Category: European

Heinz-Jorg Moritz v Commission of the European Communities: ECJ 17 Dec 1992

ECJ (Judgment) 1. The periodic report constitutes an indispensable criterion of assessment each time the official’ s career is taken into consideration by the administration and a promotion procedure is tainted with irregularity in so far as the appointing authority has not been able to consider the comparative merits of the candidates because there has been a substantial delay on the part of the administration in drawing up the periodic reports of one or more of them. It does not follow that all the candidates must be at exactly the same stage regarding the state of their periodic reports when the appointment decision is taken or that the appointing authority must postpone its decision if the most recent report on one or other of the candidates is not yet final because it has been referred to the appeal assessor or to the Joint Committee. In exceptional circumstances the absence of a periodic report may be compensated for by the existence of other information on an official’ s merits. 2. If, in dismissing a plea by an official contesting the legality of a promotion procedure on the ground that the appointing authority assessed his merits in the absence of his periodic report and on the basis of a hearing of his Director-General at which he was not heard, the Court of First Instance merely holds that that hearing did not make that procedure unlawful but does not mention the reasons justifying recourse to information other than the periodic report or the reasons why hearing the Director-General was sufficient to compensate for the absence of that periodic report, it has failed to state sufficient reasons for its judgment. 3. It is for the Court of First Instance to respond to the pleas and claims as they were raised before it by the parties. It does not fulfil that obligation where it rejects a claim for compensation on the ground that a claim based on the same allegedly wrongful conduct of the administration was dismissed by a judgment given in another case between the same parties when the two claims are not identical, in so far as they are based on separate causes of damage, namely the fault consisting in the appointment of a candidate following an irregular promotion procedure, on the ground that the appointing authority assessed the respective merits of the candidates in the absence of the appellant’ s periodic report, and the fault consisting in the fact that the periodic report in question was drawn up late by the appointing authority.

Citations:

C-68/91, [1992] EUECJ C-68/91P

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European, Administrative

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.160663

Hughes v Chief Adjudication Officer (Judgment): ECJ 16 Jul 1992

Europa Social security for migrant workers – Community rules – Scope ratione materiae – Benefits covered and benefits excluded – Criteria for distinguishing – Benefit intended to meet the claimant’ s family expenses and granted on the basis of objective, legally-defined criteria – Included – Non-contributory benefit – No effect (Council Regulation No 1408/71, Art. 4(1)(h)) 2. Social security for migrant workers – Family benefits – Employed person subject to the legislation of one Member State but resident with his family in another Member State – Derived right of spouse to the family benefits provided for by the legislation to which the worker is subject – Conditions (Council Regulation No 1408/71, Art. 73).

Citations:

C-78/91, [1992] EUECJ C-78/91

Links:

Bailii

European, Benefits

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.160672

Jackson and Cresswell v Chief Adjudication Officer (Judgment): ECJ 16 Jul 1992

Europa Article 3(1) of Directive 79/7 on the progressive implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security, which defines the matters covered by the directive, is to be interpreted as not referring to a statutory scheme which, on certain conditions, provides persons with means below a legally defined limit with a special benefit designed to enable them to meet their needs. That interpretation is not affected by the circumstance that the claimant is suffering from one of the risks listed in Article 3 of the directive.
Directive 76/207 on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women as regards access to employment, vocational training and promotion, and working conditions is to be interpreted as meaning that the fact that, under a social security scheme which, on certain conditions, provides persons with means below a legally defined limit with a special benefit designed to enable them to meet their needs, the conditions of entitlement for receipt of the benefits may be such as to affect the ability of a single parent to take up access to vocational training or part-time employment is not sufficient to bring that scheme within its scope.

