

Links: Home \| swarblaw - law discussions		swarb.co.uk - law index These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases. Â
		European - From: 1985 To: 1989 This page lists 1563 cases, and was prepared on 27 May 2018. Â Official Custodian for Charities v Parway Estates Developments (In Liquidation) [1985] Ch 151 1985 CA Dillon LJ Landlord and Tenant, European The consideration for the grant of a lease was not a capital sum, but substantial building works. Application was made for its forfeiture. Held: Dillon LJ assumed that the words "if the tenant shall enter into liquidation whether compulsorily or voluntarily" in a re-entry clause in a lease refer to the making of the winding up order. Save in relation to non-payment of rent, the power to grant relief from forfeiture to lessees is now exclusively contained in section 146 of the Law of Property Act 1925. Dillon LJ said in relation to section 9(3) and (4) of the 1972 Act: "The question then is whether, even so, it is implicit in section 9 (4), or necessary in order to give effect to section 9 (4), that, after an official notification of an event has become fully effective, all persons must be treated as having constructive notice of that event. Three matters can be urged in support of the argument, viz.: (i) if an event has not been officially notified a company can still rely on it against a person who has actual knowledge of it, and so official notification is in a sense treated as the counterpart of actual knowledge, in enabling the company to rely on the event; (ii) during the period of grace before the official notification has become fully effective, the person concerned can prevent the company relying on the event by showing he was unavoidably prevented from knowing of the event, absence of the event being treated in the period of grace as countervailing the official notification: and (iii) it is difficult to think of the circumstances in which a company will wish to rely as against a third party on the happening of the event of its own liquidation and in which the real issue will not be the third party's knowledge of that event rather than the happening of the event itself. This question whether official notification of a relevant event constitutes notice of that event to all the world, is an important question. If indeed the notification does constitute notice at all, the very many landlords who are not in the habit of studying the London Gazette regularly of effecting regular searches of the files of their company tenants in the Companies registry will be at risk of inadvertently waiving the forfeiture of leases by accepting rent after the company tenants went into liquidation. The deputy judge, after considering the wording of section 9(4) and views expressed in Palmer's Company Law 23rd ed., vol. 1, pp. 184, 185 - 186, concluded that subsection (4) did not impute knowledge to anyone. It was essentially negative in its impact. It provided that a company cannot rely upon a relevant event if it is not in the Gazette but it did not make the positive counter proposition that a company can rely upon that event - sc. it can rely upon everyone having notice of that event - merely because it is in the Gazette. I agree with the deputy judge's analysis of the subsection and with his conclusion. I would add two further comments. In the first place, I do not think that the link, such that it is, in section 9(4), between official notification of a relevant event, and actual knowledge of the event if it has not been officially notified, requires that official notification should be treated as importing notice of the event to everyone. The object of the legislation is that persons dealing with a company should be officially given an opportunity to finding out important information concerning the company vis-a-vis those who have actual knowledge of the relevant event. Hence the qualification of the restriction imposed by the subsection of the company. It is not necessary to treat official notification as the equivalent of actual knowledge in all circumstances. In the second place, among the events, other than liquidation and the appointment of a liquidator, listed in section 9(4) as events on which a company cannot rely in the absence of official notification are making of any alteration in the memorandum of association of the company, including, of course, its object clause, and the making of any change among the company's directors. But it is plain to my mind from section (9)1 that a person dealing in good faith with a company is not to be treated as having constructive notice (as under the previous ultra vires doctrine of English law) of the terms of the company's objects clause, whether in its original form or as from time to time altered, and is not to be treated as having constructive notice of the composition from time to time of the Old Aachener Re board of directors of the company. The tenor of the section is thus against imputing constructive notice of the relevant events to persons dealing with a company, while ensuring that they have an opportunity to find information about those events." European Communities Act 1972 9(3) 9(4) - Law of Property Act 1925 146 1 Citers Â Orphanos v Queen Mary College [1985] AC 761 1985 HL Lord Fraser of Tullybelton Discrimination, European The complainant, a Cypriot, argued that the respondent college’s practice, determined by government policy, of charging higher fees to ‘overseas’ students than to ‘home’ students indirectly discriminated against him on the ground of his race. ‘Overseas’ students were defined as those who had not been resident in the UK or the EEC for the three years immediately preceding the commencement of their course. The respondent conceded that a considerably smaller proportion of persons of Cypriot, non-British or non-EEC nationality than of British or EEC nationality could comply with the condition regarding residence so as to qualify for the lower fees. Held: The respondent had unlawfully discriminated against the plaintiff, but the court dismissed his claim on other grounds. Lord Fraser of Tullybelton said: "The admission [by the respondent] seems to be made on the footing that Mr. Orphanos belongs to three racial groups (Cypriot, non-British, and non-E.E.C.) and that it makes no difference which of these groups is chosen for the comparison required by section 1(1)(b )(i). I agree that Mr. Orphanos belongs to each of these groups, and that each is a "racial group" as defined by section 3(1) as extended by section 3(2). But I do not agree that it makes no difference which of these groups is used for the comparison under section 1(1)(b )(i). The comparison must be between the case of a person of the same racial group as Mr. Orphanos and the case of a person not of that racial group, but it must be such that "the relevant circumstances in the one case are the same, or not materially different, in the other": see section 3(4). The "relevant circumstances" in the present case are, in my view, that Mr. Orphanos wished to be admitted as a pupil at the college, so the comparison must be between persons of the same racial group as him who wish to be admitted to the college, and persons not of that racial group who so wish. Consider first the two largest groups - namely persons of non-British and non-E.E.C. nationality (omitting the reference to national origins brevitatis causa.) I have no doubt that the proportion of persons of non-British and non-E.E.C. nationality who wish to attend the college and who can comply with the requirement of having ordinarily resided in the E.E.C. area for three years immediately before 1 September 1982 is substantially smaller than the proportion of persons not of that group (i.e., persons who were British or E.E.C. nationals) who wish to attend the college and who can comply with it. That seems obvious and causes no difficulty. But consider now the group consisting of persons of Cypriot (or Greek Cypriot) nationality and compare it with the group consisting of persons not of Cypriot (or Greek Cypriot) nationality, i.e., consisting of all persons (except Cypriots) of every nationality from Chinese to Peruvian inclusive. If the comparison is between persons of those groups who wish to be admitted to the college as pupils I do not see how any sensible comparison can be made because it would be impracticable to ascertain the numbers of persons so wishing." Race Relations Act 1976 1 Citers Â Hasselblad (GB) Ltd v Orbison [1985] 1 QB 475 1985 CA Sir John Donaldson MR European, Jurisdiction, Defamation In the course of proceedings brought by the European Commission against Hasselblad, Mr Orbison wrote a letter to the Commission upon which the appellant then sued for damages for libel. The court considered the dangers of national and European courts separately examining evidence in cases where each had some jurisdiction. Held: Sir John Donaldson MR said: "The first question which arises is whether this letter is to be regarded as sufficiently closely connected to the process of giving evidence for it to be necessary to extend absolute privilege to it, assuming always that absolute privilege would attach to evidence to the like effect given to the Commission." and as to jurisdiction "it cannot be right that the national courts and Community institutions shall both independently weigh the force of particular evidence with the possibility of inconsistent results." The privilege of immunity given to a court was a privilege that should not be extended. Sir John Donaldson MR continued (obiter): "Mr Burton [counsel for the appellant] takes the point that an informer in England has only the benefit of qualified privilege: Shufflebottom v Allday (1857) 5 W.R. 315. Bringing the matter more up to date and relating it to an inquiry similar to that undertaken by the Commission, Mr Burton submits, rightly, that if Mr Orbison's letter had been addressed to the Director General of the Fair Trading, he could have been sued for libel and would have had to be content with the defence of qualified privilege." 1 Cites 1 Citers Â Association Des Centres Distributeurs Edouard Leclerc And Others v Sarl 'Au Ble Vert' And Others. R-229/83; [1985] EUECJ R-229/83 10 Jan 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Leclerc v Au Ble Vert (Judgment) C-229/83 10 Jan 1985 ECJ European Â Roumengous Carpentier v Commission C-158/79 15 Jan 1985 ECJ European Â Pasquali-Gherardi v Parliament (Rec 1985,P 83) (Judgment) C-168/83; [1985] EUECJ C-168/83 15 Jan 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Battaglia v Commission C-737/79 15 Jan 1985 ECJ European Â Â Rosler v Rottwinkel; ECJ 15-Jan-1985 - R-241/83; [1985] EUECJ R-241/83; [1986] QB 33 Â Amesz and Others v Commission C-532/79 15 Jan 1985 ECJ European Â Rosler v Rottwinkel C-241/83 15 Jan 1985 ECJ European Â Finsider v Commission C-250/83; [1985] EUECJ C-250/83 15 Jan 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Kupferberg v Hauptzollamt Mainz C-253/83 15 Jan 1985 ECJ European Â Roumengous Carpentier v Commission [1985] EUECJ C-158/79 15 Jan 1985 ECJ European ECJ Officials - remuneration - weighting - late adjustment - compensation for pecuniary damage - payment of default interest - point at which interest starts to run - date of prior complaint through official channels (staff regulations art 90(2)) . 