage to the party seeking them; finally they must be provisional in the sense that they do not prejudge the decision on the substance of the case.
5 In support of its applications the applicant in substance claims that a suspension of enforcement would be justified because otherwise:
(i) IBM will be forced to lodge a defence to a statement of objections delivered by the commission without lawful authority;
(ii) the commission will have been permitted to continue to act in breach of binding principles of international law;
(iii) IBM will have been forced to lodge a defence to a statement of objections so ill-defined and obscure as to justify the raising of the exceptio obscuri libelli and breach of due process.
6 The applicant’s arguments amount in substance to claiming that the measures contested in the main proceedings are vitiated by such clear and serious defects that those measures appear, even at first sight, as lacking any legal basis and in reality constitute an evident nullity, known in the administrative law of certain member states as ‘voies de fait administratives’. The nature and gravity of these illegalities alone imply, it is alleged, that it is necessary and urgent to put a stop immediately to situations of this type and that the judge to whom the application is made has jurisdiction to do so.
7 Without prejudice to the admissibility or the merits of the actions in the main proceedings, the measures under challenge, having regard to the nature of the complaints made against them, do not appear to be measures lacking even an appearance of legality, and as such to require their operation to be suspended forthwith.
8 It was therefore for the applicant to demonstrate, with a view to the avoidance of serious and irreversible damage to itself, the necessity and urgency for the court to grant the relief sought.
9 The factual and legal grounds relied upon by the applicant are not, however, such as to establish these basic conditions. The contested measures in the two main actions are in fact measures of inquiry and investigation, which precede a decision of the commission relating to the issue whether or not the applicant is or has been guilty of conduct prohibited by article 86 of the Treaty.
10 The pursuit of administrative proceedings of this type, organized, as the court has emphasized on various occasions, with a view to permitting undertakings to make known their point of view and to enlighten the commission, does not involve for the applicant any obligation other than that of participating, with a view to the defence of its rights, in the course of that procedure. That obligation is not of such a nature as to cause it, either as regards its legal position or as regards its interests, serious and irreversible damage of such a kind as to justify the measures sought.
11 It follows from all the considerations set out above that the applications must be dismissed.
12 Costs must in the circumstances be reserved.

Citations:

C-190/81, [1981] EUECJ C-190/81R

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215001

Amministrazione Delle Finanze v Srl Meridionale Industria Salumi, Fratelli Vasanelli And Fratelli Ultrocchi: ECJ 27 Mar 1980

Proceedings were taken to require Mr Salumi and others to pay additional sums as levies on imports of agricultural products, on the basis that the earlier lower levy had been applied in error. Subsequently an EU regulation was enacted and the European Court interpreted the Italian court’s question as asking in substance whether that regulation applied to payments of duties made before the date the regulation came into force. HELD: ‘Although procedural rules are generally held to apply to all proceedings pending at the time when they enter into force, this is not the case with substantive rules. On the contrary, the latter are usually interpreted as applying to situations existing before the entry into force only insofar as it clearly follows from their terms, objectives or general scheme that such an effect must be given to them.
This interpretation ensures respect for the principles of legal certainty and the protection of legitimate expectation, by virtue of which the effect of Community legislation must be clear and predictable for those who are subject to it. The Court has repeatedly emphasised the importance of those principles . . that in general the principle of legal certainty precludes a Community measure from taking effect from the point in time before its publication and that it may be otherwise only exceptionally, where the purpose to be achieved so demands and where the legitimate expectations of those concerned are duly respected.’
The regulation in question contained both procedural and substantive rules which formed an indivisible whole. The individual provisions should not be considered in isolation with regard to the time at which they take effect. The regulation could not therefore be accorded retroactive effect unless sufficiently clear indications led to such a conclusion. Both the wording and the general scheme of the regulation led to the conclusion that the regulation provided only for the future.