Citations:

C-63/91, [1992] EUECJ C-63/91

Links:

Bailii

European, Benefits, Discrimination

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.160659

Hellenic Republic v Commission of the European Communities: ECJ 22 Jun 1993

ECJ 1. Where the Court finds in a number of judgments that practices exist in a Member State which are incompatible with the Community rules on the common organizations of the markets and that that Member State has consistently resisted the Commission’ s requests for on-the-spot inquiries, the Commission is entitled, in the context of the procedure for the clearance of EAGGF accounts, to consider that those practices continued after the period to which the Court’ s findings related and, in the absence of proof to the contrary from the Member State concerned, to refuse to charge to the EAGGF expenditure in the sector affected by the unlawful practices. 2. It is for the national authorities which subsequently amend figures of decisive significance for the purposes of the calculation of the amount which the Member State concerned owes to the EAGGF in connection with the co -responsibility levy in the cereals sector to provide sufficient specific information to justify that change. 3. Where the Commission, after receiving a complaint regarding the total forfeiture of a security given by an economic operator which has purchased intervention products, has informed the national authorities concerned that it is possible to recalculate the amount of the security having to be regarded as definitively forfeit and makes that recalculation conditional solely on the primary obligation undertaken by the operator being fulfilled, the national authorities cannot be criticized, on the clearance of the EAGGF accounts, for having effected that recalculation in accordance with a method consistent with the content of the communication sent to them, even though it may be incorrect or incomplete.

Citations:

C-56/91, [1993] EUECJ C-56/91

Links:

Bailii

European, Administrative, Agriculture

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.160655

Wunsche v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas: ECJ 4 Jun 1992

ECJ Common Customs Tariff – Customs value – Transaction value – Calculation – Interest payable under a financing arrangement – Excluded – Financing arrangement – Concept – Deferment of payment granted by the seller to the buyer – Included
(Council Regulation No 1224/80, Arts 1, 3 and 8; Commission Regulation No 1495/80, Art. 3, as amended by Regulation No 220/85)
The expression ‘financing arrangement’ used in Article 3(2) of Regulation No 1495/80 implementing certain provisions of Articles 1, 3 and 8 of Regulation No 1224/80 on the valuation of goods for customs purposes, as amended by Regulation No 220/85, is to be interpreted in the same manner as the same expression in Article 3(c) of the original version of Regulation No 1495/80.
The said Article 3 is to be interpreted as meaning that interest payable as a result of time allowed by the seller and accepted by the buyer for payment for imported goods is to be regarded as ‘interest payable under a financing arrangement relating to the purchase of the imported goods’, not to be included in the customs value.

Citations:

C-21/91, [1992] EUECJ C-21/91, [1992] ECR I-3647

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Council Regulation No 1224/80

European, Customs and Excise

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.160637

Redmond Stichting v Bartol and others (Judgment): ECJ 19 May 1992

Europa Article 1(1) of Council Directive 77/187 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the safeguarding of employees’ rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of businesses is to be interpreted as meaning that the expression ‘legal transfer’ covers a situation in which a public authority decides to terminate the subsidy paid to one legal person, as a result of which the activities of that legal person are fully and definitively terminated, and to transfer it to another legal person with a similar aim.
The expression ‘transfer of an undertaking, business or part of a business’ contained in Article 1(1) of Directive 77/187 refers to the case in which the entity in question has retained its identity. In order to ascertain whether or not there has been such a transfer, it is necessary to determine, having regard to all the factual circumstances characterizing the operation in question, whether the functions performed are in fact carried out or resumed by the new legal person with the same or similar activities, it being understood that activities of a special nature which constitute independent functions may, where appropriate, be equated with a business or part of a business within the meaning of the directive.

Citations:

C-29/91, [1992] ECR I-3189, [1992] EUECJ C-29/91

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 77/187 1(1)

Cited by:

Cited – Alderson and others v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry CA 8-Dec-2003
The claimant had been employed in a government department, the work of which was transferred to a private company. He sought to claim compensation for the adverse changes in his contract.
Held: At the time, the Regulations gave protection only . .
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: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.160643

Criminal proceedings against Debus Pretura circondariale di Pordenone et Pretura circondariale di Vigevano (Rec 1992,p I-3617) (Judgment): ECJ 4 Jun 1992

