Category: European

Meeth v Glacetal: ECJ 9 Nov 1978

Europa Although, with regard to an agreement conferring jurisdiction, article 17 of the Brussels Convention, as it is worded, refers to the choice by the parties to a contract of a single court or the courts of a single state, that wording cannot be interpreted as prohibiting an agreement under which the two parties to a contract , who are domiciled in different states, can be sued only in the courts of their respective states. Having regard to the need to respect individuals ‘right of independence’, upon which article 17 is based, and the need to avoid superfluous procedure, which forms the basis of the convention as a whole, the first paragraph of article 17 cannot be interpreted as preventing a court before which proceedings have been instituted pursuant to a clause of the type described above from taking into account a claim for a set-off connected with the legal relationship in dispute if such court considers that course to be compatible with the letter and spirit of the clause conferring jurisdiction.

Citations:

C-23/78

European

Updated: 10 April 2022; Ref: scu.132668

Fritz Schumalla: ECJ 28 Nov 1978

Europa In giving the Council the task of adopting a common transport policy within the meaning of article 74, the Treaty confers wide legislative powers upon it as regards the adoption of appropriate common rules. Regulation no 543/69 of the Council, adopted under article 75 of the treaty and referring mainly to the social sphere, is merely a partial implementation of such a policy. The Council did not exceed its powers by regulating, by this measure, matters which concern the social protection of the driver and road safety in so far as they are not interlinked.

Citations:

C-97/78

European, Transport

Updated: 10 April 2022; Ref: scu.132690

Racke v Hauptzollamt Mainz (Judgment): ECJ 25 Jan 1979

A fundamental principle in the Community legal order requires that a measure adopted by the public authorities shall not be applicable to those concerned before they have the opportunity to make themselves acquainted with it.

Citations:

[1979] ECR 69, C-98/78

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Anufrijeva HL 26-Jun-2003
The appellant challenged the withdrawal of her benefits payments. She had applied for asylum, and been granted reduced rate income support. A decision was made refusing her claim, but that decision was, by policy, not communicated to her for several . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 10 April 2022; Ref: scu.132691

Theodorus Engelbertus Sanders v Ronald van der Putte: ECJ 14 Dec 1977

Europa Convention of 27 September 1968 – exclusive jurisdiction – matters relating to tenancies of immovable property – strict interpretation – business carried on in immovable property rented from a third party by the lessor -agreement to run the business – application of article 16 excluded – dispute as to the existence of such an agreement
The assignment, in the interests of the proper administration of justice, of exclusive jurisdiction to the courts of one contracting state in accordance with article 16 of the convention results in depriving the parties of the choice of the forum which would otherwise be theirs and, in certain cases, results in their being brought before a court which is not that of the domicile of any of them. Having regard to that consideration the provisions of article 16 must not be given a wider interpretation than is required by their objective. Therefore, the concept of ‘ matters relating to… Tenancies of immovable property ‘ within the context of article 16 of the convention must not be interpreted as including an agreement to rent under a usufructuary lease a retail business (verpachting van een winkelbedrijf) carried on in immovable property rented from a third person by the lessor. The fact that there is a dispute as to the existence of such an agreement does not affect the reply given as regards the applicability of article 16 of the convention.

Citations:

C-73/77

European, Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 10 April 2022; Ref: scu.132636

SA Ancienne Maison Marcel Bauche and SARL Francois Delquignies v Administration Francaise des Douanes: ECJ 15 Feb 1978

Europa Agriculture – common organization of the markets – sugar – export to non- member countries – assignment of licences – substitution of product – deflection of trade – application of monetary compensatory amounts – commission regulation no 101/77 – validity – Measure adopted by an institution – amendment of an earlier provision – situations arising under the latter – future effects – application of the amending rule.

Citations:

C-96/77

European, Customs and Excise

Updated: 10 April 2022; Ref: scu.132656

Ministere public du Kingdom of the Netherlands v Jacobus Philippus van Tiggele: ECJ 24 Jan 1978

ECJ For the purposes of the prohibition of measures having an effect equivalent to a quantitative restriction it is sufficient that such measures are likely to hinder, directly or indirectly, actually or potentially, imports between member states. A fixed minimum price which, although applicable without distinction to domestic products and imported products, is capable of having an adverse effect on the marketing of the latter must be considered as a measure having an effect equivalent to a quantitative restriction in so far as it prevents their lower cost price from being reflected in the retail selling price. This conclusion must be drawn even though the competent authority is empowered to grant exemptions from the fixed minimum price and though this power is freely applied to imported products, since the requirement that importers and traders must comply with the administrative formalities inherent in such a system may in itself constitute a measure having an effect equivalent to a quantitative restriction . The temporary nature of the application of the fixed minimum prices is not a factor capable of justifying such a measure since it is incompatible on other grounds with article 30 of the treaty. Article 92 of the eec treaty must be interpreted as meaning that the fixing by a public authority of minimum retail prices for a product at the exclusive expense of consumers does not constitute an aid granted by a state within the meaning of that article.

