Category: European

Bruns v Commission: ECJ 15 Dec 1977

ECJ Officials – pension – transitional system – pension rights – acquisition – payment of contributions as the basis thereof – interest – consideration of interest – absence – loss of income from the investment of contributions – compensation of the fund – refusal (staff regulations of officials, annex viii, articles 48 and 49 ; staff memorandum of the commission no 16-470/58-f, of 19 June 1958)

Citations:

C-95/76, [1977] EUECJ C-95/76

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.132497

Ruckdeschel and Others v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-St Annen: ECJ 19 Oct 1977

Europa The wording of the second subparagraph of article 40(3) of the Treaty does not refer in clear terms to the relationship between different industrial or trade sectors in the sphere of processed agricultural products . This does not alter the fact that the prohibition of discrimination laid down in the aforesaid provision is merely a specific enunciation of a general principle of equality which is one of the fundamental principles of community law. This principle requires that similar situations shall not be treated differently unless differentiation is objectively justified.
The provisions of article 11 of regulation no 120/67/eec of the council of 13 june 1967, as worded with effect from 1 august 1974 following the amendment made by article 5 of regulation ( eec ) no 1125/74 of the council of 29 april 1974, and repeated in subsequent regulations, are incompatible with the principle of equality in so far as they provide for quellmehl and pre-gelatinized starch to receive different treatment in respect of production refunds for maize used in the manufacture of these two products.
In the particular circumstances of the case, this finding of illegality does not inevitably involve a declaration that a provision of regulation (eec) no 1125/74 is invalid. The illegality of article 5 of regulation ( eec ) no 1125/74 cannot be removed merely by the fact that the court , in proceedings under article 177, rules that the contested provision was in part or in whole invalid . As the situation created, in law, by article 5 of regulation (eec) no 1125/74 is incompatible with the principle of equality, it is for the competent institutions of the community to adopt the measures necessary to correct this incompatibility.

Citations:

C-117/76, R-117/76, [1977] EUECJ R-117/76

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.132514

United Brands v Commission: ECJ 5 Apr 1976

Citations:

C-27/76, [1976] EUECJ C-27/76R

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

See Also – United Brands Company and United Brands Continentaal BV v Commission of the European Communities ECJ 14-Feb-1978
Europa The opportunities for competition under article 86 of the treaty must be considered having regard to the particular features of the product in question and with reference to a clearly defined geographic . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.132437

Silvana Di Paolo v Office national de l’emploi: ECJ 17 Feb 1977

ECJ The concept of the member state in which the worker resides, appearing in article 71(1)(b)(ii) of regulation no 1408/71, must be limited to the state where the worker, although occupied in another member state, continues habitually to reside and where the habitual centre of his interests is also situated. The addition of the words ‘or who returns to that territory’ implies merely that the concept of residence in a state does not necessarily exclude non-habitual residence in another member state. For the purposes of applying article 71(1)(b)(ii), account should be taken of the length and continuity of residence before the person concerned moved, the length and purpose of his absence, the nature of the occupation found in the other member state and the intention of the person concerned as it appears from all the circumstances.

Citations:

R-76/76, [1977] EUECJ R-76/76, C-76/76

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.132479

Mills v EIB (Judgment): ECJ 15 Jun 1976

Europa By its use of the words ‘any dispute between the community and its servants’ article 179 is not restricted exclusively to the institutions of the community and their staff but also includes the bank as a community institution established and with legal personality conferred by the treaty. Under this article the court thus has jurisdiction in any dispute between the bank and its servants.
The system adopted for the relations between the bank and its employees is contractual. The contract may be repudiated and terminated by either of the parties on the conditions laid down both in the regulations and in the contract itself.
If the contract is terminated contrary to the provisions of the individual contract or of the staff regulations of the european investment bank which are deemed to be an integral part thereof the party having illegally terminated the contract must be ordered to compensate the other party for the material and non-material damage occasioned to the latter by such illegality.
Both the provisions of the contract and the general principles of the law of master and servant impose limits on the intention of the parties. Termination of a contract which exceeds those limits may be void and it will be for the court having jurisdiction, in this case the court of justice, to make a declaration to that effect.