Citations:

R-128/79, [1980] EUECJ R-128/79

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – Emerald Supplies Ltd and Others v British Airways Plc ChD 4-Oct-2017
EC has sole jurisdiction over old cartels
Several claimants alleged that the defendant airway had been part of a cartel which had overcharged for freight services. The court now heard arguments about whether it had jurisdition to deal with claims which preceded the measures which had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Customs and Excise, Agriculture, European

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.214891

Klaus Mecke and Co v Hauptzollamt Bremen-Ost: ECJ 16 Oct 1980

ECJ 1. When a comparison of the various language versions of any subheadings in the common customs tariff reveals that the difficulties in interpretation raised before a national court result mainly from the peculiarities of one of the language versions , those subheadings are to be considered in all the official language versions simultaneously , using in addition the information to be found in the explanatory notes of the customs co-operation council.
2. A general consideration of all the official language versions of the common customs tariff shows clearly that subheading 56.01 a represents an open-ended category including all types of fibre irrespective of their method of manufacture and their subsequent use. Consequently an interpretation of that subheading which has the effect of arbitrarily restricting its scope by excluding from it all fibres which are not suitable for use later in spinning is unacceptable.
3. It is apparent from the explanatory notes of the customs co-operation council that the scope of heading 59.01 of the common customs tariff cannot be restricted to waste produced by shearing and that there cannot be a requirement that in every case the product has the appearance of dust. The notes make it clear that subheading 59.01 b I can apply equally to textile cuttings of a regular length.
4. Cuttings of synthetic textile fibres having a length of between 6 and 7 mm fall within subheading 59.01 b I of the common customs tariff as flock and dust of man-made fibres.

Citations:

R-816/79, [1980] EUECJ R-816/79

Links:

Bailii

European, Customs and Excise

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.214943

Just I/S v Danish Ministry For Fiscal Affairs: ECJ 27 Feb 1980

ECJ Whilst the treaty does not exclude, in principle, a difference in the taxation of various alcoholic products, such a distinction may not be used for the purposes of tax discrimination or in such a manner as to afford protection, even indirect, to domestic production. A system which consists in conferring a tax advantage on a single product which represents the major proportion of domestic production to the exclusion of all other similar or competing imported products is incompatible with community law.
Where a national system of taxation at different rates is found to be incompatible with community law, the member state in question must apply to imported products a rate of tax which eliminates the margin of discrimination or protection pro- hibited by the treaty. Article 95 accords such treatment only to products which are imported from other member states.
In application of the principle of co-operation laid down in article 5 of the treaty, it is the courts of the member states which are entrusted with ensuring the legal protection which subjects derive from the direct effect of the provisions of community law.
In the absence of community rules concerning the refunding of national charges which have been levied in breach of article 95 of the eec treaty, it is for the member states to arrange for the reimbursement of such charges in accordance with the requirements of their domestic legal system ; it is for them to designate to this intent the courts having jurisdiction and to determine the procedural conditions governing actions at law. Such conditions cannot be less favourable than those relating to similar actions of a domestic nature and must not make it impossible in practice to exercise the rights conferred on individuals by the community legal system. Community law does not require an order for the recovery of charges improperly made to be granted in conditions which would involve the unjust enrichment of those entitled. Thus it does not prevent account being taken of the fact that it has been possible for the burden of such charges to be passed on to other traders or to consumers. It is equally compatible with the principles of community law for account to be taken in accordance with the national law of the state concerned of the damage which an importer may have suffered because the effect of the discriminatory or protective tax provisions was to restrict the volume of imports from other member states.

Citations:

R-68/79, [1980] EUECJ R-68/79, C-68/79, [1980] ECR 501

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Marks and Spencer Plc v Customs and Excise HL 28-Jul-2005
The claimant had sought repayment of overpaid VAT, and the respondent resisted arguing that this would be an unjust enrichment. A reference to the European Court was sought.
Held: It was not possible to say that the House’s opinion was acte . .
Cited – Devenish Nutrition Ltd v Sanofi-Aventis Sa (France) and others CA 14-Oct-2008
The defendant had been involved in price fixing arrangements, and the claimant sought damages for breach of its proprietary rights. The claimant appealed refusal of an award an account of profits for what was akin to a breach of statutory duty.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.214884

