Category: European

Greece v Council: ECJ 29 Mar 1990

Europa The need for a complete and consistent review of legality requires the first paragraph of Article 173 to be construed as not depriving the Court of jurisdiction to consider, in proceedings for the annulment of a measure based on a provision of the EEC Treaty, a submission concerning the infringement of a rule of the EAEC or ECSC Treaties. In the context of the organization of the powers of the Community, the choice of the legal basis for a measure, which may influence its content in so far as it determines the procedure to be followed for its adoption, must be based on objective factors which are amenable to judicial review. Although Article 190 of the Treaty compels a reference to the Commission’ s proposal in measures which may be adopted only on a proposal from the Commission, it does not thereby impose the obligation to indicate whether or not the measure in question is in conformity with that proposal. By subjecting the release for free circulation of certain agricultural products originating in non-member countries to compliance with maximum permitted levels of radioactive contamination, Regulation No 3955/87 pursues the aim of ensuring that agricultural products and processed agricultural products intended for human consumption and likely to be contaminated are introduced into the Community only according to common arrangements which safeguard the health of consumers, maintain, without having unduly adverse effects on trade between the Community and non-member countries, the unified nature of the market and prevent deflections of trade. It follows that, according to its objective and its content, the regulation seeks to regulate trade between the Community and non-member countries; accordingly it comes within the common commercial policy within the meaning of Article 113 of the EEC Treaty.

Citations:

C-62/88, [1990] EUECJ C-62/88

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.134832

Al-Jubail Fertilizer Company and Others v Council: ECJ 27 Jun 1991

ECJ The right to a fair hearing, as a principle of fundamental character, must be observed not only in administrative proceedings which may result in the imposition of penalties, but also in investigative proceedings such as those prior to the adoption of anti-dumping regulations which, despite their general scope, may directly and individually affect the undertakings concerned and entail adverse consequences for them.
So far as the defence against dumping practices is concerned, any action taken by the Community institutions must be all the more scrupulous in view of the fact that, as they stand at present, the rules in question do not provide all the procedural guarantees for the protection of the individual which may exist in certain national legal systems.
In performing their duty to provide information under Article 7(4)(b) of Regulation No 2176/84, the Community institutions must act with all due diligence by seeking to provide the undertakings concerned, as far as is compatible with the obligation not to disclose business secrets, with information relevant to the defence of their interests, choosing, if necessary on their own initiative, the appropriate means of providing such information. In any event, the undertakings concerned should have been placed in a position during the administrative procedure in which they could effectively make known their views on the correctness and relevance of the facts and circumstances alleged and on the evidence presented by the Commission in support of its allegation concerning the existence of dumping and the resultant injury.
Although the information requested may, under Article 7(4)(c)(ii) of Regulation No 2176/84, be supplied in a purely oral manner, that possibility cannot release the Community authorities from their obligation to ensure that they have evidence enabling them, if necessary, to prove that such information was actually communicated.
While it is true that the amount of the definitive duty constitutes essential information, such is not the case with regard to the type of duty adopted and its method of calculation, if only because the choice between the various types of anti-dumping duties has in principle no effect on the final amount of that duty. The absence of such information cannot therefore be treated as infringing the right to a fair hearing.

Citations:

C-49/88, [1991] EUECJ C-49/88

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.134823

Commission v Greece: ECJ 21 Sep 1989

Europa 1. There is an inseparable link between the obligation to establish the Community’s own resources, the obligation to credit them to the Commission’s account within the prescribed time-limit and the obligation to pay default interest . The interest is payable regardless of the reason for the delay in making the entry in the Commission’ s account. 2. Where Community legislation does not specifically provide any penalty for an infringement or refers for that purpose to national laws, regulations and administrative provisions, Article 5 of the Treaty requires the Member State to take all measures necessary to guarantee the application and effectiveness of Community law. For that purpose, whilst the choice of penalties remains within their discretion, they must ensure in particular that infringements of Community law are penalized under conditions, both procedural and substantive, which are analogous to those applicable to infringements of national law of a similar nature and importance and which, in any event, make the penalty effective, proportionate and dissuasive . Moreover, the national authorities must proceed, with respect to infringements of Community law, with the same diligence as that which they bring to bear in implementing corresponding national laws.