Citations:

C-110/75, [1976] EUECJ C-110/75, [1976] EUECJ C-110/75

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

European, Employment

Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.132393

Van Duyn v Home Office: ECJ 4 Dec 1974

LMA Miss Van Duyn, a Dutch national, wished to enter the UK to take up work with the Church of Scientology. Art 48EC (new Art.39EC) confers rights on the individuals of each Member State to go to another MS (host state) to take up work without being discriminated against as regards employment, remuneration and other conditions of work and employment. The right to free movement of workers is subject to limitations justified on the grounds of public policy, public security or public health. Despite any evidence of ‘personal conduct’ being held against her, the HO refused to admit Miss Van Duyn into the UK.
Held: Miss van Duyn was allowed to invoke the Directive against the HO directly before the Dutch court (i.e. vertical direct effect). Article 3 of Directive 64/221 conferred on individuals rights which were enforceable by them in the courts of Member States and which the national courts must protect.
In relation to its approach to the free movement of workers and public policy within the Treaty of Rome, the court remarked that ‘it is a principle of international law, which the EEC Treaty cannot be assumed to disregard in the relations between member states, that a state is precluded from refusing its own nationals the right of entry or residence’.

Citations:

(1975) 1 CMLR 1, C-41/74, [1974] ECR I 1337, R-41/74, [1974] EUECJ R-41/74, [1975] Ch 358, [1974] ECR 1337

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Chagos Islanders v The Attorney General, Her Majesty’s British Indian Ocean Territory Commissioner QBD 9-Oct-2003
The Chagos Islands had been a British dependent territory since 1814. The British government repatriated the islanders in the 1960s, and the Ilois now sought damages for their wrongful displacement, misfeasance, deceit, negligence and to establish a . .
Cited – HB v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 11-Jul-2008
The claimant appealed against the decision to deport him made on the basis of hs propensity to criminality. The court was asked whether a propensity to commit robberies was a sufficiently serious threat to society to allow expulsion. However it . .
Cited – Regina v Kluxen CACD 14-May-2010
The court considered the occasions on which a court should recommend deportation after completion of a prison sentence and how this might differ between EU and non-EU nationals.
Held: Since the 2007 it is not appropriate to recommend . .
Cited – Lukaszewski v The District Court In Torun, Poland SC 23-May-2012
Three of the appellants were Polish citizens resisting European Arrest Warrants. A fourth (H), a British citizen, faced extradition to the USA. An order for the extradition of eachhad been made, and acting under advice each filed a notice of appeal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Employment

Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.132382

Centrafarm Bv and Others v Sterling Drug: ECJ 31 Oct 1974

(Free Movement Of Goods)

Citations:

C-15/74, R-15/74, [1974] EUECJ R-15/74, [1974] ECR 1147

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, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.132356

Jean Reyners v Belgian State: ECJ 21 Jun 1974

Europa The rule on equal treatment with nationals is one of the fundamental legal provisions of the community. As a reference to a set of legislative provisions effectively applied by the country of establishment to its own nationals, this rule is, by its essence, capable of being directly invoked by nationals of all the other member states. In laying down that freedom of establishment shall be attained at the end of the transitional period, article 52 thus provides an obligation to obtain a precise result, the fulfilment of which had to be made easier by, but not made dependent on, the implementation of a programme of progressive measures. Since the end of the transitional period article 52 of the treaty is a directly applicable provision despite the absence, in a particular sphere, of the directives prescribed by articles 54(2) and 57(1) of the treaty. Having regard to the fundamental character of freedom of establishment and the rule on equal treatment with nationals in the system of the treaty, the exceptions allowed by the first paragraph of article 55 cannot be given a scope which would exceed the objective for which this exemption clause was inserted. The exception to freedom of establishment provided for by the first paragraph of article 55 must be restricted to those activities referred to in article 52 which in themselves involve a direct and specific connexion with the exercise of official authority; it is not possible to give this description, in the context of a profession such as that of avocat, to activities such as consultation and legal assistance or the representation and defence of parties in court even if the performance of these activities is compulsory or there is a legal monopoly in respect of it.