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Samara v Commission C-266/83; [1985] EUECJ C-266/83 15 Jan 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Piraiki-Patraiki v Commission C-11/82; [1985] EUECJ C-11/82 17 Jan 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Sorani v Commission C-293/84 17 Jan 1985 ECJ European Â Gesamthochschule Duisburg v Hauptzollamt Munchen-Mitte (Rec 1985,P 327) (Judgment) C-234/83 29 Jan 1985 ECJ European Â Gesamthochschule Duisburg v Hauptzollamt Muenchen Mitte. R-234/83; [1985] EUECJ R-234/83 29 Jan 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Binderer v Commission (Rec 1985,P 257) (Judgment) C-147/83; [1985] EUECJ C-147/83 29 Jan 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Henri Cullet And Chambre Syndicale Des Reparateurs Automobiles Et Detaillants De Produits Petroliers v Centre Leclerc A Toulouse And Centre Leclerc A Saint-Orens-De-Gameville. R-231/83; [1985] EUECJ R-231/83 29 Jan 1985 ECJ European Europa Although the rules laid down in article 85(1) of the Treaty are concerned with the conduct of undertakings and not with the national legislation of member states, the latter are none the less obliged under the second paragraph of article 5 of the treaty not to detract, by means of national legislation, from the full and uniform application of community law or from the effectiveness of its implementing measures ; nor may they introduce or maintain in force measures, even of a legislative nature, which may render ineffective the competition rules applicable to undertakings. Articles 3(f), 5, 85 and 86 of the eec treaty do not prohibit national rules providing for a minimum price to be fixed by the national authorities for the retail sale of fuel. Systems of price control which apply to domestic products and imported products alike do not in themselves constitute measures having an effect equivalent to a quantitative restriction but may have such an effect when the prices are fixed at a level such that imported products are placed at a disadvantage compared to identical domestic products, either because they cannot profitably be marketed on the conditions laid down or because the competitive advantage conferred by lower cost prices is cancelled out. Article 30 of the eec treaty prohibits national rules providing for a minimum price to be fixed by the national authorities for the retail sale of fuel, where the minimum price is fixed on the basis solely of the ex-refinery prices of the national refineries and where those ex-refinery prices are in turn linked to the ceiling price which is calculated on the basis solely of the cost prices of national refineries when the european fuel rates are more than 8% above or below those prices. [ Bailii ] Â Henri Cullet and Chambre syndicale des reparateurs automobiles et detaillants de produits petroliers v Centre Leclerc a Toulouse and Centre Leclerc a Saint-Orens-de-Gameville C-231/83; [1985] ECR 305 29 Jan 1985 ECJ European Europa "I would add that the acceptance of civil disturbances as justification for encroachments upon the free movement of goods would, as is apparent from experiences of the last year (and before, during the Franco-Italian 'wine war') have unacceptably drastic consequences. If road-blocks and other effective weapons of interest groups which feel threatened by the importation and sale at competitive prices of certain cheap products or services, or by immigrant workers or foreign businesses, were accepted as justification, the existence of the four fundamental freedoms of the Treaty could no longer be relied upon. Private interest groups would then, in place of the Treaty and Community (and, within the limits laid down in the Treaty, national) institutions, determine the scope of those freedoms. In such cases, the concept of public policy requires, rather, effective action on the part of the authorities to deal with such disturbances." 1 Citers Â F v Commission (Rec 1985,P 275) (Judgment) C-228/83; [1985] EUECJ C-228/83 29 Jan 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Michel v Commission (Rec 1985,P 347) (Judgment) C-273/83; [1985] EUECJ C-273/83 29 Jan 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Bureau National Interprofessionnel Du Cognac v Guy Clair. R-123/83; [1985] EUECJ R-123/83 30 Jan 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Denmark (Rec 1985,P 427) (Sv85-31 Fi85-31) (Judgment) C-143/83; [1985] EUECJ C-143/83 30 Jan 1985 ECJ European 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Bnic v Clair (Rec 1985,P 391) (Judgment) C-123/83 30 Jan 1985 ECJ European Â Commission v France (Rec 1985,P 439) (Sv85-39 Fi85-39) (Judgment) C-290/83; [1985] EUECJ C-290/83 30 Jan 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Bat v Commission (Rec 1985,P 363) (Judgment) C-35/83; [1985] EUECJ C-35/83 30 Jan 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Strack v Parliament (Rec 1985,P 453) (Order) C-259/84; [1985] EUECJ C-259/84R 31 Jan 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â The Administrative Board Of The Bedrijfsvereniging Voor De Metaalindustrie En De Electrotechnische Industrie. R-135/83; [1985] EUECJ R-135/83 7 Feb 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Knud Wendelboe and Others v LJ Music Aps, In Liquidation C-19/83; R-19/83; [1985] EUECJ R-19/83 7 Feb 1985 ECJ European Europa Council directive no 77/187 does not require the member states to enact provisions under which the transferee of an undertaking becomes liable in respect of obligations concerning holiday pay and compensation to employees who were not employed in the undertaking on the date of the transfer. The existence or otherwise of a contract of employment or an employment relationship on the date of the transfer, within the meaning of article 3(1) of directive no 77/187, must be established on the basis of the rules of national law, subject however to observance of the mandatory provisions of the directive and, more particularly, article 4(1) thereof, concerning the protection of employees against dismissal by the transferor or the transferee by reason of the transfer. Only those employed on the date of transfer can claim the benefit of Article 3 of the Directive. Whether a contract of employment or an employment relationship existed at such date: "must be established on the basis of the rules of national law, subject however to observance of the mandatory provisions of the directive and, more particularly, Article 4(1) thereof, concerning the protection of employees against dismissal by the transferor or the transferee by reason of the transfer." The Advocate General further expressed the opinion that: "Whether the remedy for such unlawful dismissal consists in a court order declaring that dismissal to be a nullity or the award of damages or some other effective remedy is for the Member States to determine." 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Industriebond Fnv And Federatie Nederlandse Vakbeweging (Fnv) v The Netherlands State. R-179/83; [1985] EUECJ R-179/83 7 Feb 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Abels v Bedrijfsvereniging Voor De Metaalindustrie En De Electrotechnische Industrie C-135/83 7 Feb 1985 ECJ European Â Commission v France (Rec 1985,P 491) (Judgment) C-173/83; [1985] EUECJ C-173/83 7 Feb 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Fnv v Netherlands State (Rec 1985,P 511) (Judgment) C-179/83 7 Feb 1985 ECJ European Â Procureur De La Republique v Adbhu (Rec 1985,P 531) (Judgment) C-240/83 7 Feb 1985 ECJ European Â Procureur De La Republique v Association De Defense Des Bruleurs D'Huiles Usagees (ADBHU) R-240/83; [1985] EUECJ R-240/83; C-240/83 7 Feb 1985 ECJ European, Environment The protection of the environment constitutes one of the essential objectives of the Community. Europa 1. The measures prescribed by directive no 75/439 on the disposal of waste oils do not create barriers to intra-community trade and such measures, in particular the requirement that permits must be obtained in advance , may have a restrictive effect on freedom of trade and of competition, they must nevertheless neither be discriminatory nor go beyond the inevitable restrictions which are justified by the pursuit of the objective of environmental protection, which is in the general interest. 2. Inasmuch as member states are obliged to prohibit any form of waste-oil disposal which might harm the environment, national legislation prohibiting the burning of waste oils otherwise than in special plants and by approved operators is not incompatible with directive no 75/439. 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Dansk Metalarbejderforbund And Specialarbejderforbundet I Danmark v H Nielsen and Son, Maskinfabrik A/S, In Liquidation. C-284/83; R-284/83; [1985] EUECJ R-284/83; [1985] ECR 553 12 Feb 1985 ECJ Advocate General Lenz European Europa The termination by workers of their contract of employment following an announcement by the employer that he is suspending payment of his debts cannot be treated as dismissal by the employer for the purposes of council directive no 75/129 on the approximation of the laws of the member states relating to collective redundancies. Council directive no 75/129 applies only where the employer has in fact contemplated collective redundancies or has drawn up a plan for collective redundancies. It does not apply where, because of the financial state of the undertaking, the employer ought to have contemplated collective redundancies but did not do so. 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Gravier v Ville De Liege (Rec 1985,P 593) (Sv85-71 Fi85-71) (Judgment) C-293/83 13 Feb 1985 ECJ European Â Direct Cosmetics v Commissioners Of Customs and Excise (Rec 1985,P 617) (Judgment) C-5/84 13 Feb 1985 ECJ European Â Aissatou Diatta v Land Berlin. R-267/83; [1985] EUECJ R-267/83 13 Feb 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Diatta v Land Berlin (Rec 1985,P 567) (Sv85-61 Fi85-61) (Judgment) C-267/83 13 Feb 1985 ECJ European Â Francoise Gravier v City Of Liege. R-293/83; [1985] EUECJ R-293/83 13 Feb 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Direct Cosmetics Ltd v Commissioners Of Customs And Excise. R-5/84; [1985] EUECJ R-5/84 13 Feb 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Oryzomyli Kavallas v Commission (Rec 1985,P 675) (Order) C-160/84 14 Feb 1985 SCS European Â Casteels v Commission (Rec 1985,P 667) (Judgment) C-40/84; [1985] EUECJ C-40/84 14 Feb 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Rompelman v Minister van Financien (Judgment) C-268/83; [1985] ECR I-655 14 Feb 1985 ECJ European, VAT, Land A trader who decided to acquire property for letting could claim repayment of VAT on the cost of a right to acquire a building which had not yet been constructed, let alone tenanted. 