Category: European

Bosman v Commission: ECJ 4 Oct 1991

Only measures, the legal effects of which are binding on, and capable of affecting the interests of, the applicant by bringing about a distinct change in his legal position may the subject of an application for annulment.
That is not the position where it is clear from a press release distributed by the Commission that it confined itself on the one hand to taking formal notice of the amendments which a private association coordinating professional football at the European level proposed to make to its rules in order to facilitate the movement of professional footballers within the Community and, on the other hand, the plans envisaged in relation to the question of transfer of players, for in so doing the Commission neither adopted any unilateral decision having legal effects with regard to third parties nor entered into any contract or agreement capable of being challenged before the Court.
An action seeking compensation for damage caused by the alleged unlawfulness of a measure adopted by an institution is inadmissible where that measure has no legal effect.

Citations:

C-117/91

European

Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.160697

Blot and Front National v Parliament (Rec 1990,p I-2177) (Order): ECJ 23 May 1990

Europa 1 By an application lodged at the Court Registry on 16 March 1990, Mr Y . Blot, a Member of the European Parliament belonging to the Group of the European Right, and the Front national, a non-profit-making association governed by the French Law of 18 July 1901, represented by its chairman Mr Le Pen, sought the annulment, under Article 173 of the EEC Treaty, of three measures adopted by the European Parliament concerning, respectively, the calling of a meeting on 16 January 1990 of the European Parliament’s Interparliamentary Delegation for relations with Switzerland, the procedure for the appointment of the chairman of that delegation, and the appointment on 16 January 1990 of G. Topmann as chairman of the delegation.
2 By a separate document lodged at the Court Registry on the same date, the applicants also applied, pursuant to Article 185 of the EEC Treaty and Article 83 of the Rules of Procedure, for interim measures suspending the operation of the three contested measures until such time as the Court had given its ruling on the main application.
3 The defendant submitted its written observations on 20 April 1990. The parties presented oral argument on 14 May 1990.
4 However, by an order of 22 May 1990 made pursuant to Article 92(1) of the Rules of Procedure, the Court dismissed the main application as inadmissible.
5 The application for interim measures is therefore inadmissible and must be dismissed.

Citations:

C-68/90

European

Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.160460

Kongress Agentur Hagen GmbH v Zeehaghe BV: ECJ 15 May 1990

Europa Where a defendant domiciled in a Contracting State is sued in a court of another Contracting State pursuant to Article 5(1) of the Brussels Convention of 27 September 1968 on jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgment in civil and commercial matters, that court also has jurisdiction by virtue of Article 6(2) of the Convention to entertain an action on a warranty or guarantee brought against a person domiciled in a Contracting State other than that of the court seised of the original proceedings. To enable the entire dispute to be heard by a single court, Article 6(2) simply requires there to be a connecting factor between the main action and the action on a warranty or guarantee, irrespective of the basis on which the court has jurisdiction in the original proceedings. Article 6(2) must be interpreted as meaning that it does not require the national court to accede to the request for leave to bring an action on a warranty or guarantee and that the national court may apply the procedural rules of its national law in order to determine whether that action is admissible, provided that the effectiveness of the Convention in that regard is not impaired and, in particular, that leave to bring the action on the warranty or guarantee is not refused on the ground that the third party resides or is domiciled in a Contracting State other than that of the court seised of the original proceedings.

Citations:

C-365/88

Cited by:

Cited – Turner v Grovit and others HL 13-Dec-2001
The applicant was a solicitor employed by a company in Belgium. He later resigned claiming unfair dismissal, saying he had been pressed to become involved in unlawful activities. The defendants sought to challenge the jurisdiction of the English . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Jurisdiction

Updated: 11 April 2022; Ref: scu.134997

Boots Company plc v Commissioners of Customs and Excise: ECJ 27 Mar 1990

In the simple case of a voucher which the issuer himself redeems by allowing a discount on a purchase from himself, the voucher is not property but is simply evidence of an obligation to give a discount.

Citations:

C-126/88, [1990] STC 387

Cited by:

Cited – Lex Services plc v Her Majestys Commissioners of Customs and Excise HL 4-Dec-2003
When taking a car in part exchange, the company would initially offer the correct market value. If the customer wanted, the company would agree a higher price. When cars were returned, the company at first reclaimed the VAT on the re-purchase price, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, VAT

Updated: 11 April 2022; Ref: scu.134868

Zuckerfabrik Suderdithmarschen and Zuckerfabrik Soest v Hauptzollamt Itzehoe and Hauptzollamt Paderborn: ECJ 21 Feb 1991

Citations:

[1991] E C R I-415, C-143/88

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Health and Others, ex parte Imperial Tobacco Limited and others HL 7-Dec-2000
Where a party sought an injunction to prevent a government from implementing a European Union directive, pending a decision from the European Court, on whether domestic or community law was to be applied, the domestic court must refer the matter to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 11 April 2022; Ref: scu.134880

Van De Bijl v Staatssecretaris Van Economische Zaken: ECJ 27 Sep 1989

When looking at certificates of professional competence issued by other member states, the host Member State cannot be obliged to overlook matters which occurred within its own territory and which are of direct relevance to the real and genuine character of the period of professional activity completed in the Member State from which the beneficiary comes. Here a certificate was manifestly inaccurate.

Citations:

C-130/88, [1989] ECR 3039[26]

Cited by:

Cited – Dr A Lambiris v The Specialist Training Authority of the Medical Royal Colleges and the General Medical Council, the Secretary of State for Health – Interested Parties CA 8-May-2003
The applicant challenged the failure to register him properly to reflect his specialism for which he had been qualified in Greece.
Held: The Directive set out principles for the recognition of medical qualifications within the Union. The Order . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Employment

Updated: 11 April 2022; Ref: scu.134870