Citations:

C-2/74, R-2/74, [1974] EUECJ R-2/74, [1974] ECR 631

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Gebhard v Consiglio dell’Ordine degli Avvocati e Procuratori di Milano ECJ 30-Nov-1995
Practice by lawyers in other European jurisdictions were governed by the general principles of freedom of establishment under the Treaty: ‘National measures liable to hinder or make less attractive the exercise of fundamental freedoms guaranteed by . .
Cited – Autologic Holdings Plc and others v Commissioners of Inland Revenue HL 28-Jul-2005
Taxpayer companies challenged the way that the revenue restricted claims for group Corporation Tax relief for subsidiary companies in Europe. The issue was awaiting a decision of the European Court. The Revenue said that the claims now being made by . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.132345

Centrafarm Bv and Others v Winthorp Bv: ECJ 31 Oct 1974

(Free Movement Of Goods)

Citations:

[1974] ECR 1183, C-16/74, R-16/74, [1974] EUECJ R-16/74

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Scandecor Developments AB v Scandecor Marketing AV and Others and One Other Action HL 4-Apr-2001
A business had grown, but the two founders split, and set up separate business. There was no agreement as to the use of the trading names and trade marks. The original law of Trade Marks prohibited bare exclusive licenses, licences excluding the . .
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, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Intellectual Property

Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.132357

Commission v France (Judgment): ECJ 4 Apr 1974

Europa The commission, in the exercise of the powers which it has under articles 155 and 169 of the treaty, does not have to show the existence of a legal interest, since, in the general interest of the community, its function is to ensure that the provisions of the treaty are applied by the member states and to note the existence of any failure to fulfil the obligations deriving therefrom, with a view to bringing it to an end. Conceived as being applicable to the whole complex of economic activities, the basic rules set out in part two of the eec treaty can be rendered inapplicable only as a result of express provision in the treaty. When article 74 refers to the objectives of the treaty, it means the provisions of articles 2 and 3, the attainment of which the fundamental provisions applicable to the whole complex of economic activities seek to ensure. Far from involving a departure from these fundamental rules, the object of the rules relating to the common transport policy is to implement and complement them by means of common action. Consequently the said general rules must be applied insofar as they can achieve these objectives. Under article 84(2), sea and air transport, so long as the council has not decided otherwise, is excluded only from the rules of title iv of part two of the treaty relating to the common transport policy. It remains, on the same basis as the other modes of transport, subject to the general rules of the treaty. Since the provisions of article 48 and of regulation no 1612/68 are directly applicable in the legal order of every member state, and community law has priority over national law, these provisions give rise, on the part of those concerned, to rights which the national authorities must respect and safeguard and as a result of which all contrary provisions of internal law are rendered inapplicable to them. Although article 48 and regulation no 1612/68 are directly applicable in the territory of the french republic, nevertheless the maintenance in these circumstances of the wording of the code du travail maritime gives rise to an ambiguous state of affairs by maintaining, as regards those subject to the law who are concerned, a state of uncertainty as to the possibilities available to them of relying on community law. The absolute nature of the prohibition on discrimination under article 48(2) of the eec treaty has the effect of not only allowing in each state equal access to employment to the nationals of other member states, but also of guaranteeing to the state’s own nationals that they shall not suffer the unfavourable consequences which could result from the offer or acceptance by nationals of other member states of conditions of employment or remuneration less advantageous than those obtaining under the national law. It thus follows from the general character of the prohibition on discrimination in article 48 and the objective pursued by the abolition of discrimination that discrimination is prohibited even if it constitutes only an obstacle of secondary importance as regards the equality of access to employment and other conditions of work and employment.
A French law which provided that a proportion of the crew of a French flagged vessel must be French nationals, was contrary to the rules relating to the free movement of workers.