1 Cites 1 Citers Â D.A. Rompelman And E.A. Rompelman-Van Deelen v Minister Van Financien. R-268/83; [1985] EUECJ R-268/83 14 Feb 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Berti v Commission (Rec 1985,P 645) (Judgment) C-131/81 14 Feb 1985 ECJ European Â Societe Des Produits De Mais Sa v Administration Des Douanes Et Droits Indirects. R-112/83; [1985] EUECJ R-112/83 27 Feb 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Italy v Commission (Rec 1985,P 703) (Judgment) C-56/83; [1985] EUECJ C-56/83 27 Feb 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Italy v Commission (Rec 1985,P 683) (Judgment) C-55/83; [1985] EUECJ C-55/83 27 Feb 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Nuovo Campsider v Commission (Rec 1985,P 751) (Order) C-25/85 6 Mar 1985 ECJ European Â Nicolet Instrument Gmbh v Hauptzollamt Frankfurt Am Main Flughafen. R-6/84; [1985] EUECJ R-6/84 7 Mar 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Spitzley v Sommer Exploitation (Rec 1985,P 787) (Judgment) C-48/84 7 Mar 1985 ECJ European Â Cochet v Bedrijfsvereniging Voor De Gezondheid, Geestelijke En Maatschappelijke Belangen (Rec 1985,P 801) (Judgment) C-145/84 7 Mar 1985 ECJ European Â Hannelore Spitzley v Sommer Exploitation Sa. R-48/84; [1985] EUECJ R-48/84 7 Mar 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Nicolet Instrument v Hauptzollamt Frankfurt Am Main-Flughafen C-30/84 7 Mar 1985 ECJ European Â Nicolet Instrument Gmbh v Hauptzollamt Frankfurt Am Main Flughafen. R-30/84; [1985] EUECJ R-30/84 7 Mar 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Nicolet Instrument v Hauptzollamt Frankfurt Am Main-Flughafen C-6/84 7 Mar 1985 ECJ European Â Commission v France (Rec 1985,P 829) (Judgment) C-93/84; [1985] EUECJ C-93/84 13 Mar 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Netherlands and Leeuwarder Papierwarenfabriek v Commission (Judgment) C-296/82 13 Mar 1985 ECJ European Â Commission v France (Rec 1985,P 837) (Judgment) C-269/83; [1985] EUECJ C-269/83 14 Mar 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Timex v Council and Commission C-264/82; [1985] EUECJ C-264/82 20 Mar 1985 ECJ European Europa A regulation introducing an anti-dumping duty constitutes a decision of direct and individual concern, within the meaning of the second paragraph of article 173 of the EEC Treaty, to an undertaking if it is established that the objections of that undertaking, being the only manufacturer of the product in question in one member state and the leading manufacturer in the community, lay at the origin of the complaint made by an association of which it is a member which led to the opening of the investigation procedure, that the under taking's views were heard during that procedure and that the anti-dumping duty was fixed in the light of the injury caused to it. That undertaking is therefore entitled to put before the court any matters which would facilitate a review as to whether the commission has observed the procedural guarantees granted to complainants by regulation no 3017/79 and whether or not it has committed manifest errors in its assessment of the facts, has omitted to take any essential matters into consideration or has based the reasons for its decision on considerations amounting to a misuse of powers. In that respect, the court is required to exercise its normal powers of review over a discretion granted to a public authority, even though it has no jurisdiction to intervene in the exercise of the discretion reserved to the community authorities by the aforementioned regulation. The aim of article 7(4)(a) of regulation no 3017/79 regarding the disclosure of information obtained by the commission during a dumping investigation is to ensure that the traders or manufacturers concerned may effectively put forward their points of view. The expression ' any party to an investigation ' contained in that provision must therefore be interpreted as meaning not only the parties which are the subject of the investigation but also the parties whose information has been used to calculate the normal value of the relevant products, since such information is just as relevant to the defence of complainants ' interests as the information supplied by the undertakings carrying out the dumping. Consequently, all non-confidential information, whether supplied by a community undertaking or an undertaking in a non-member country, which has been used by the commission during its investigation and which has had a decisive influence on its decision regarding the anti-dumping duty must be made available to the complainant requesting it. The community institutions are bound by Article 214 of the eec treaty to respect the principle of confidential treatment of information about undertakings, particularly about undertakings in non-member countries which have expressed their readiness to cooperate with the commission in dumping investigations, even if no express request for such treatment is received under Article 8 of regulation no 3017/79. That obligation, however, must be interpreted in such a way that the rights provided by Article 7(4)(a) of that regulation are not deprived of their substance. [ Bailii ] Â Italy v Commission (Rec 1985,P 873) (Sv85-131 Fi85-131) (Judgment) C-41/83; [1985] EUECJ C-41/83 20 Mar 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Celestri v Ministero Delle Finanze (Rec 1985,P 963) (Judgment) C-172/84 21 Mar 1985 ECJ European Â Ferriere Di Borgaro v Commission C-66/84; [1985] EUECJ C-66/84 21 Mar 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Bout (Rec 1985,P 941) (Judgment) C-86/84 21 Mar 1985 ECJ European Â Michael Paul v Hauptzollamt Emmerich. R-54/84; [1985] EUECJ R-54/84 21 Mar 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Paul v Hauptzollamt Emmerich (Rec 1985,P 915) (Judgment) C-54/84 21 Mar 1985 ECJ European Â Celestri and Co Spa v Ministry of Finance. R-172/84; [1985] EUECJ R-172/84 21 Mar 1985 ECJ European, Constitutional ECJ Although article 41 of the EEC Treaty, which is based on a clear separation of functions between the national courts and the Court of Justice, does not permit the court either to assess the facts of the case or to review the grounds on which the question submitted for a preliminary ruling is based, it is none the less for the court to set the measure whose validity is contested in context in community law and to examine the criteria for interpretation established by community law in order to be able to give the national court an appropriate answer for the purpose of resolving the main dispute. Where that examination reveals that the provision of community law on which the court has been requested to give a ruling is not relevant to the solution of the main dispute, the court will declare that it is unnecessary for it to give a decision on the point at issue. [ Bailii ] Â Turner v Commission (Rec 1985,P 893) (Judgment) C-263/83; [1985] EUECJ C-263/83 21 Mar 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Criminal Proceedings Against I. Bout En Zonen Bv. R-87/84; [1985] EUECJ R-87/84 21 Mar 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â De Santis v Court Of Auditors (Rec 1985,P 947) (Judgment) C-108/84; [1985] EUECJ C-108/84 21 Mar 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Denkavit Futtermittel Gmbh v Land Nordrhein-Westfalen. R-73/84; [1985] EUECJ R-73/84 27 Mar 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Johann-Wolfgang-Goethe-Universitat v Hauptzollamt Frankfurt Am Main-Flughafen (Rec 1985,P 991) (Judgment) C-4/84 27 Mar 1985 ECJ European Â Kenneth Scrivner And Carol Cole v Centre Public D'Aide Sociale De Chastre C-122/84; R-122/84; [1985] EUECJ R-122/84 27 Mar 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Vera Hoeckx v Openbaar Centrum Voor Maatschappelijk Welzijn, Kalmthout. R-249/83; [1985] EUECJ R-249/83 27 Mar 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Johann-Wolfgang-Goethe-Universitat v Hauptzollamt Frankfurt Am Main Flughafen. R-4/84; [1985] EUECJ R-4/84 27 Mar 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Hoeckx v Openbaar Centrum Voor Maatschappelijk Welzijn Kalmthout (Rec 1985,P 973) (Judgment) C-249/83 27 Mar 1985 ECJ European Â Denkavit Futtermittel v Land Nordrhein-Westfalen (Rec 1985,P 1013) (Judgment) C-73/84 27 Mar 1985 ECJ European Â Kypreos v Council (Rec 1985,P 1005) (Judgment) C-12/84; [1985] EUECJ C-12/84 27 Mar 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1985,P 1077) (Judgment) C-274/83; [1985] EUECJ C-274/83 28 Mar 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1985,P 1127) (Judgment) C-2/84; [1985] EUECJ C-2/84 28 Mar 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Vereniging Slachtpluimvee-Export EV v Rewe-Zentral-Aktiengesellschaft R-96/84; [1985] EUECJ R-96/84 28 Mar 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Cicce v Commission (Rec 1985,P 1105) (Judgment) C-298/83; [1985] EUECJ C-298/83 28 Mar 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Vereniging Slachtpluimvee-Export v Rewe-Zentral-Aktiengesellschaft (Rec 1985,P 1157) (Judgment) C-96/84 28 Mar 1985 ECJ European Â Commission v United Kingdom (Judgment) C-100/84; [1985] EUECJ C-100/84 28 Mar 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1985,P 1057) (Sv85-147 Fi85-147) (Judgment) C-272/83; [1985] EUECJ C-272/83 28 Mar 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Director of Public Prosecutions v Hackett C-91/84 28 Mar 1985 ECJ European Â Commission v Belgium (Rec 1985,P 1097) (Judgment) C-275/83; [1985] EUECJ C-275/83 28 Mar 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Director of Public Prosecutions v Sidney Hackett Limited And Weston ; Tetlow v Dovey R-91/84; [1985] EUECJ R-91/84 28 Mar 1985 ECJ European, Transport, Agriculture Europa Article 14a(2)(c) of Regulation No 543/69 of the council of 25 March 1969 on the harmonization of certain social legislation relating to road transport, as amended by regulations nos 515/72 and 2827/77, must be interpreted to the effect that 'local market' must be understood as meaning the market which, having regard to geographical circumstances, is the nearest to a particular farm and at which it is possible to buy or sell, as the case may be, according to the needs of normal, average-sized farms which may be considered typical of the area in question. The exception in paragraph (2)(c) of article 14a cannot be extended to transport operations which, either because of the unusual size of the farm concerned or because the production of several farms is pooled, necessitate the use of markets further away than the nearest market normally serving farms in the area. Regulation No 543/69 of the council of 25 March 1969 on the harmonization of certain social legislation relating to road transport [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Belgium (Rec 1985,P 1039) (Judgment) C-215/83; [1985] EUECJ C-215/83 28 Mar 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Remy v Commission (Rec 1985,P 1185) (Order) C-74/85; [1985] EUECJ C-74/85R 29 Mar 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Eurasian Corporation v Commission (Rec 1985,P 