Citations:

C-68/88, [1989] EUECJ C-68/88, [1989] ECR 2965

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Commission v Council (Police And Judicial Cooperation In Criminal Matters) ECJ 13-Sep-2005
The Commission sought anullment of Council Framework Decision 2003/80/JHA on the protection of the environment through criminal law. The framework decision laid down a number of environmental offences, in respect of which the Member States are . .
Cited – UK Coal Mining Ltd v National Union of Mineworkers (Northumberland Area) and Another EAT 27-Sep-2007
The employer appealed against a protective award made for failing to consult the union on prospective redundancies.
Held: The appeal failed. The duty to consult arose as soon as the redundancies were fixed as a clear, even if there had been . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.134836

Criminal Proceedings Against Zwartveld and Others: ECJ 13 Jul 1990

Europa European Communities – Institutions – Obligations – Duty to cooperate with national authorities acting to ensure respect for Community law – Implementation – Disclosure of documents and authorization of officials to give evidence – Legitimate grounds of refusal – Review by the Court
The Community institutions’ duty of sincere cooperation with the judicial authorities of the Member States which are responsible for ensuring that Community law is applied and respected in the national legal system does not preclude a refusal to disclose documents or to authorize officials to give evidence where there are legitimate grounds relating to the protection of the rights of third parties or where there may be interference with the functioning and independence of the Communities. In the case of such refusal the institution concerned must provide the Court with the information required to allow it to decide whether the refusal is justified.

Citations:

C-2/88, [1990] EUECJ C-2/88I, [1990] ECR I-3365

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Commission v Council (Police And Judicial Cooperation In Criminal Matters) ECJ 13-Sep-2005
The Commission sought anullment of Council Framework Decision 2003/80/JHA on the protection of the environment through criminal law. The framework decision laid down a number of environmental offences, in respect of which the Member States are . .
Cited – Barron and Others v Collins QBD 16-May-2016
The defendant MEP sought an order staying the defamation action brought against her by four MPs from the Rotherham area. She said that as an MEP she had a procedural immunity. She had informed the European Commission that she sought the protection . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.134782

Lopes Da Veiga v Staatssecretaris Van Justitie: ECJ 27 Sep 1989

Europa Article 216(1) of the Act of Accession of Portugal must be interpreted as meaning that the provisions relating to the holding of employment and equal treatment which are contained in Article 7 et seq . of Regulation No 1612/68 on freedom of movement for workers within the Community may be relied upon by a Portuguese national who, since a date prior to the accession of Portugal, has been carrying on an activity as an employed person on board a vessel flying the flag of another Member State and who has not been granted possession of a residence document for carrying on an activity as a employed person in the territory of that State, if the employment relationship has a sufficiently close connection with the territory of that Member State.
A Portuguese national who satisfies those conditions may rely on Article 4 of Directive 68/360 under which Member States are to grant the right of residence in their territory to workers from Member States and to their families moving within the Community.

Citations:

C-9/88, R-9/88, [1989] EUECJ R-9/88, [1989] ECR 2989

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: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.134789

Lefebvre Frere and Soeur v Commission: ECJ 14 Feb 1989

A Commission decision, adopted pursuant to the first paragraph of Article 115 of the Treaty, addressed to a Member State and authorizing that State in future to exclude from Community treatment for a specified period bananas originating in certain non-member countries and released into free circulation in the other Member States, is, with regard to all banana importers, a measure of general application which applies to situations determined objectively and has legal effects with regard to categories of persons referred to in a general and abstract manner.
It is not therefore of individual concern, within the meaning of the second paragraph of Article 173 of the Treaty, to a banana-importing undertaking, even if that undertaking had been prohibited on several occasions by the authorities of the Member State concerned from importing bananas and had complained of its difficulties to the national courts and the Commission.
Firstly, no application for an import licence lodged by that undertaking was still pending when the decision was adopted and, secondly, a measure does not cease to be a regulation because it is possible to determine the number or even the identity of the persons to whom it applies at any given time as long as it is established that such application takes effect by virtue of an objective legal or factual situation.

Citations:

C-206/87, [1989] EUECJ C-206/87

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Agriculture, Customs and Excise

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.134664

Commission v Greece: ECJ 30 Jun 1988

1. Although the powers conferred on the Commission by Article 90(3) of the Treaty operate in a specific field of application and under conditions defined by reference to the particular objective of that article, that does not prevent the ‘directives’ and ‘decisions’ referred to in that provision from falling within the general category of directives and decisions referred to in Article 189.
Consequently, a decision based on Article 90(3) is, by virtue of the fourth paragraph of Article 189, ‘binding in its entirety’ upon the Member State to which it is addressed.
2. The system of remedies set up by the Treaty distinguishes between the remedies provided for in Articles 169 and 170, which permit a declaration that a Member State has failed to fulfil its obligations, and those contained in Articles 173 and 175, which permit judicial review of the lawfulness of measures adopted by the Community institutions, or the failure to adopt such measures. Those remedies have different objectives and are subject to different rules. In the absence of a provision of the Treaty expressly permitting it do so, a Member State cannot therefore plead the unlawfulness of a decision addressed to it as a defence in an action for a declaration that it has failed to fulfil its obligations arising out of its failure to implement that decision.
Such a defence could be upheld only if the measure at issue contained such particularly serious and manifest defects that it could be deemed non-existent.