Europa 1. In view of the uncertainties in the present state of scientific research in the matter of food additives and of the absence of complete harmonization of national legislation, Articles 30 and 36 of the Treaty do not preclude national legislation restricting the use of such substances and laying down a maximum limit on the use of a specific additive in certain products. In applying such legislation to imported products containing a quantity of additives exceeding the limit authorized by the legislation of the importing Member State when that quantity is authorized in the Member State of production, the national authorities must, however, having regard to the principle of proportionality on which the last sentence of Article 36 is based, be restricted to that which is actually necessary for the protection of public health. Accordingly, the use of a specific additive which is authorized in one Member State must be authorized as regards products imported from that State where, both in view of the findings of international scientific research, in particular the work of the Community Scientific Committee for Food and the FAO Codex Alimentarius Committee and of the World Health Organization, and in the light of eating habits in the importing Member State, that additive does not represent a danger to public health and fulfils a real need, in particular of a technological nature. That concept has to be assessed in the light of the raw materials used, having regard to the assessment made by the authorities in the Member State of production and the findings of international scientific research. It follows that Articles 30 and 36 of the Treaty preclude national legislation which prohibits, generally and absolutely, the marketing of beers imported from another Member State in which they are lawfully marketed if they contain a quantity of sulphur dioxide exceeding 20 mg per litre, where it is agreed that the absorption of sulphur dioxide on account of the consumption of certain such beers does not entail a serious risk of exceeding the limits on the maximum daily dose of sulphur dioxide allowed by the FAO and the WHO, and that the legislation of the importing Member State authorizes the use of sulphur dioxide in much higher proportions in other beverages, one of which is consumed in much higher quantities than beer in the Member State in question. 2. A national court which is called upon, within the limits of its jurisdiction, to apply provisions of Community law is under a duty to give full effect to those provisions, if necessary refusing of its own motion to apply any conflicting provision of national legislation, even if adopted subsequently, and it is not necessary for the court to request or await the prior setting aside of such provision by legislative or other constitutional means.

Citations:

C-113/91, C-13/91, [1992] EUECJ C-13/91

Links:

Bailii

European, Agriculture

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.160629

Regina v Secretary of State for Social Security, ex parte the Equal Opportunities Commission: ECJ 7 Jul 1992

Europa Article 7(1)(a) of Directive 79/7 on the progressive implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security must be interpreted as authorizing the determination of a statutory pensionable age which differs according to sex for the purposes of granting old-age and retirement pensions and also forms of discrimination which are necessarily linked to that difference. Inequality between men and women with respect to the length of contribution periods required in order to obtain a pension of an identical amount constitutes such discrimination where, having regard to the financial equilibrium of the national pension system in the context of which it appears, it cannot be disassociated from a difference in pensionable age. In view of the advantages allowed to women by national pension systems, in particular as regards statutory pensionable age and length of contribution periods, and the disruptions which would necessarily be caused to the financial equilibrium of those systems if the principle of equality between the sexes were to be applied from one day to the next in respect of those periods, the Community legislature intended to authorize the progressive implementation of that principle by the Member States and that progressive nature could not be ensured if the scope of the derogation authorized by Article 7(1)(a) were to be interpreted restrictively.
LMA The pensionable age in the UK was 65 for men and 60 for women.. The EOC sought judicial review of the contributory state pension scheme, claiming that it discriminated against men on the grounds of sex, by requiring them to pay contributions for 44 years and women for 39 years in order to qualify for a full basic pension. Further, men working between the ages of 60 and 64 paid pension contributions whereas women working between those ages did not. The UK Government argued that the differences in treatment could be justified under the derogation in Art.7(1)(a) of Directive 79/7

Citations:

[1992] ECR I 4297, C-9/91, [1992] EUECJ C-9/91

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Goodwin v The United Kingdom ECHR 11-Jul-2002
The claimant was a post operative male to female trans-sexual. She claimed that her human rights were infringed when she was still treated as a man for National Insurance contributions purposes, where she continued to make payments after the age at . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.160628

Pitrone v Commission: ECJ 2 Apr 1992

ECJ Appeals – Pleas in law – Incorrect assessment of the facts – Appointment of an official when no vacancy existed – Pleas inadmissible – Rejection – (Statute of the EEC Court of Justice, Art. 51)
It is for the Court of First Instance to find whether or not the appointment of an official took place when there was no post vacant. This assessment of the facts by the Court of First Instance cannot be challenged in an appeal to the Court of Justice, since such an appeal is limited to points of law.