1191) (Order) C-82/85; [1985] EUECJ C-82/85R; [1985] EUECJ C-82/85 22 Apr 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Commission Of The European Communities v United Kingdom Of Great Britain And Northern Ireland. C-207/83; [1985] EUECJ C-207/83 25 Apr 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission of the European Communities v United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland Case 207/83 25 Apr 1985 ECJ European, Commercial Europa Free movement of goods - quantitative restrictions - measures having equivalent effect - legislation requiring an indication of origin on certain products - prohibited - consumer protection - not a permissible ground of justification (EEC treaty, art. 30) national legislation prohibiting the retail sale of certain products imported from other member states unless they bear or are accompanied by an indication of origin has the effect of increasing the production costs of the imported goods and of making it more difficult to sell them. Even if it is applicable without distinction to domestic and imported products, it is in practice and by its nature intended to enable the consumer to distinguish between those two categories of products, which may prompt him to give his preference to national products; no imperative reason relating to consumer protection justifies such legislation so that it must be considered a measure having an effect equivalent to a quantitative restriction prohibited by article 30 of the treaty. Â Klaus Von Menges v Land Nordrhein-Westfalen. R-109/84; [1985] EUECJ R-109/84 2 May 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Von Menges v Land Nordrhein-Westfalen (Rec 1985,P 1289) (Judgment) C-109/84 2 May 1985 ECJ European Â J K v Parliament (Judgment) C-38/84; [1985] EUECJ C-38/84 2 May 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Josef Hoche And Roomboterfabriek 'De Beste Boter' v Bundesanstalt Fuer Landwirtschaftliche Marktordnung. R-155/83; [1985] EUECJ R-155/83 2 May 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â De Angelis v Commission(Judgment) C-246/83; [1985] EUECJ C-246/83 2 May 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Hoche and De Beste Boter v Balm (Rec 1985,P 1215) (Judgment) C-154/83 2 May 1985 ECJ European Â De Angelis v Commission (Judgment) C-144/84; [1985] EUECJ C-144/84 2 May 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Deutsche Forschungs- Und Versuchsanstalt Fur Luft- Und Raumfahrt v Hauptzollamt Stuttgart-West (Rec 1985,P 1277) (Judgment) C-81/84 2 May 1985 ECJ European Â Deutsche Forschungs Und Versuchsanstalt Fuer Luft Und Raumfahrt E.V. v Hauptzollamt Stuttgart-West. R-81/84; [1985] EUECJ R-81/84 2 May 1985 ECJ European Europa A commission decision which, in accordance with article 7(6) of regulation no 2784/75, is addressed to all the member states and which concerns the possibility of importing an apparatus as a scientific apparatus free of customs duties applies to all importations of apparatuses of the same type, unless the particular circumstances justify a different appraisal. That cannot be the case where the commission decision has declared that the apparatus in question is not a scientific apparatus within the meaning of article 3(1) of regulation no 1798/75. [ Bailii ] Â Deutsche Lebensmittelwerke v Commission (Rec 1985,P 1331) (Order) C-97/85 3 May 1985 ECJ European Â Van Der Kooy v Commission (Rec 1985,P 1315) (Order) C-67/85 3 May 1985 ECJ European Â Commission v France (Rec 1985,P 1339) (Sv85-167 Fi85-167) (Judgment) C-18/84; [1985] EUECJ C-18/84 7 May 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Koyo Seiko v Council and Commission (Rec 1985,P 1351) (Order) C-256/84 8 May 1985 ECJ European Â Humblot v Directeur Des Services Fiscaux (Rec 1985,P 1367) (Sv85-175 Fi85-175) (Judgment) C-112/84 9 May 1985 ECJ European Â Commission v France (Rec 1985,P 1355) (Judgment) C-21/84; [1985] EUECJ C-21/84 9 May 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Michel Humblot v Directeur Des Services Fiscaux. R-112/84; [1985] EUECJ R-112/84 9 May 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Van Dijk'S Boekhuis v Staatsecretaris Van Financien (Rec 1985,P 1405) (Judgment) C-139/84 14 May 1985 ECJ European Â Hansen v Esc (Rec 1985,P 1381) (Order) C-14/84 14 May 1985 ECJ European Â Van Dijk'S Boekhuis Bv v Staatssecretaris Van Financien. R-139/84; [1985] EUECJ R-139/84 14 May 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Producteurs De Vins De Table and Vins De Pays v Ramel (Rec 1985,P 1385) (Judgment) C-89/84 14 May 1985 ECJ European Â Federation Nationale Des Producteurs De Vins De Table Et Vins De Pays, Confederation Des Associations Viticoles De France And Others v Pierre Ramel And Others. R-89/84; [1985] EUECJ R-89/84 14 May 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Onnasch v Hauptzollamt Berlin-Packhof (Rec 1985,P 1449) (Judgment) C-155/84 15 May 1985 ECJ European Â Reinhard Onnasch v Hauptzollamt Berlin Packhof. R-155/84; [1985] EUECJ R-155/84 15 May 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Patrinos v Esc (Rec 1985,P 1421) (Judgment) C-3/84; [1985] EUECJ C-3/84 15 May 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Esly v Commission (Rec 1985,P 1437) (Judgment) C-127/84; [1985] EUECJ C-127/84 15 May 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Staatssecretaris Van Financien v Schul (Rec 1985,P 1491) (Sv85-183 Fi85-183) (Judgment) C-47/84 21 May 1985 ECJ European Â Staatssecretaris Van Financien v Gaston Schul Douane-Expediteur Bv. R-47/84; [1985] EUECJ R-47/84 21 May 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Germany (Rec 1985,P 1459) (Judgment) C-248/83; [1985] EUECJ C-248/83 21 May 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Fragd v Amministrazione Delle Finanze Dello Stato (Rec 1985,P 1605) (Judgment) C-33/84 22 May 1985 ECJ European Â Spa Fragd v Amministrazione Delle Finanze Dello Stato. R-33/84; [1985] EUECJ R-33/84 22 May 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Parliament v Council (Rec 1985,P 1513) (Sv85-197 Fi85-197) (Judgment) C-13/83; [1985] EUECJ C-13/83 22 May 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Germany C-29/84; [1985] EUECJ C-29/84; [1985] ECR 1661 23 May 1985 ECJ European The question was asked as to whether Germany had given effect in domestic law to a directive which required the mutual recognition of nursing diplomas. German law conferred no right of recognition upon holders of diplomas from other member states but allowed their holders, if thought suitably qualified, to be given authority to practice on a case by case basis. But the German Government said that they had adopted an administrative policy which would result in recognition being accorded to all nurses from other member states. There was, however, nothing to stop them from changing the policy. The European Court said that this did not amount to an adequate implementation of the directive. Sir Gordon Slynn, Advocate General said that the German administrative policy, which was not to be found in any public document, lacked transparency: "There are two reasons for this requirement: (1) to enable the Community citizen to know his rights and have at his disposal a text on which he can rely simply and cheaply; (2) to ensure sufficient transparency to enable the Commission to check effectively whether a directive has been implemented." 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Allied Corporation v Council (Rec 1985,P 1621) (Judgment) C-53/83; [1985] EUECJ C-53/83 23 May 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Onpts v Ruzzu (Rec 1985,P 1697) (Judgment) C-117/84 4 Jun 1985 ECJ European Â Office National Des Pensions Pour Travailleurs Salaries (Onpts) v Salvatore Ruzzu. R-117/84; [1985] EUECJ R-117/84 4 Jun 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Office Nationale Des Pensions Pour Travailleurs Salaries (Onpts) v Francesco Romano. R-58/84; [1985] EUECJ R-58/84 4 Jun 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Onpts v Romano (Rec 1985,P 1679) (Judgment) C-58/84 4 Jun 1985 ECJ European Â Roelstraete (Rec 1985,P 1705) (Judgment) C-116/84 5 Jun 1985 ECJ European Â Criminal Proceedings Against Henri Roelstraete. R-116/84; [1985] EUECJ R-116/84 5 Jun 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Maria Frascogna v Caisse Des Depots Et Consignations. R-157/84; [1985] EUECJ R-157/84 6 Jun 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Frascogna v Caisse Des Depots and Consignations (Rec 1985,P 1739) (Judgment) C-157/84 6 Jun 1985 ECJ European Â De Santis v Court Of Auditors (Rec 1985,P 1723) (Judgment) C-146/84; [1985] EUECJ C-146/84 6 Jun 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1985,P 1753) (Order) C-154/85 7 Jun 1985 ECJ European Â Diezler v Esc (Rec 1985,P 1805) (Order) C-146/85 11 Jun 1985 ECJ European Â Leon Emile Gaston Carlos Debaecker And Berthe Plouvier v Cornelis Gerrit Bouwman. R-49/84; [1985] EUECJ R-49/84 11 Jun 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Debaecker v Bouwman (Rec 1985,P 1779) (Judgment) C-49/84 11 Jun 1985 ECJ European Â Commission v Ireland (Rec 1985,P 1761) (Judgment) C-288/83; [1985] EUECJ C-288/83 11 Jun 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Germany v Commission (Rec 1985,P 1813) (Order) C-248/84 13 Jun 1985 ECJ European Â P. Steinhauser v City Of Biarritz. R-197/84; [1985] EUECJ R-197/84 18 Jun 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Steinhauser v Ville De Biarritz (Rec 1985,P 1819) (Sv85-235 Fi85-235) (Judgment) C-197/84 18 Jun 1985 ECJ European Â Remo Padovani And Others v Amministrazione Delle Finanze Dello Stato. R-69/84; [1985] EUECJ R-69/84 20 Jun 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Onem v Deak (Rec 1985,P 1873) (Sv85-243 Fi85-243) (Judgment) C-94/84 20 Jun 1985 ECJ European Â Padovani v Amministrazione Delle Finanze Dello Stato (Rec 1985,P 1859) (Judgment) C-69/84 20 Jun 1985 ECJ European Â Pauvert v Court Of Auditors (Rec 1985,P 1969) (Judgment) C-228/84; [1985] EUECJ C-228/84 20 Jun 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Queenborough Rolling Mill Company v Commission (Rec 1985,P 1829) (Judgment) C-64/84; [1985] EUECJ C-64/84 20 Jun 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Royale Belge (Rec 1985,P 1889) (Judgment) C-118/84; [1985] EUECJ C-118/84 20 Jun 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â De Compte v Parliament C-141/84; [1984] EUECJ C-141/84R; [1985] EUECJ C-141/84 20 Jun 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Klein v Commission (Rec 1985,P 1907) (Judgment) C-123/84; [1985] EUECJ C-123/84 20 Jun 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Spitta v Hauptzollamt Frankfurt Am Main-Ost (Rec 1985,P 1923) (Judgment) C-124/84 20 Jun 1985 ECJ European Â H. Spitta and Co. v Hauptzollamt Frankfurt Am Main-Ost. R-124/84; [1985] EUECJ R-124/84 20 Jun 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Spachis v Commission (Rec 1985,P 1939) (Judgment) C-138/84; [1985] EUECJ C-138/84 20 Jun 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Office National De L'Emploi v Joszef