Sa Lancome And Cosparfrance Nederland Bv v Etos Bv And Albert Heyn Supermart Bv.: ECJ 10 Jul 1980

ECJ 1. An administrative letter despatched without publication as laid down in regulation no 17 informing the undertaking concerned of the commission’s opinion that there is no need for it to take action in respect of the agreements in question and that the file on the case may therefore be closed constitutes neither a decision granting negative clearance nor a decision applying article 85 (3) of the eec treaty within the meaning of articles 2 and 6 of regulation no 17.
such a letter does not have the result of preventing national courts before which the agreements in question are alleged to be incompatible with article 85 of the treaty from reaching a different finding as regards the agreements in question on the basis of the information available to them. Whilst it does not bind the national courts, the opinion transmitted in such a letter nevertheless constitutes a factor which the national courts may take into account in examining whether the agreements in question are in accordance with the provisions of article 85.
2. An administrative letter informing the person concerned that the com- mission is of the opinion that there are no grounds for it to take action with regard to agreements which have been notified pursuant to the provisions of article 85 (1) of the eec treaty has the effect of terminating the period of provisional validity accorded from the date of notification to agreements made prior to 13 march 1962 notified within the period laid down in article 5 (1) of regulation no 17 or exempted from notification. In fact, the maintenance of the provisional protection from which notified old agreements benefit is no longer justified from the date on which the commission informs the parties concerned that it has decided to close the file on the case concerning them. There is, therefore, no longer any reason to release national courts, before which the direct effect of the prohibition in article 85 (1) is relied upon, from the duty of giving judgment.

3. Selective distribution systems consti- tute an aspect of competition which accords with article 85 (1) of the eec treaty provided that re-sellers are chosen on the basis of objective criteria of a qualitative nature relating to the qualifications of the re-seller, his staff and his trading premises, and that such conditions are laid down uniformly for all potential re-sellers and are not applied in a discrimi- natory fashion.

it follows that, in principle, a selective distribution network which relies on tests for admission to the system which go beyond simple, objective qualitative selection falls within the prohibition laid down in article 85 (1) especially when it is based on quantitative selection criteria.

4. To decide whether an agreement may affect trade between member states it is necessary to decide whether it is possible to foresee with a sufficient degree of probability on the basis of a set of objective factors of law or of fact that the agreement in question may have an influence, direct or indirect, actual or potential, on the pattern of trade between member states.

5. In order to decide whether an agreement is to be considered as prohibited by reason of the distortion of competition which is its object or its effect, it is necessary to examine the competition within the actual context in which it would occur in the absence of the agreement in dispute. To that end, it is appropriate to take into account in particular the nature and quantity, limited or otherwise, of the products covered by the agreement, the position and the importance of the parties on the market for the products concerned, and the isolated nature of the disputed agreement or, alternatively, its position in a series of agreements. Although not necessarily decisive, the existence of similar contracts is a circumstance which, together with others, is capable of being a factor in the economic and legal context within which the contract must be judged.

Citations:

C-99/79, R-99/79, [1980] EUECJ R-99/79

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.214936

Caisse De Compensation Des Allocations Familiales Des Regions De Charleroi Et De Namur v Cosimo Laterza: ECJ 12 Jun 1980

ECJ 1. The regulations on social security for migrant workers did not set up a common scheme of social security, but allowed different schemes to exist, creating different claims on different institutions against which the claimant possesses direct rights by virtue either of national law alone or of national law supplemented, where necessary, by community law. The community rules cannot, therefore, in the absence of an express exception consistent with the aims of the treaty, be applied in such a way as to deprive a migrant worker or his dependants of the benefit of a part of the legislation of a member state, nor may they bring about a reduction in the benefits awarded by virtue of that legislation supplemented by community law.
2. Article 77 (2) (b) (i) of regulation no 1408/71 must be interpreted as meaning that entitlement to family benefits from the state in whose territory the recipient of an invalidity pension resides does not take away the right to higher benefits awarded previously by another member state. If the amount of family benefits actually received by the worker in the member state in which he resides is less than the amount of the benefits provided for by the legislation of the other member state, he is entitled to a supplement to the benefits from the competent institution of the latter state equal to the difference between the two amounts.