Citations:

C-82/77

European

Updated: 10 April 2022; Ref: scu.132644

Caisse primaire d’assurance maladie d’Eure-et-Loir v Alicia Tessier, nee Recq: ECJ 19 Jan 1978

Europa A national of a member state who, in another member state, has been subject to a social security scheme which is applicable to all residents can benefit from the provisions of regulation no 1408/71 of the council of 14 june 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons and their families moving within the community only if he can be identified as an employed person within the meaning of article 1(a)(ii) of that regulation. As regards the united kingdom in particular , in the absence of any other criterion , such identification depends by virtue of annex v to that regulation on whether he was required to pay social security contributions as an employed person. Rights acquired by a person who can be identified as a worker within the meaning of article 1(a)(ii) of regulation no 1408/71 during his residence in a member state must be taken into account by any other member state as if they were periods required for the acquisition of a right under its own legislation.

Citations:

C-84/77

European

Updated: 10 April 2022; Ref: scu.132646

Criminal proceedings against Michel Choquet: ECJ 28 Nov 1978

Europa It is not in principle incompatible with community law for one member state to require a national of another member state, who is permanently established in its territory, to obtain a domestic driving licence for the purpose of driving motor vehicles, even if he is in possession of a driving licence issued by the authorities in his state of origin. However, such a requirement may be regarded as indirectly prejudicing the exercise of the right of freedom of movement, the right of freedom of establishment or the freedom to provide services guaranteed by articles 48, 52 and 59 of the treaty respectively, and consequently as being incompatible with the treaty, if it appears that the conditions imposed by national rules on the holder of a driving licence issued by another member state are not in due proportion to the requirements of road safety. Insistence on a driving test which clearly duplicates a test taken in another member state for the classes of vehicle which the person concerned wishes to drive, or linguistic difficulties arising out of the procedure laid down for the conduct of any checks, or the imposition of exorbitant charges for completing the requisite formalities could all be examples of this.

Citations:

C-16/78

European, Crime

Updated: 10 April 2022; Ref: scu.132662

Etablissements A. De Bloos SPRL v Societe en Commandite par Actions Bouyer: ECJ 14 Dec 1977

Europa During the period between notification and the date on which the commission takes a decision, courts before which proceedings are brought relating to an old agreement duly notified or exempted from notification must give such an agreement the legal effects attributed thereto under the law applicable to the contract, and those effects cannot be called in question by any objection which may be raised concerning its compatibility with article 85(1).

Citations:

C-59/77

European

Updated: 10 April 2022; Ref: scu.132622

Directeur regional de la Securite sociale de Nancy v Paulin Gillard et Caisse regionale d’assurance maladie du Nord-Est, Nancy: ECJ 6 Jul 1978

Europa The fact that a provision creating benefits for victims of war or its consequences is inserted in national social security legislation is not by itself decisive in determining that the benefit referred to in the above-mentioned provision is a social security benefit within the meaning of regulation no 1408/71, as the distinction between benefits which are excluded from the field of application of that regulation and benefits which come within it rests entirely on the factors relating to each benefit, in particular its purposes and the conditions for its grant. Article 4 (4) of regulation no 1408/71 must be interpreted as meaning that the regulation does not apply to benefits for former prisoners of war consisting in the grant, to workers who prove that they underwent a long period of captivity, of an advanced old-age pension, the essential purpose of such benefits being to provide for former prisoners of war testimony of national gratitude for the hardships endured between 1939 and 1945 on behalf of France and its allies and thus granting them, by the provision of a social benefit, a quid pro quo for the services rendered to those states.

Citations:

C-9/78

European, Benefits

Updated: 10 April 2022; Ref: scu.132589

Bertrand v Paul Ott KG: ECJ 21 Jun 1978

Europa Since the concept of a contract of sale on instalment credit terms varies from one member state to another, in accordance with the objectives pursued by their respective laws, it is necessary, in the context of the convention, to consider that concept as being independent and therefore to give it a uniform substantive content allied to the community order. According to the principles common to the laws of the member states, the sale of goods on instalment credit terms is to be understood as a transaction in which the price is discharged by way of several payments or which is linked to a financing contract. However, a restrictive interpretation of the second paragraph of article 14 of the convention, in conformity with the objectives pursued by section 4, entails the restriction of the jurisdictional advantage for which provision is made by that article to buyers who are in need of protection, their economic position being one of weakness in comparison with sellers by reason of the fact that they are private final consumers and are not engaged, when buying the product acquired on instalment credit terms, in trade or professional activities.

Citations:

C-150/77

European, Consumer

Updated: 10 April 2022; Ref: scu.132572

HOAGM Perenboom v Inspecteur der directe belastingen of Nijmegen: ECJ 5 May 1977

Europa Both article 12 of regulation no 3 and article 13 of regulation no 1408/71 prevent the state of residence from requiring payment, under its social legislation, of contributions on the remuneration received by a worker in respect of work performed in another member state and therefore subject to the social legislation of that state.

Citations:

C-102/76

European, Benefits

Updated: 10 April 2022; Ref: scu.132501