Deak. R-94/84; [1985] EUECJ R-94/84 20 Jun 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Sa Binon and Cie v Sa Agence Et Messageries De La Presse. R-243/83; [1985] EUECJ R-243/83 3 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Maizena Gmbh And Others v Hauptzollamt Hamburg Jonas. R-39/84; [1985] EUECJ R-39/84 3 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Abrias v Commission (Rec 1985,P 1995) (Judgment) C-3/83; [1985] EUECJ C-3/83 3 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Nv De Jong Verenigde Et Cooperatieve Melkprodukten Bedrijven 'Domo-Bedum' Ga v Voedselvoorzienings In En Verkoopbureau (Vib). R-20/84; [1985] EUECJ R-20/84 3 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Binon v Amp (Judgment) C-243/83 3 Jul 1985 ECJ European Â De Jong v Vib (Rec 1985,P 2061) (Judgment) C-20/84 3 Jul 1985 ECJ European Â Maizena v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas (Rec 1985,P 2115) (Judgment) C-39/84 3 Jul 1985 ECJ European Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1985,P 2049) (Judgment) C-277/83; [1985] EUECJ C-277/83 3 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Agostini v Commission (Rec 1985,P 2163) (Judgment) C-233/83; [1985] EUECJ C-233/83; [1986] EUECJ C-233/83 4 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â J. W. M. Kromhout v Raad Van Arbeid. R-104/84; [1985] EUECJ R-104/84 4 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Delhez v Commission (Rec 1985,P 2179) (Judgment) C-264/83; [1985] EUECJ C-264/83; [1986] EUECJ C-264/83 4 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Hauptzollamt Bremen Freihafen v J. Henr. Druenert Holzimport. R-167/84; [1985] EUECJ R-167/84 4 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Williams v Court of Auditors C-134/84 4 Jul 1985 ECJ European Â Hauptzollamt Bremen-Freihafen v Drunert (Rec 1985,P 2235) (Judgment) C-167/84 4 Jul 1985 ECJ European Â Amman and Others v Council (Rec 1985,P 2133) (Judgment) C-174/83; [1985] EUECJ C-174/83; [1986] EUECJ C-174/83 4 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â AS-Autoteile Service GmbH v Pierre Malhe (Judgment) Case 220/84; [1985] ECR 2267 4 Jul 1985 ECJ Lenz AG European, Jurisdiction The particular areas which fall under Article 16, certain disputes regarding tenancies, companies, registers, industrial property and the enforcement of judgments, are matters which, because of their particular difficulty or complexity, require that the court having jurisdiction should be particularly familiar with the relevant national law. Lugano Convention 1 Citers Â Kromhout v Raad Van Arbeid (Rec 1985,P 2205) (Judgment) C-104/84 4 Jul 1985 ECJ European Â Culmsee and Others v Esc (Rec 1985,P 2149) (Judgment) C-175/83; [1985] EUECJ C-175/83; [1986] EUECJ C-175/83 4 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Allo v Commission (Rec 1985,P 2155) (Judgment) C-176/83; [1985] EUECJ C-176/83; [1986] EUECJ C-176/83 4 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Berkholz v Finanzamt Hamburg-Mitte-Altstadt C-168/84 4 Jul 1985 ECJ European Â As-Autoteile Service Gmbh v Pierre Malhe. R-220/84; [1985] EUECJ R-220/84 4 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ambrosetti v Commission (Rec 1985,P 2171) (Judgment) C-247/83; [1985] EUECJ C-247/83; [1986] EUECJ C-247/83 4 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Gunter Berkholz v Finanzamt Hamburg-Mitte-Altstadt. R-168/84; [1985] EUECJ R-168/84 4 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Bozzetti v Invernizzi (Rec 1985,P 2301) (Judgment) C-179/84 9 Jul 1985 ECJ European Â Piercarlo Bozzetti v Invernizzi Spa And Ministero Del Tesoro. R-179/84; [1985] EUECJ R-179/84 9 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Pharmon Bv v Hoechst Ag. R-19/84; [1985] EUECJ R-19/84 9 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Pharmon v Hoechst (Rec 1985,P 2281) (Sv85-265 Fi85-265) (Judgment) C-19/84 9 Jul 1985 ECJ European Â Commission v Ireland (Rec 1985,P 2375) (Judgment) C-17/84; [1985] EUECJ C-17/84 10 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Netherlands (Rec 1985,P 2355) (Judgment) C-16/84; [1985] EUECJ C-16/84 10 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Wirtschaftsvereinigung Eisen- Und Stahlindustrie v Commission (Rec 1985,P 2385) (Judgment) C-27/84; [1985] EUECJ C-27/84 10 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Cmc v Commission (Rec 1985,P 2325) (Judgment) C-118/83; [1983] EUECJ C-118/83R; [1985] EUECJ C-118/83 10 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Calogero Scaletta v Union Nationale Des Federations Mutualistes Neutres De Belgique. R-261/84; [1985] EUECJ R-261/84 11 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Institut National D'Assurances Sociales Pour Travailleurs Independants v Nicola Cantisani. R-111/84; [1985] EUECJ R-111/84 11 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Pierre Hattet And Others v Commission Of The European Communities. C-140/83; [1985] EUECJ C-140/83 11 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â R v Commission Of The European Communities. C-256/83; [1985] EUECJ C-256/83 11 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Cinetheque Sa And Others v Federation Nationale Des Cinemas Francais. R-61/84; [1985] EUECJ R-61/84 11 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Sa Saint-Herblain Distribution, Centre Distributeur Leclerc And Others v Syndicat Des Libraires De Loire Ocean R-299/83; [1985] EUECJ R-299/83 11 Jul 1985 ECJ European Euopa As community law stands, the second paragraph of article 5 of the Treaty, in conjunction with articles 3(f) and 85, do not preclude member states from enacting legislation whereby the retail price of books must be fixed by the publisher or by the importer and is binding on all retailers, provided that such legislation is consonant with the other specific provisions of the treaty, in particular those relating to the free movement of goods. In the context of national legislation on the price of books, the following constitute measures equivalent in effect to quantitative restrictions on imports, contrary to article 30 of the Treaty: (a) provisions whereby the importer responsible for complying with the statutory requirement to deposit one copy of each imported book with the authorities, that is to say the principal distributor, is responsible for fixing the retail price, and (b) provisions requiring the retail price fixed by the publisher to be applied to books published in the member state concerned and re-imported following exportation to another member state, unless it is established that those books were exported for the sole purpose of re-importation in order to circumvent the legislation in question. [ Bailii ] Â Criminal Proceedings Against Robert Heinrich Maria Mutsch R-137/84; [1985] EUECJ R-137/84 11 Jul 1985 ECJ European Europa In so far as it provides that the member states shall, so far as is necessary, enter into negotiations with each other with a view to securing for their nationals 'the protection of persons and the protection and enjoyment of rights under the same conditions as those accorded by each state to its own nationals', the first indent of article 220 of the eec treaty is not intended to lay down a legal rule directly applicable as such, but merely defines as an objective the extension by each member state to the nationals of the other member states of the guarantees accorded by it to its own nationals. The principle of free movement of workers, as laid down in article 48 of the treaty and more particularly in regulation no 1612/68 of the council, requires that a worker who is a national of one member state and habitually resides in another member state be entitled, under the same conditions as a worker who is a national of the host member state, to require that criminal proceedings against him take place in a language other than the language normally used in proceedings before the court which tries him. Such an entitlement falls within the meaning of the term 'social advantage' as used in article 7(2) of that regulation. [ Bailii ] Â Vittorio Salerno And Others v Commission Of The European Communities And Council Of The Ec. C-130/77; [1985] EUECJ C-130/77 11 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Foreningen Af Arbejdsledere I Danmark v A/S Danmols Inventar, In Liquidation C-105/84; R-105/84; [1985] EUECJ R-105/84; [1985] ECR 2639; [1985] ECR 2639 11 Jul 1985 ECJ European, Employment Europa Article 1(1) of Council Directive no 77/187 does not apply to the transfer of an undertaking, business or part of a business where the transferor has been adjudged insolvent and the undertaking or business in question forms part of the assets of the insolvent transferor, although the member states are at liberty to apply the principles of the directive to such a transfer on their own initiative. However, the mere fact that the transfer has occurred after the transferor has suspended payment of its debts is not sufficient to exclude the transfer from the scope of the directive. Article 3(1) of council directive no 77/187 must be construed as not covering the transfer of the rights and obligations of persons who were employed by the transferor at the date of the transfer, but who, by their own decision , do not continue to work as employees of the transferee. The expression 'employee' within the meaning of directive no. 77/187 must be interpreted as covering any person who , in the member state concerned, is protected as an employee under national employment law. It is for the national court to establish whether that is the case. 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Institut National D'Assurances Sociales Pour Travailleurs Independants v Cantisani (Rec 1985,P 2671) (Judgment) C-111/84 11 Jul 1985 ECJ European Â Leclerc v Syndicat Des Libraires De Loire-Ocean (Judgment) C-299/83 11 Jul 1985 ECJ European Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1985,P 2503) (Judgment) C-278/83; [1985] EUECJ C-278/83 11 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â R v Commission (Rec 1985,P 2473) (Judgment) C-255/83 11 Jul 1985 ECJ European Â Appelbaum v Commission (Rec 1985,P 2423) (Judgment) C-119/83; [1985] EUECJ C-119/83 11 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ministere Public v Mutsch (Rec 1985,P 2681) (Sv85-307 Fi85-307) (Judgment) C-137/84 11 Jul 1985 ECJ European Â Brautigam v Council (Rec 1985,P 2401) (Judgment) C-236/82; [1985] EUECJ C-236/82 11 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Germany (Rec 1985,P 2655) (Judgment) C-107/84; [1985] EUECJ C-107/84 11 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1985,P 2629) (Judgment) C-101/84; [1985] EUECJ C-101/84 11 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Salerno and Others v Commission and Council (Rec 1985,P 2523) (Judgment) C-87/77 11 Jul 1985 ECJ European Â Cinetheque v Federation Nationale Des Cinemas Francais (Rec 1985,P 2605) (Sv85-295 Fi85-295) (Judgment) C-60/84 11 Jul 1985 ECJ European Â F Berghoefer GmbH and Co KG v ASA SA C-221/84; R-221/84; [1985] EUECJ R-221/84; [1985] ECR 2699 11 Jul 1985 ECJ European, Jurisdiction Brussels Convention - Interpretation of Article 17 - Validity of an oral jurisdiction agreement confirmed in writing by one party only. "It must be pointed out that . . article 17 of the Convention does not expressly require that the written confirmation of an oral argument should be given by the party who is to be affected by the agreement. Moreover, as the various observations submitted to the Court have rightly emphasized, it is sometimes difficult to determine the party for whose benefit a jurisdiction agreement has been concluded before proceedings have actually been instituted. If it is actually established that jurisdiction has been conferred by express oral agreement and if confirmation of that oral agreement by one of the parties has been received by the other and the latter has raised no objection to it within a reasonable time thereafter, the aforesaid literal interpretation of article 17 will also, as the Court has already decided in another context . . be in accordance with the purpose of that article, which is to ensure that the parties have actually consented to the clause. It would therefore be a breach of good faith for a party who did not raise any objection subsequently to contest the application of the oral agreement." 