Citations:

[1974] EUECJ C-167/73, C-167/73, [1974] ECR 359, [1996] EUECJ C-167/73

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – International Transport Workers’ Federation and Another v Viking Line Abp and Another CA 3-Nov-2005
An order had been made restraining the defendant trades unions from taking industrial action. The unions said the UK court had no jurisdiction.
Held: ‘It is at first sight surprising that the English Commercial Court should be the forum in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.132325

Transocean Marine Paint Association v Commission: ECJ 23 Oct 1974

ECJ 1. The obligation imposed upon the commission by articles 2 and 4 of regulation no 99/63 to inform an undertaking, in writing or by giving notice in the official journal, of the objections raised against it and to deal, in its decisions, only with these objections, is essentially concerned with the statement of the reasons which lead it to apply article 85 (1).
On the other hand, the commission cannot be expected to anticipate the conditions and obligations to which it is entitled to subject the exemption laid down in article 85 (3).
2. It is clear, however, both from the nature and objective of the procedure for hearings, and from articles 5, 6 and 7 of regulation no 99/63, that this regulation, notwithstanding the cases specifically dealt with in articles 2 and 4, applies the general rule that persons whose interests are perceptibly affected by a decision taken by a public authority must be given the opportunity to make their point of view known.
3. Since article 85 (3) constitutes, for the benefit of undertakings, an exception to the general prohibition contained in article 85 (1), the commission must be in a position at any moment to check whether the conditions justifying the exemption are still present.
Accordingly, in relation to the detailed rules to which it may subject the exemption, the commission enjoys a large measure of discretion, while at the same time having to act within the limits imposed upon its competence by article 85.
On the other hand, the exercise of this discretionary power is linked to a preliminary canvassing of objections which may be raised by the undertakings.

Citations:

C-17/74, [1974] EUECJ C-17/74

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.132358

Casagrande v Landeshauptstadt Munchen (Judgment): ECJ 3 Jul 1974

The question of whether or not a person is a party must be decided according to the criteria of national law.

Citations:

R-9/74, [1974] EUECJ R-9/74, C-9/74, [1974] ECR 773

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Football Association Premier League Ltd and Others v QC Leisure (A Trading Name) and Others ChD 13-Nov-2008
Football organisations applied to be joined to a case being remitted to the European Court for the purpose of giving their views on the questions raised. The European Court practice only allowed for states to act as interveners. The court had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.132351

EMI Records v CBS Grammofon: ECJ 15 Jun 1976

ECJ Neither the rules of the treaty on the free movement of goods nor those on the putting into free circulation of products coming from third countries nor, finally, the principles governing the common commercial policy, prohibit the proprietor of a mark in all the member states of the community from exercising his right in order to prevent the importation of similar products bearing the same mark and coming from a third country.
A trade-mark right, as a legal entity, does not possess those elements of contract or concerted practice referred to in article 85(1). Nevertheless the exercise of that right might fall within the ambit of the treaty if it were to manifest itself as the subject, the means, or the consequence of a restrictive practice.
A restrictive agreement between traders within the common market and competitors in third countries that would bring about an isolation of the common market as a whole which, in the territory of the community, would reduce the supply of products originating in third countries and similar to those protected by a mark within the community, might be of such a nature as to affect adversely the conditions of competition within the common market. In particular if the proprietor of the mark in dispute in the third country has within the community various subsidiaries established in different member states which are in a position to market the products at issue within the common market such isolation may affect trade between member states.