Citations:

C-226/87, [1988] EUECJ C-226/87

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.134680

Cockerill Sambre v Commission: ECJ 10 Aug 1987

ECJ 1. Application for interim measures – conditions of admissibility – admissibility of main application – not relevant – limits
(ECSC Treaty, art. 39; rules of procedure, art. 83*(1)*)
2. Application for interim measures – suspension of operation – conditions for granting – prima facie case – serious and irreparable damage
(ECSC treaty, art. 39; rules of procedure, art. 83*(2)*)
3. ECSC – production – system of production and delivery quotas for steel – duties of the commission – guarantee to any given undertaking of minimum production or maintenance of market share – none
(CSC Treaty, art. 58)

Citations:

C-214/87, [1987] EUECJ C-214/87R

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.134671

Star Fruit v Commission: ECJ 14 Feb 1989

(Judgment) Action for failure to act – Natural or legal persons – Failures to act against which an action lies – Failure to commence proceedings for a breach of Treaty obligations – Inadmissibility
An action for failure to act brought by a natural or legal person for a declaration that in not commencing against a Member State proceedings to establish its breach of obligations the Commission has, in breach of the Treaty, failed to take a decision.
First, it is clear from the scheme of Article 169 of the Treaty that the Commission is not obliged to commence proceedings under that provision but has a discretionary power in this regard which excludes the right of private individuals to require that institution to adopt a specific position.
Secondly, a natural or legal person who asks the Commission to commence proceedings pursuant to Article 169 is in fact seeking the adoption of acts which are not of direct and individual concern to him within the meaning of the second paragraph of Article 173 and which it could not therefore challenge by means of an action for annulment in any event .

Citations:

C-247/87, [1989] EUECJ C-247/87

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

EEC Treaty 169

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.134695

Regina v Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, ex parte Jaderow Ltd: ECJ 14 Dec 1989

ECJ Fishing – Common structural policy – Conservation of the resources of the sea – Fishing quota system – Regulation by a Member State of the use of its quotas – Grant of licences – Conditions for ensuring that a real economic link exists between vessels and the State concerned – Requirement for vessels to operate from national ports – Means of proof – Landing of a proportion of the vessel’ s catches and its periodic presence in national ports – Whether permissible – Conditions – Amendment of the national rules relating to the grant of licences – Principle of the protection of legitimate expectation – Breach – None (Council Regulation No 101/76, Art. 2(1), No 2057/82, Arts 6(1) and 9(1), No 170/83, Arts 4 and 5(2) and No 172/83)
Community law as it now stands does not preclude a Member State, in issuing to one of its vessels a licence authorizing it to fish against national quotas, from laying down conditions designed to ensure that the vessel has a real economic link with that State if that link concerns only the relations between the vessel’ s fishing operations and the populations dependent on fisheries and related industries or from laying down the condition, in order to ensure that there is such a link, that the vessel is to operate from national ports, if that condition does not involve an obligation for the vessel to depart from a national port on all its fishing trips. The Member State concerned is entitled to consider that proof of compliance with that condition may be provided by the landing of a proportion of catches or by the periodic presence of the vessel in national ports and may accept, as evidence that the vessel operates from national ports, only the landing of a specified proportion of the vessel’ s catches or a specified periodic presence of the vessel in national ports, provided that the frequency with which the vessel is required to be present in those ports does not impose, directly or indirectly, an obligation to land the vessel’ s catches in national ports or hinder normal fishing operations. The fact that in a Member State the conditions for granting fishing licences authorizing fishing against national quotas are made more restrictive while remaining compatible with Community law does not constitute a breach of the protection owed to the legitimate expectation of traders.

Citations:

C-216/87, R-216/87, [1989] EUECJ R-216/87

Links:

Bailii

European, Agriculture, Licensing

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.134673

Kerzmann v Court of Auditors: ECJ 4 Jul 1989

ECJ (Judgment) According to the established case-law of the Court :
1. The Community institutions enjoy a wide discretion in organizing their departments on the basis of the tasks entrusted to them and, consequently, in posting members of their staff. The need to create a new post come within the scope of that discretion.
2. A decision may amount to misuse of powers only if it appears on the basis of objective, relevant and consistent indications, to have been taken for purposes other than those stated.
3. It is for the appointing authority to assess whether a candidate fulfils the conditions required by the vacancy notice, and that assessment may be questioned only in the event of manifest error.
Where a vacancy notice requires that candidates possess either a university degree or equivalent experience, and additional experience in fields relevant to the post to be filled, it is for the appointing authority to determine both how far experience is equivalent to the degree referred to in the vacancy notice and the relevance of additional experience to the post in question .

Citations:

C-198/87, [1989] EUECJ C-198/87

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.134657