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Scaletta v Unfmnb (Rec 1985,P 2711) (Judgment) C-261/84 11 Jul 1985 ECJ European Â Maag v Commission (Rec 1985,P 2581) (Judgment) C-43/84; [1985] EUECJ C-43/84 11 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Remia v Commission (Rec 1985,P 2545) (Sv85-277 Fi85-277) (Judgment) C-42/84; [1985] EUECJ C-42/84 11 Jul 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Hattet v Commission (Rec 1985,P 2459) (Judgment) C-66/83 11 Jul 1985 ECJ European Â Ford Werke Ag And Ford Of Europe Inc. v Commission Of The European Communities. C-26/84; [1985] EUECJ C-26/84 17 Sep 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ford v Commission (Rec 1985,P 2725) (Judgment) C-25/84 17 Sep 1985 ECJ European Â Commission v Greece C-276/83; [1985] EUECJ C-276/83 18 Sep 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Finsider v Commission Of The European Communities. C-147/84; [1985] EUECJ C-147/84 19 Sep 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Hoogovens Groep Bv v Commission Of The European Communities. C-226/83; [1985] EUECJ C-226/83 19 Sep 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Asteris v Commission (Rec 1985,P 2815) (Judgment) C-194/83 19 Sep 1985 ECJ European Â Hoogovens Groep v Commission (Rec 1985,P 2831) (Judgment) C-172/83 19 Sep 1985 ECJ European Â Murri Freres v Commission (Rec 1985,P 2759) (Judgment) C-33/82; [1985] EUECJ C-33/82 19 Sep 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Asteris Ae And Others v Commission Of The European Communities. C-206/83; [1985] EUECJ C-206/83 19 Sep 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Greece v Commission C-192/83; [1985] EUECJ C-192/83 19 Sep 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â The Queen, Ex Parte E. D. and F. Man (Sugar) Ltd v Intervention Board For Agricultural Produce R-181/84; [1985] EUECJ R-181/84 24 Sep 1985 ECJ European ECJ 1. In order to establish whether a provision of community law is in conformity with the principle of proportionality it is necessary to ascertain whether the means which it employs are appropriate and necessary to attain the objective sought. Where community legislation makes a distinction between a primary obligation, compliance with which is necessary in order to attain the objective sought, and a secondary obligation, essentially of an administrative nature, it cannot, without breaching the principle of proportionality, penalize failure to comply with the secondary obligation as severely as failure to comply with the primary obligation. 2. Although, within the context of the standing invitation to tender organized by regulation no 1880/83, in order to determine levies and/or refunds on exports of white sugar, the obligation imposed on successful tenderers to apply within a short period for an export licence in accordance with article 12(b) of that regulation performs a useful administrative function from the commission's point of view, it cannot be accepted that that obligation is as important as the obligation to export, which remains the essential aim of the community legislation in question. Article 6(3) of regulation no. 1880/83 is invalid inasmuch as it prescribes forfeiture of the entire security as the penalty for failure to comply with the time-limit imposed for the submission of applications for export licences. That penalty, imposed in respect of an infringement significantly less serious than the failure to fulfil the primary obligation, which the security itself is intended to guarantee, is too drastic in relation to the export licence's function of ensuring the sound management of the market in question. [ Bailii ] Â Procureur De La Republique v Leclerc (Rec 1985,P 2915) (Judgment) C-34/84 25 Sep 1985 ECJ European Â Procureur De La Republique v Hericotte (Rec 1985,P 2993) (Judgment) C-215/84 25 Sep 1985 ECJ European Â Procureur De La Republique v Girault (Rec 1985,P 2985) (Judgment) C-202/84 25 Sep 1985 ECJ European Â Procureur De La Republique v Chabaud and Remy (Rec 1985,P 2953) (Judgment) C-79/84 25 Sep 1985 ECJ European Â Procureur De La Republique v Gontier (Rec 1985,P 2977) (Judgment) C-201/84 25 Sep 1985 ECJ European Â Procureur De La Republique And Direction Interdepartementale De La Concurrence Et De La Consommation v Binet And Others. R-149/84; [1985] EUECJ R-149/84 25 Sep 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Procureur De La Republique v Michel Leclerc. R-34/84; [1985] EUECJ R-34/84 25 Sep 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Procureur De La Republique v Marie-Helene Ferey, Nee Hericotte. R-215/84; [1985] EUECJ R-215/84 25 Sep 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Surcouf and Vidou v EEC (Rec 1985,P 2925) (Judgment) C-71/84 25 Sep 1985 ECJ European Â Robert Surcouf And Jean Vidou v Eec. C-72/84; [1985] EUECJ C-72/84 25 Sep 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Piszko v Leclerc and Carrefour Supermarche (Rec 1985,P 2961) (Judgment) C-114/84 25 Sep 1985 ECJ European Â Procureur De La Republique v Binet (Rec 1985,P 2969) (Judgment) C-149/84 25 Sep 1985 ECJ European Â Procureur De La Republique v Gratiot (Rec 1985,P 2907) (Judgment) C-11/84 25 Sep 1985 ECJ European Â Procureur De La Republique v Jean-Pierre Gontier. R-201/84; [1985] EUECJ R-201/84 25 Sep 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Procureur De La Republique v Christian Gratio R-11/84; [1985] EUECJ R-11/84 25 Sep 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Procureur De La Republique v Claude Chabaud And Jean-Louis Remy. R-80/84; [1985] EUECJ R-80/84 25 Sep 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Procureur De La Republique v Bernard Girault. R-202/84; [1985] EUECJ R-202/84 25 Sep 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Valentini v Commission (Rec 1985,P 3027) (Judgment) C-231/84; [1985] EUECJ C-231/84 26 Sep 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Thomasduenger Gmbh v Oberfinanzdirektion Frankfurt Am Main. R-166/84; [1985] EUECJ R-166/84 26 Sep 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Thomasdunger v Oberfinanzdirektion Frankfurt Am Main (Rec 1985,P 3001) (Judgment) C-166/84 26 Sep 1985 ECJ European Â Caldana (Rec 1985,P 3013) (Judgment) C-187/84 26 Sep 1985 ECJ European Â Criminal Proceedings Against Giacomo Caldana. R-187/84; [1985] EUECJ R-187/84 26 Sep 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Office Belge De L'Economie Et De L'Agriculture (Obea) v Sa Nicolas Corman Et Fils. R-125/83; [1985] EUECJ R-125/83 1 Oct 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Obea v Corman (Rec 1985,P 3039) (Judgment) C-125/83 1 Oct 1985 ECJ European Â Rederij L. De Boer En Zn. Bv v Produktschap Voor Vis En Visprodukten. R-207/84; [1985] EUECJ R-207/84 3 Oct 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ministere Public And Ministry Of Finance v Venceslas Profant. R-249/84; [1985] EUECJ R-249/84 3 Oct 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Nordgetreide Gmbh and Co. Kg v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas. R-46/84; [1985] EUECJ R-46/84 3 Oct 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Cbem v Clt and Ipb (Rec 1985,P 3261) (Judgment) C-311/84 3 Oct 1985 ECJ European Â Ministere Public v Profant (Rec 1985,P 3237) (Sv85-315 Fi85-315) (Judgment) C-249/84 3 Oct 1985 ECJ European Â Nordgetreide v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas (Rec 1985,P 3127) (Judgment) C-46/84 3 Oct 1985 ECJ European Â P. Capelloni Et F. Aquilini v J. -c- J. Pelkmans. R-119/84; [1985] EUECJ R-119/84 3 Oct 1985 ECJ European Europa Article 39 of the Convention of 27 September 1968 merely lays down the principle that the party who has applied for enforcement may, during the period indicated in that article, proceed to apply measures to protect the property of the party against whom enforcement is sought. By contrast, the convention leaves the matter of resolving any question not covered by specific provisions of the treaty to the procedural law of the court hearing the proceedings. It must nevertheless be made clear that the application of the requirements of the national procedural law of the court hearing the proceedings must not in any circumstances lead to frustration of the principles laid down in that regard, whether expressly or by implication, by the convention itself and by article 39 thereof in particular. Accordingly, the question whether any given provision of the national procedural law of the court hearing the proceedings is applicable to protective measures taken pursuant to article 39 depends upon the scope of each provision of national law and upon the extent to which it is compatible with the principles laid down by article 39. By virtue of article 39 of the convention a party who has applied for and obtained authorization for enforcement may proceed directly with protective measure against the property of the party against whom enforcement is sought and is under no obligation to obtain specific authorization. Such measures may be taken up to the expiry of the period for lodging an appeal prescribed in article 36 and, if such an appeal is lodged, until a decision is given thereon. A party who has proceeded with the protective measures referred to in article 39 of the convention is under no obligation to obtain in respect of such measures any confirmatory judgment required by the national law of the court in question. However, article 39 does not prevent the party against whom those measures have been applied from taking legal proceedings in order to secure, by recourse to the appropriate procedures laid down in the national law of the court dealing with the matter, adequate protection of the rights which he alleges to have been infringed by the measures in question. [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Tordeur (Rec 1985,P 3223) (Judgment) C-232/84 3 Oct 1985 ECJ European Â Commission v Germany (Rec 1985,P 3097) (Judgment) C-28/84; [1985] EUECJ C-28/84 3 Oct 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Denkavit Futtermittel Gmbh v Land Nordrhein Westfalen. R-195/84; [1985] EUECJ R-195/84 3 Oct 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Centre Belge D'Etudes De Marche Telemarketing (Cbem) v Sa Compagnie Luxembourgeoise De Telediffusion (Clt) And Information Publicite Benelux (Ipb). R-311/84; [1985] EUECJ R-311/84 3 Oct 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Fkf v Hauptzollamt Berlin-Sud (Rec 1985,P 3165) (Judgment) C-154/84 3 Oct 1985 ECJ European Â Fleischwaren Und Konservenfabrik (Fkf) Schulz Und Berndt Gmbh v Hauptzollamt Berlin Sued. R-154/84; [1985] EUECJ R-154/84 3 Oct 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â De Boer v Produktschap Voor Vis En Visprodukten (Rec 1985,P 3203) (Judgment) C-207/84 3 Oct 1985 ECJ European Â Capelloni and Aquilini v Pelkmans (Rec 1985,P 3147) (Judgment) C-119/84 3 Oct 1985 ECJ European Â Commission Of The European Communities v Jean Louis Tordeur And Others. R-232/84; [1985] EUECJ R-232/84 3 Oct 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Denkavit Futtermittel v Land Nordrhein-Westfalen (Rec 1985,P 3181) (Judgment) C-195/84 3 Oct 1985 ECJ European Â Germany v Commission (Rec 1985,P 3053) (Judgment) C-214/83; [1985] EUECJ C-214/83 3 Oct 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Telefunken v Oberfinanzdirektion Munchen (Rec 1985,P 3335) (Judgment) C-223/84 7 Oct 1985 ECJ European Â Hauptzollamt Hannover v Telefunken Fernseh Und Rundfunk Gmbh R-163/84; [1985] EUECJ R-163/84 7 Oct 1985 ECJ European, Customs and Excise ECJ 1. The fact that goods are intended, or are even specifically designed, to be used together and that they are presented for customs clearance together in the same package is not a sufficient reason for classifying them as a functional unit within the meaning of the customs cooperation council's explanatory notes, if they can be used separately. The functional unit principle is intended to allow classification under a given heading of machines and appliances made up of components falling under several tariff headings, in cases where those components as a whole are intended to perform the single clearly-defined function referred to in the tariff heading in question. The principle does not apply where some of the components making up a product may be used independently of the other components and for functions other than those which may be performed by all the components together. 2. The expression 'goods put up in sets' in general rule A3(b) implies that the goods are closely linked from the marketing point of view, with the result that they are not only presented together for customs clearance but are also normally supplied together, at the various marketing stages and in particular the retail stage, in a single package in order to satisfy a demand or to perform a specific function. General rule A3(b) applies only where goods are prima facie classifiable under two or more headings and classification is not possible under general rule A3(a), that is to say where there is no specific heading taking precedence over more general headings. 3. A combined tuner, record-player and cassette recorder imported together with two loudspeakers intended for use with it constitutes a set of goods falling under heading no 85.15 of the common customs tariff, where the goods concerned are put up in a single package and are intended to be marketed together in order to satisfy a specific demand. [ Bailii ] Â Hauptzollamt Hannover v Telefunken (Rec 1985,P 3299) (Judgment) C-163/84 7 Oct 1985 ECJ European Â Procuratore Della Repubblica v Tiziano Migliorini And Tibor Tiburzio Fischl. R-199/84; [1985] EUECJ R-199/84 7 Oct 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Procuratore Della Republica v Migliorini and Fischl (Rec 1985,P 3317) (Judgment) C-199/84 7 Oct 1985 ECJ European Â Van Der Stijl v Commission (Rec 1985,P 3281) (Judgment) C-128/84; [1985] EUECJ C-128/84 7 Oct 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Telefunken Fernseh Und Rundfunk Gmbh v Oberfinanzdirektion Muenchen R-223/84; [1985] EUECJ R-223/84 7 Oct 1985 ECJ European, Customs and Excise ECJ 1. The functional unit principle referred to in the customs cooperation council's explanatory notes is intended to allow classification under a given heading of machines or appliances made up of components falling under several tariff headings, in cases where those components as a whole are designed to perform the single clearly-defined function referred to in the tariff heading in question. The principle does not apply where some of the components making up a product may be used independently of the other components and for functions other than those which may be performed by all the components together. 2. An apparatus described as a timer/tuner which consists of a colour-television reception component with a 12-programme memory and of a timer that can be pre-set to switch the apparatus on and off up to 10 days in advance and which must be combined with a video recorder of a specific design in order to convert into visible form transmissions received must be regarded as a part or accessory within the meaning of subheading 92.13 d of the common customs tariff. [ Bailii ] Â Sohnlein Rheingold v Hauptzollamt Wiesbaden. R-183/84; [1985] EUECJ R-183/84 10 Oct 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Collector Guns v Hauptzollamt Koblenz (Rec 1985,P 3387) (Judgment) C-252/84 10 Oct 1985 ECJ European Â Daiber v Hauptzollamt Reutlingen (Rec 1985,P 3363) (Judgment) C-200/84 10 Oct 1985 ECJ European Â Erika Daiber v Hauptzollamt Reutlingen. R-200/84; [1985] EUECJ R-200/84 10 Oct 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Collector Guns Gmbh and Co. Kg v Hauptzollamt Koblenz. R-252/84; [1985] EUECJ R-252/84 10 Oct 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Rheingold v Hauptzollamt Wiesbaden C-183/84 10 Oct 1985 ECJ European Â Krupp Stahl Ag And Thyssen Stahl Ag v Commission Of The European Communities. C-212/83; [1985] EUECJ C-212/83 15 Oct 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Krupp and Thyssen v Commission (Rec 1985,P 3409) (Judgment) C-211/83 15 Oct 1985 ECJ European Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1985,P 3397) (Judgment) C-281/83; [1985] EUECJ C-281/83 15 Oct 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Continental Irish Meat Ltd v Minister For Agriculture. R-125/84; [1985] EUECJ R-125/84 15 Oct 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Continental Irish Meat v Minister For Agriculture (Rec 1985,P 3441) (Judgment) C-125/84 15 Oct 1985 ECJ European Â Canon Inc. And Others v Council Of The Ec. C-300/85; [1985] EUECJ C-300/85R 18 Oct 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Towa Sandiken v Council (Rec 1985,P 3483) (Order) C-297/85; [1985] EUECJ C-297/85R 18 Oct 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Canon v Council (Rec 1985,P 3491) (Order) C-277/85 18 Oct 1985 ECJ European Â Silver Seiko v Council (Rec 1985,P 3475) (Order) C-273/85 18 Oct 1985 ECJ European Â Tec v Council (Rec 1985,P 3467) (Order) C-260/85 18 Oct 1985 ECJ European Â Brother v Council (Rec 1985,P 3459) (Order) C-250/85 18 Oct 1985 ECJ European Â Riseria Modenese v Council, Commission and Birra Peroni (Rec 1985,P 3499) (Judgment) C-267/80; [1984] EUECJ C-267/80; [1986] EUECJ C-267/80T; [1987] EUECJ C-267/80 23 Oct 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Gerlach v Minister Van Economische Zaken (Rec 1985,P 3507) (Judgment) C-239/84 24 Oct 1985 ECJ European Â Gerlach and Co. Bv, Internationale Expeditie, v Minister For Economice Affairs. R-239/84; [1985] EUECJ R-239/84 24 Oct 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Belgium (Rec 1985,P 3521) (Order) C-293/85 25 Oct 1985 ECJ European Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1985,P 3531) (Judgment) C-131/84 6 Nov 1985 ECJ European Â Adams v Commission of the European Communities C-145/83; [1985] EUECJ C-145/83 7 Nov 1985 ECJ European, Limitation, Information Non-contractual liability - Protection of the confidentiality of information - Period of limitation. [ Bailii ] Â Adams v Commission C-53/84; [1985] EUECJ C-53/84 7 Nov 1985 ECJ European Europa The decision whether or not to refer to the joint committee set up under the free trade agreement between the EEC and the Swiss Confederation in connection with articles 23(1) and 27 of the agreement, which are intended to provide fair conditions of competition for trade between the contracting parties and concern the means of putting an end to the abuse of a dominant position by one or more undertakings where such abuse is likely to affect that trade, may not be taken except for purposes which have to do exclusively with general interests of the community, following an assessment which is essentially political and which cannot be challenged before the court by an individual. [ Bailii ] Â Eurasian Corporation v Commission (Rec 1985,P 3603) (Order) C-82/85 11 Nov 1985 ECJ European Â Krupp v Commission (Rec 1985,P 3609) (Judgment) C-183/83; [1985] EUECJ C-183/83 12 Nov 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Neumann v Balm (Rec 1985,P 3663) (Judgment) C-299/84 14 Nov 1985 ECJ European Â Cooperatieve Melkproductenbedrijven 'Noord-Nederland' Ba (Frico) v Produktschap Voor Zuivel. R-275/84; [1985] EUECJ R-275/84 14 Nov 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Texas Instruments Deutschland Gmbh v Hauptzollamt Muenchen Mitte. R-227/84; [1985] EUECJ R-227/84 14 Nov 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Powell v Commission (Judgment) C-219/84 14 Nov 1985 ECJ European Â Texas Instruments v Hauptzollamt Munchen-Mitte (Judgment) C-227/84 14 Nov 1985 ECJ European, Customs and Excise Common customs tariff - alteration or suspension of import duties - powers of the council - limits (eec treaty, art. 28; council regulation no 2841/79) although article 28 of the EEC treaty, which concerns autonomous alterations or suspensions of common customs tariff duties, leaves the council considerable discretion, it is for the court to ascertain whether or not the manner in which the council has carried out the duties thereby entrusted to it constitutes a misuse of power or gives rise to discrimination. Â Firma Karl-Heinz Neumann v Bundesanstalt Fuer Landwirtschaftliche Marktordnung. R-299/84; [1985] EUECJ R-299/84 14 Nov 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Frico v Produktschap Voor Zuivel (Rec 1985,P 3651) (Judgment) C-275/84 14 Nov 1985 ECJ European Â Â Cockerill-Sambre v Commission; ECJ 26-Nov-1985 - C-42/85; [1985] EUECJ C-42/85 Â Criminal Proceedings Against Miro Bv. R-182/84; [1985] EUECJ R-182/84 26 Nov 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Leeuwarder Papierwarenfabriek Bv v Commission (Order) C-318/82; [1985] EUECJ C-318/82 26 Nov 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Miro (Rec 1985,P 3731) (Judgment) C-182/84 