Citations:

C-378/90, [1992] EUECJ C-378/90P

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.160621

Micheletti and others v Delegacion del Gobierno en Cantabria (Rec 1992,p I-4239) (Judgment): ECJ 7 Jul 1992

Europa The provisions of Community law concerning freedom of establishment preclude a Member State from withholding that freedom from a national of another Member State who at the same time possesses the nationality of a non-member country, on the ground that the legislation of the host State deems him to be a national of the non-member country.
Whenever a Member State, having due regard to Community law, has granted its nationality to a person, another Member State may not, by imposing an additional condition for its recognition, restrict the effects of the grant of that nationality with a view to the exercise of a fundamental freedom provided for in the Treaty, particularly since the consequence of allowing such a possibility would be that the class of persons to whom the Community rules on freedom of establishment were applied might vary from one Member State to another.

Citations:

C-369/90, [1992] EUECJ C-369/90

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.160613

Regina v Immigration Appeal Tribunal and Surinder Singh, ex parte Secretary of State for the Home Department: ECJ 7 Jul 1992

ECJ The provisions of the Treaty relating to the free movement of persons are intended to facilitate the pursuit by Community citizens of occupational activities of all kinds throughout the Community and preclude measures which might place Community citizens at a disadvantage when they wish to pursue an economic activity in the territory of another Member State. For that purpose, nationals of Member States have in particular the right, which they derive directly from Articles 48 and 52 of the Treaty, to enter and reside in the territory of other Member States in order to pursue an economic activity there as envisaged by those provisions. A national of a Member State might be deterred from leaving his country of origin in order to pursue an activity as an employed or self-employed person in the territory of another Member State if, on returning to the Member State of which he is a national in order to pursue an activity there as an employed or self-employed person, his conditions were not at least equivalent to those which he would enjoy under Community law in the territory of another Member State. He would in particular be deterred from so doing if his spouse and children were not also permitted to enter and reside in the territory of that State under conditions at least equivalent to those granted by Community law in the territory of another Member State. The fact that a national of a Member State enters and resides in the territory of that State by virtue of the rights attendant upon his nationality, without its being necessary for him to rely on his rights under Articles 48 and 52 of the Treaty, does not preclude him from relying on the latter rights when he takes up residence again in that Member State. Consequently, Article 52 of the Treaty and Directive 73/148 on the abolition of restrictions on movement and residence within the Community for nationals of Member States with regard to establishment and the provision of services must be construed as requiring a Member State to grant leave to enter and reside in its territory to the spouse, of whatever nationality, of a national of that State who has gone, with that spouse, to another Member State in order to work there as an employed person as envisaged by Article 48 of the Treaty and returns to establish himself or herself as envisaged by Article 52 of the Treaty in the territory of the State of which he or she is a national. The spouse must enjoy at least the same rights as would be granted to him or her under Community law if his or her spouse entered or resided in the territory of another Member State.
Mr Singh was the Indian husband of a British woman. They had married in the UK in 1982, and lived in Germany from 1983-1985 where they were employed. They returned to the UK to open a business in 1985. A decree nisi of divorce was pronounced in 1987. Mr Singh remained in the UK without leave from 1988. A deportation order was made against Mr Singh, which he appealed, asserting a Community law right to reside in the UK. The decree absolute was pronounced in 1989.
Held: The fact that the marriage was dissolved by the decree absolute was irrelevant to the issue raised by the question before the court which concerned the basis of his right of residence in the period before the decree: ‘A national of a member state might be deterred from leaving his country of origin in order to pursue an activity as an employed or self-employed person as envisaged by the Treaty in the territory of another member state if, on returning to the member state of which he is a national in order to pursue an activity there as an employed or self-employed person, the conditions of his entry and residence were not at least equivalent to those which he would enjoy under the Treaty or secondary law in the territory of another member state.’
The court rejected the submission that her rights turned on domestic law. The case was concerned with free movement under Community law: ‘These rights cannot be fully effective if such a person may be deterred from exercising them by obstacles raised in his or her country of origin to the entry and residence of his or her spouse.’