For article 85 to apply to cases of agreements which are no longer in force it is sufficient that such agreements continue to produce their effects after they have formally ceased to be in force. An agreement is only regarded as continuing to produce its effects if from the behaviour of the persons concerned there may be inferred the existence of elements of concerted practice and of coordination peculiar to the agreement and producing the same result as that envisaged by the agreement. This is not so when the said effects do not exceed those flowing from the mere exercise of the national trade-mark rights. And in particular when a foreign trader can obtain access to the common market without availing himself of the mark in dispute.
Although the trade-mark right confers upon its proprietor a special position within the protected territory this, however, does not imply the existence of a dominant position within the meaning of article 86 in particular where several undertakings whose economic strength is comparable to that of a proprietor of the mark operate in the market for the products in question and are in a position to compete with the said proprietor. Furthermore, in so far as the exercise of a trade-mark right is intended to prevent the importation into the protected territory of products bearing an identical mark, it does not constitute an abuse of a dominant position within the meaning of article 86 of the treaty.
In so far as the proprietor of a mark in the member states of the community may prevent the sale by a third party within the community of products bearing the same mark held in a third country, the requirement that such third party must, for the purposes of his exports to the community, obliterate the mark on the products concerned and perhaps apply a different mark forms part of the permissible consequences of the protection which the national laws of each member state afford to the proprietor of the mark against the importation of products from third countries bearing a similar or identical mark.

Citations:

C-86/75, R-86/75, [1976] EUECJ R-86/75

Links:

Bailii

European, Intellectual Property

Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.132296

Macevicius v Parliament: ECJ 20 May 1976

ECJ Officials – application – subject-matter – measure coming within the power of internal organization – admissibility – conditions
(Staff Regulations of officials, articles 5, 7, 91)
A measure coming within the power of internal organization of an institution can be actionable under article 91 of the staff regulations only if it adversely affected the rights which the person concerned has under articles 5 and 7 of those regulations, especially by requiring him to carry out duties which do not correspond to his post and grade.
For such to be the case, it is not sufficient that the said measures should bring about a change or even any reduction in the responsibilities of the person concerned, but it is necessary that, taken together, his remaining responsibilities should fall clearly short of those corresponding to his grade and post, taking account of their character, their importance and their scope.

Citations:

C-66/75, [1976] EUECJ C-66/75

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.132294

Rutili v Ministre De L’Interieur: ECJ 28 Oct 1975

Europa 1. The expression ‘subject to limitations justified on grounds of public policy’ in article 48 concerns not only the legislative provisions adopted by each member state to limit within its territory freedom of movement and residence for nationals of other member states but concerns also individual decisions taken in application of such legislative provisions. 2. The concept of public policy must, in the community context, and where, in particular, it is used as a justification for derogating from the fundamental principles of equality of treatment and freedom of movement for workers, be interpreted strictly, so that its scope cannot be determined unilaterally by each member state without being subject to control by the institutions of the community. 3. Restrictions cannot be imposed on the right of a national of any member state to enter the territory of another member state, to stay there and to move within it unless his presence or conduct constitutes a genuine and sufficiently serious threat to public policy. 4. An appraisal as to whether measures designed to safeguard public policy are justified must have regard to all rules of community law the object of which is, on the one hand, to limit the discretionary power of member states in this respect and, on the other, to ensure that the rights of persons subject thereunder to restrictive measures are protected. These limitations and safeguards arise, in particular, from the duty imposed on member states to base the measures adopted exclusively on the personal conduct of the individuals concerned, to refrain from adopting any measures in this respect which service ends unrelated to the requirements of public policy or which adversely affect the exercise of trade union rights and, finally, unless this is contrary to the interests of the security of the state involved, immediately to inform any person against whom a restrictive measure has been adopted of the grounds on which the decision taken is based to enable him to make effective use of legal remedies. 5. Measures restricting the right of residence which are limited to part only of the national territory may not be imposed by a member state on nationals of other member states who are subject to the provisions of the treaty except in the cases and circumstances in which such measures may be applied to nationals of the state concerned.