Citations:

R-733/79, [1980] EUECJ R-733/79

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.214917

Pigs Marketing Board v Raymond Redmond: ECJ 29 Nov 1978

ECJ 1. As regards the division of jurisdiction between national courts and the court of justice under article 177 of the treaty the national court, which is alone in having a direct knowledge of the facts of the case and of the arguments put forward by the parties, and which has to give judgment in the case, is in the best position to appreciate, with full knowledge of the matter before it, the relevance of the questions of law raised by the dispute before it and the necessity for a preliminary ruling so as to enable it to give judgement.
In the event of questions ‘ having been improperly formulated or going beyond the scope of the powers conferred on the court of justice by article 177, the court is free to extract from all the factors provided by the national court and in particular from the statement of grounds contained in the reference, the elements of community law which, having regard to the subject-matter of the dispute, require an interpretation or, as the case may be, an assessment of validity.
2. It follows from article 38(2) of the EEC Treaty that the provisions of the Treaty relating to the common agricultural policy have precedence, in case of any discrepancy, over the rules relating to the establishment of the common market. The specific provisions creating a common organization of the market have precedence in the sector in question over the system laid down in article 37 in favour of state monopolies of a commercial character.
3. Once the community has, pursuant to article 40 of the treaty, legislated for the establishment of the common organization of the market in a given sector, member states are under an obligation to refrain from taking any measure which might undermine or create exceptions to it.
4. The common organizations of the agricultural markets are based on the concept of the open market to which every producer has free access and the functioning of which is regulated solely by the instruments provided for by those organizations.
Any provisions or national practices which might alter the pattern of imports or exports or influence the formation of market prices by preventing producers from buying and selling freely within the state in which they are established, or in any other member state, in conditions laid down by community rules and from taking advantage directly of intervention measures or any other measures for regulating the market laid down by the common organization are incompatible with the principles of such organization.
5. The provisions of articles 30 and 34 of the eec treaty and of regulation no 2759/75 are directly applicable and confer on individuals rights which the courts of member states must protect. As regards the new member states, the effects of those provisions applied, according to the terms of the act of accession and in particular of articles 2, 42 and 60(1) thereof, as from 1 February 1973.

Citations:

R-83/78, [1978] EUECJ R-83/78, [1978] NI 73

Links:

Bailii

European, Agriculture

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.214774

British Beef Company Limited v Intervention Board For Agricultural Produce: ECJ 13 Jun 1978

ECJ 1. The actual right to receive a monetary compensatory amount and the charge resulting from the levying of such an amount are only created by the performance of the import or export transaction as the case may be and only from the moment when that transaction takes place. It follows that in the absence of an express provision to the contrary the amounts to be paid or levied are those fixed by the rules in force at the moment of the import or export whatever may be the date on which the contract relating to the transaction in question was concluded.
2. Having regard to the recitals to and the provisions of regulation no 2405/76 and to the special circumstances existing at the time of its adoption it could not arouse in the minds of persons concerned a legitimate expectation, which the commission was required to protect, of its maintenance for the whole of the week in question.

Citations:

R-146/77, [1978] EUECJ R-146/77

Links:

Bailii

European, Agriculture

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.214744

Aamministrazione Delle Finanze Dello Stato v The Rasham Undertaking: ECJ 3 Oct 1978

ECJ 1. Council decision no 66/532 of 26 July 1966 concerning the abolition of customs duties, the prohibition of quantitative restrictions as between member states and the application of the common customs tariff duties for products other than those set out in annex ii to the treaty did not bring forward the date of expiry of the transitional period within the meaning of article 8 of the treaty.
2. Although the notification prescribed by the second paragraph of article 115 of the treaty is compulsory, it is not a condition precedent of the entry into force of the protective measures adopted by the member states.

Citations:

R-27/78, [1978] EUECJ R-27/78

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.214757