Judges:

O Due, P

Citations:

[1993] Fam Law 294, [1993] 1 FLR 798, [1992] 3 CMLR 358, Times 31-Aug-1992, [1992] ECR I-4265, C-370/90, [1992] EUECJ C-370/90, [1992] Imm AR 565, [1992] 3 All ER 798

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – Secretry of State for the Home Department v Akrich ECJ 23-Sep-2003
After being deported twice from England, the applicant returned secretly, married a British citizen, and sought leave to remain. He was deported, but to Ireland where his new spouse was then established. He sought to rely upon the case of Surinder . .
Cited – Regina v Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority ex parte DB Admn 17-Oct-1996
Sperm which had been taken from a dying and unconscious man may not be used for the later insemination of his surviving wife. The Act required his written consent.
Held: Community Law does not assist the Applicant. The question had been . .
Cited – Machado v Secretary of State for the Home Deptment CA 19-May-2005
At issue was a decision of the Home Secretary to deport on grounds of public policy a foreign national married to an EU national with a right of establishment in the United Kingdom. The substantive issue was whether the decision of the IAT to uphold . .
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 . .
Cited – Nouazli, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 20-Apr-2016
The court considered the compatibility with EU law of regulations 21 and 24 of the 2006 Regulations, and the legality at common law of the appellant’s administrative detention from 3 April until 6 June 2012 and of bail restrictions thereafter until . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Immigration

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.160614

Lourenco Dias v Director da Alfandega do Porto: ECJ 16 Jul 1992

Europa 1. In the framework of the procedure for cooperation between the Court of Justice and the courts of the Member States provided for by Article 177 of the Treaty, the national court, which alone has direct knowledge of the facts of the case, is in the best position to assess, having regard to the particular features of the case, whether a preliminary ruling is necessary to enable it to give judgment. Consequently, where the questions put by the national court concern the interpretation of a provision of Community law, the Court is, in principle, bound to give a ruling.
Nevertheless, it is a matter for the Court of Justice, in order to determine whether it has jurisdiction, to examine the conditions in which the case has been referred to it. The spirit of cooperation which must prevail in the preliminary-ruling procedure requires the national court to have regard to the function entrusted to the Court of Justice, which is to assist in the administration of justice in the Member States and not to deliver advisory opinions on general or hypothetical questions.
2. In order to enable the Court of Justice to provide a useful interpretation of Community law under Article 177 of the Treaty, it is appropriate that, before making the reference to the Court, the national court should establish the facts of the case and settle the questions of purely national law. By the same token, it is essential for the national court to explain the reasons why it considers that a reply to its questions is necessary to enable it to give judgment.
3. The fact that certain elements or certain rules for the application of a system of internal taxation are discriminatory and consequently prohibited by Article 95 of the Treaty does not necessarily mean that the whole of the tax system of which those elements or rules form a part has to be considered to be incompatible with that article.
In a situation in which, in most Member States, the tax systems are characterized by the extreme diversity with which some products are taxed or qualify for abatements or deductions, the fact that some categories of products may suffer discriminatory treatment cannot have any bearing on the compatibility with Community law of internal taxes charged on other categories of products where those taxes are themselves applied in a non-discriminatory manner.
4. A motor-vehicle tax applied without distinction to vehicles assembled and manufactured in the Member State where it is levied and to both new and used imported vehicles cannot be considered to be a charge having an effect equivalent to a customs duty on imports prohibited by Article 12 of the Treaty where it forms part of a general system of internal dues applied systematically to categories of products in accordance with objective criteria irrespective of the origin of the products. It constitutes internal taxation within the meaning of Article 95.

Citations:

C-343/90, [1992] EUECJ C-343/90

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Foulser and Another v HM Inspector of Taxes ChD 20-Dec-2005
The taxpayer company entered into an arrangement in which shares were purchased by a company based in Ireland and resold. A claim was made for holdover relief.
Held: The scheme failed. The restriction imposed did not infringe the right of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.160595

Compagnia Italiana Alcool v Commission: ECJ 7 Apr 1992

ECJ The urgency of an application for interim measures must be assessed in relation to the necessity for an order granting interim relief in order to prevent serious and irreparable damage to the party requesting the interim measures. Damage of a financial nature is not in principle considered to be serious and irreparable unless it could not be wholly recouped if the applicant were to be successful in the main action. Even assuming that the alleged damage could not be made good entirely by an award of damages, the commercial interests which the applicant seeks to protect should be weighed against the interests of the Community.