Citations:

C-36/75, R-36/75, [1975] EUECJ R-36/75, [1975] ECR 1219

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.132203

EMI Records v CBS United Kingdom: ECJ 15 Jun 1976

ECJ Neither the rules of the Treaty on the free movement of goods nor those on the putting into free circulation of products coming from third countries nor, finally, the principles governing the common commercial policy, prohibit the proprietor of a treade mark in all the member states of the community from exercising his right in order to prevent the importation of similar products bearing the same mark and coming from a third country. Nor may the provisions of the treaty on the free movement of goods be invoked for the purpose of prohibiting the proprietor of the mark in the territories of the member states from exercising his right in order to prevent another proprietor of the same mark in a third country from manufacturing and marketing his products within the community, either himself or through his subsidiaries established in the community.
‘neither the rules of the Treaty on the free movement of goods nor those on the putting into free circulation of products coming from third countries nor, finally, the principles governing the common commercial policy, prohibit the proprietor of a mark in all the Member States of the Community from exercising his right in order to prevent the importation of similar products bearing the same mark and coming from a third country.’

Citations:

[1976] ECR 811, C-51/75, R-51/75, [1976] EUECJ R-51/75

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Levi Strauss and Co and Another v Tesco Stores Ltd and Others ChD 31-Jul-2002
Pumfrey J discussed the principle of European law disallowing so called grey imports in breach of trade mark law, as set out in EMI v CBS, and said that it: ‘could hardly be clearer. It has formed, with the principle of exhaustion, the basis for the . .
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 May 2022; Ref: scu.132217

General Motors NV v Commission: ECJ 13 Nov 1975

Europa When combined with the freedom of the manufacturer or its authorized agent appointed by the public authority to fix the price for its service, the delegation by a member state to such person in the form of a legal monopoly of the duty governed by public law which consists in carrying out the technical inspection of vehicles before they are used on the public highway, leads to the creation of a dominant position. The abuse of such a position may be, inter alia, in the imposition of a price which is excessive in relation to the economic value of the service provided, and which has the effect of curbing parallel imports by neutralizing the possibly more favourable price levels applying in other sales areas in the community or by leading to unfair trading in the sense of article 86(2)(a).

Citations:

C-26/75, [1975] EUECJ C-26/75

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Attheraces Ltd and Another v British Horse Racing Board and Another ChD 21-Dec-2005
The claimants relayed horse racing events to bookmakers. The respondents collected data about the races and horses. The claimants sought the freedom to use that data, and the defendants asserted a database right to control such use.
Held: BHB . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.132194

Procureur General at the Cour d’Appel Lyon v Henri Mommessin and others: ECJ 9 Dec 1975

ECJ The methods of analysis laid down by regulation no 1539/71 are mandatory not merely when wine has to be analysed for commercial purposes but also whenever the determination of the elements referred to is necessary to establish fraud or adulteration. Regulation no 1539/71 is not exhaustive but leaves to the member states the choice of applying other methods of analysis for determining the constituent elements of wine which are not relevant to the application of regulations nos 816/70 and 817/70. A member state may in the present state of community law apply as a national measure of control a presumption in law of over-alcoholization which is based on the proportion of alcohol to the dry extract measured by the 100* method, provided that that presumption is capable of being rebutted and that it is applied in such a way as not to place at a disadvantage, in law or in fact, wines from other member states.

Citations:

C-64/75, R-64/75, [1975] EUECJ R-64/75

Links:

Bailii

European, Agriculture

Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.132232

IBC v Commission: ECJ 27 Jan 1976

When an action is brought against decisions of the national authorities adopted in implementation of community rules which the applicant regards as unlawful, the question of the legality of such implementing measures adopted in pursuance of community law is a matter for the competent national courts or tribunals to decide, using the procedures laid down under national law and after application, where appropriate, of article 177 of the Treaty, in particular on questions concerning the validity of the community provisions applied.
It is, therefore, impossible to refer the matter to the Court of Justice by the expedient of an action brought under the second paragraph of article 215 of the EEC Treaty in order to obtain a material revision of such implementing measures.

Citations:

C-46/75, [1976] EUECJ C-46/75

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.132212