Citations:

C-358/90, [1990] EUECJ C-358/90R

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

See Also – Compagnia Italiana Alcool Sas di Mario Mariano and Co v Commission of the European Communities ECJ 19-Dec-1990
ECJ Vinous alcohol – Special sale by tender. Application for interim measures – Interim measures – Conditions for granting – Serious and irreparable damage – Financial damage – Damage which cannot be wholly . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.160607

Germany and Pleuger Worthington v Commission: ECJ 13 Apr 1994

(Judgment) 1. Although the Commission, in carrying out its task of supervising State aid, may not in principle be barred from relying on a set of circumstances which taken as a whole indicate the de facto existence of an aid programme, the mere fact that a set of aids may be part of a policy to prevent the exodus of undertakings and the fact that those aids were granted under the same budget heading and by the same administrative body are not sufficient, in the absence of further explanations on legislative, administrative, financial or economic matters, to demonstrate that all those aids constitute elements of a single programme to which the provisions of Article 93 of the Treaty apply. Such a policy may be conducted on the basis of measures of a very different nature and even by means of very varied aid programmes.
2. Once the Commission has established that aids have been granted or altered without notification, it has the power, after giving the Member State in question an opportunity to submit its comments on the matter, to issue an interim decision requiring it to suspend immediately the payment of such aids pending the outcome of the examination of the aids and to provide the Commission, within such period as it may specify, with all such documentation, information and data as are necessary in order that it may examine the compatibility of the aid with the common market. It is only if the Member State, notwithstanding the Commission’ s order, fails to provide the information requested, that the Commission is empowered to terminate the procedure and make its decision, on the basis of the information available to it, on the question whether or not the aids are compatible with the common market.
If the Commission, when the procedure relating to the unnotified aids was commenced, requested information about the aids and about the aid programme or programmes, without, however, requiring the Member State concerned, by interim decision, to provide it with all information relating to all the aids granted, it is not entitled to rely on the failure to notify the individual aids in question to arrive at the conclusion that an aid programme exists, which is denied by the Member State concerned. Nor can it rely, in justification of its decision, on the fragmentary nature of the information sent to it, since it did not use all its powers to cause the Member State to provide it with all the necessary information.

Citations:

C-324/90, [1994] EUECJ C-324/90

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.160585

Commission v Belgium: ECJ 28 Jan 1992

Europa Legislation of a Member State which makes the deductibility of pension and life assurance contributions conditional on those contributions being paid in that State is contrary to Articles 48 and 59 of the Treaty. However, that condition may be justified by the need to safeguard the cohesion of the applicable tax system.
That need may exist, for example, where the tax system of a Member State is such that the deductibility of the contributions is offset by the taxation of payments made by insurers pursuant to the contracts, and vice versa, and where it would be impossible to ensure that the deductions were offset by subsequent taxation of payments because payments arising from the deductible contributions were made by a foreign insurer established in another country where there would be no certainty of subjecting them to tax.

Citations:

C-300/90, [1992] EUECJ C-300/90

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Pirelli Cable Holding Nv and others v Inland Revenue HL 8-Feb-2006
Under s247 of the 1988 Act, a company paying dividends to a parent company need not withhold ACT. This option was not offered where either subsidiary or parent was not UK resident until the decision in Hoechst which found the restriction contrary to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.160567

Reichert and Kockler v Dresdner Bank: ECJ 26 Mar 1992

The case concerned article 16(5) of the Brussels Convention, among other articles.
Held: It is necessary to take account of the fact that the essential purpose of the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of the place in which the judgment has been or is to be enforced is that it is only for the courts of the Member State on whose territory enforcement is sought to apply the rules concerning the action on that territory of the authorities responsible for enforcement.

Citations:

C-261/90, [1992] ECR 1-2149, [1992] EUECJ C-261/90

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Brussesl Convention 16(5)

Cited by:

Cited – Kuwait Oil Tanker Company SAK and others v UBS AG, Qabazard HL 12-Jun-2003
Mr Qabazard conspired with others to defraud the Kuwait Oil Tanker Company SAK and Sitka Shipping Inc of large sums of money. On 16 November 1998 Moore-Bick J gave judgment against him for over US$130m. Historically sums had been placed with the . .
Cited – Mazur Media Limited and Another v Mazur Media Gmbh in Others ChD 8-Jul-2004
Proceedings were brought in England. The respondents sought a stay, saying the company was subject to insolvency proceedings in Germany.
Held: Our domestic insolvency law was not applicable to foreign proceedings, and so could not be used to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Jurisdiction

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.160547