26 Nov 1985 ECJ European Â Commission v Co De Mi (Rec 1985,P 3693) (Judgment) C-318/81; [1982] EUECJ C-318/81R; [1985] EUECJ C-318/81 26 Nov 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Rousseau Wilmot v Organic (Rec 1985,P 3759) (Sv85-347 Fi85-347) (Judgment) C-295/84 27 Nov 1985 ECJ European Â Sa Rousseau Wilmot v Caisse De Compensation De L'Organisation Autonome Nationale De L'Industrie Et Du Commerce (Organic). R-295/84; [1985] EUECJ R-295/84 27 Nov 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Gregoire-Foulon v Parliament C-19/85; [1985] EUECJ C-19/85 28 Nov 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Direktaratet For Markedsordningerne v Corman (Rec 1985,P 3777) (Judgment) C-124/83 5 Dec 1985 ECJ European Â Van Der Stijl v Commission (Rec 1985,P 3795) (Order) C-341/85 5 Dec 1985 ECJ European Â Direktoratet For Markedsordningerne v Sa Nicolas Corman Et Fils. R-124/83; [1985] EUECJ R-124/83 5 Dec 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Stichting Sigarettenindustrie And Others v Commission Of The European Communities. C-269/82; [1985] EUECJ C-269/82 10 Dec 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Nso v Commission (Rec 1985,P 3801) (Judgment) C-260/82; [1982] EUECJ C-260/82R; [1985] EUECJ C-260/82 10 Dec 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Eta v Dk Investment (Rec 1985,P 3933) (Judgment) C-31/85 10 Dec 1985 ECJ European Â Criminal Proceedings Against Leon Motte. R-247/84; [1985] EUECJ R-247/84 10 Dec 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Eta Fabriques D'Ebauches v Sa Dk Investment And Others. R-31/85; [1985] EUECJ R-31/85 10 Dec 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Hauptzollamt Schweinfurt v Mainfrucht Obstverwertung Gmbh. R-290/84; [1985] EUECJ R-290/84 10 Dec 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Greece (Rec 1985,P 3967) (Judgment) C-192/84; [1985] EUECJ C-192/84 11 Dec 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commune De Hillegom v Cornelis Hillenius. R-77/78; [1985] EUECJ R-77/780 11 Dec 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Gemeente Hillegom v Hillenius (Judgment) C-110/84 11 Dec 1985 ECJ European Â John Friedrich Krohn (gmbh and co Kg) v Bundesanstalt fur Landwirtschaftliche Marktordnung C-165/84 12 Dec 1985 ECJ European, Customs and Excise Europa 1. Measures adopted by the institutions - regulations - application by analogy - conditions (commission regulations Nos 2029/82 and 2655/82) 2. Agriculture - common organization of the markets - cereals - import certificates - opportunity offered by regulation no 2655/82 to importers of products falling within subheading 07.06 a of the common customs tariff originating in non-member countries other than Thailand to have licences cancelled - extension to importation of the same products originating in Thailand covered by regulation no 2029/82 - identical conditions concerning time-limits and other procedural requirements (commission regulations Nos 2029/82 and 2655/82, art. 3 (6)) The scope of a regulation is normally defined by its own terms and it may not in principle be extended to situations other than those which it envisaged. The position may be different in certain exceptional cases. Thus, traders are entitled to rely on an application by analogy of a regulation which would not normally be applicable to them if they can show that the rules applicable to their case, on the one hand, are very similar to those which it is sought to have applied by analogy and, on the other hand, contain an omission which is incompatible with a general principle of community law and which can be remedied by application by analogy of those other rules. Article 3 (6) of commission regulation no 2655/82, laying down rules for implementing the import arrangements for 1982 for products falling within subheading 07.06 a of the common customs tariff originating in third countries other than Thailand must be interpreted as applying to the case of importers of products falling within the said tariff subheading and originating in Thailand as provided for by commission regulation no 2029/82. If that were not so, importers of the said products originating in Thailand, who, until the adoption of regulation no 2029/82, were subject to legal rules corresponding very closely to those governing importers of the same products originating in other non-member countries and who were therefore likely to benefit, on the same basis as the latter, from measures intended to protect legitimate expectation, would be placed in a situation which was contrary to the principle in community law of equal treatment of traders in comparable situations. Article 3 (6) of regulation no 2655/82 is to be applied to the importation of products falling within subheading 07.06 a of the common customs tariff and originating in Thailand subject to the time-limits and other procedural requirements therein laid down. Â Gebr. Metelmann Gmbh and Co. Kg v Hauptzollamt Hamburg Jonas. R-276/84; [1985] EUECJ R-276/84 12 Dec 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Sideradria v Commission (Rec 1985,P 3983) (Judgment) C-67/84; [1985] EUECJ C-67/84 12 Dec 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Stinnes Ag v Hauptzollamt Kassel. R-214/84; [1985] EUECJ R-214/84 12 Dec 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â John Friedrich Krohn (Gmbh and Co. Kg) v Bundesanstalt Fuer Landwirtschaftliche Marktordnung. R-165/84; [1985] EUECJ R-165/84 12 Dec 1985 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Vonk's Kaas Inkoop En Produktie Holland Bv v Minister Van Landbouw En Visserij Et Produktschap Voor Zuivel R-208/84; [1985] EUECJ R-208/84 12 Dec 1985 ECJ European ECJ When fixing monetary compensatory amounts, the commission must not only act to prevent disturbances to normal trade caused by the monetary measures adopted by the member states but also see to it that the compensatory amounts themselves are not so constituted as to provoke such disturbances or to create market conditions favourable to the formation of artificial trade flows. It is therefore not only empowered but under a duty to amend its existing legislation if it finds that improper transactions of the type described above have occurred or that there is a risk that they may occur. In its choice of the measures to be adopted, the commission must be allowed a broad measure of discretion where the product concerned is of very limited importance for trade within the community and with non-member countries and where, furthermore, it occurs in two forms which are administratively difficult to distinguish, one of which is devoid of commercial value while the other is perfectly capable of being processed and reprocessed in a closed circuit without ever reaching the stage of final consumption. [ Bailii ] Â Stinnes AG v Hauptzollamt Kassel C-214/84 12 Dec 1985 ECJ European, Customs and Excise Europa European Communities ' own resources - post-clearance recovery of import or export duties - article 8 of regulation no 1697/79 - a given action for recovery - meaning - combining of several separate actions for recovery -permissibility - conditions (Council Regulation no 1697/79, art. 8). The term 'a given action for recovery' in article 8 of council regulation no 1697/79 of 24 July 1979 on the post-clearance recovery of import or export duties must be interpreted as referring to each individual import or export transaction. That interpretation does not preclude the practice of combining several separate actions for recovery in a single recovery order provided that the amount concerned in each action exceeds the amount specified in the first paragraph of the aforesaid article 8. Â Gebr Metelmann gmbh and co Kg v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas C-276/84 12 Dec 1985 ECJ European, Agriculture Europa 1. Agriculture - common organization of the markets - export refunds -refunds fixed in advance - condition of payment - departure of the goods ' unaltered ' from the territory of the community - repackaging following customs clearance - forfeiture of the refund - completion of customs formalities after the event - reference date for determining the rate of refund - actual date of departure (commission regulation no 2730/79, art. 9 (1)) 2. Agriculture - monetary compensatory amounts - advance fixing of compensatory amounts and export refunds - forfeiture of the refund -concomitant forfeiture of the monetary compensatory amount - completion of customs formalities after the event - reference date for determining the rate of the compensatory amount - date adopted for determining the rate of refund (commission regulation no 243/78, art. 2; commission regulation no 1371/81). 1. Article 9 (1) of regulation (EEC) no 2730/79, which provides that the export refund is to be paid on condition that the goods have left the geographical territory of the community ' unaltered ', must be interpreted as meaning that any alteration in the presentation of the goods, where it is such as to render customs control more difficult, entails forfeiture of the refund. Where, exceptionally, customs export formalities may still be completed after the date on which the goods have left the geographical territory of the community, the rate of refund to be applied is that applicable on that date. 2. Since monetary compensatory amounts may be fixed in advance only if the export refunds and levies are also fixed in advance, forfeiture of the refund fixed in advance also entails forfeiture of the monetary compensatory amounts fixed in advance. Where customs formalities are completed after the event, reference may not be made to different dates for the purpose of fixing the rate of the monetary compensatory amount payable pursuant to regulation no 1371/81 and the rate of the refund. Â Â Secretary of State for Employment v Spence; CA 1986 - [1986] ICR 651; [1987] QB 179 Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1986,P 107) (Judgment) C-121/84; [1986] EUECJ C-121/84 15 Jan 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Pinna v Caisse D'Allocations Familiales De La Savoie (Rec 1986,P 1) (Sv86-355 Fi86-355) (Judgment) C-41/84 15 Jan 1986 ECJ European Â Derrick Guy Edmund Hurd v Kenneth Jones (Her Majesty's Inspector Of Taxes) R-44/84; [1986] EUECJ R-44/84 15 Jan 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Belgium (Rec 1986,P 89) (Judgment) C-52/84; [1986] EUECJ C-52/84 15 Jan 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Hurd v Jones (Judgment) C-44/84; [1986] ECR 29 15 Jan 1986 ECJ European " . . . [A] provision produces direct effect in relations between the Member States and their subjects only if it is clear and unconditional and not contingent on any discretionary implementing measure." and "According to a consistent line of decisions of the court, a provision produces direct effect in relations between member states and their subjects only if it is clear and unconditional and not contingent on any discretionary implementing measure." 1 Citers Â Eridania v Cassa Conguaglio Zucchero (Rec 1986,P 117) (Judgment) C-250/84 22 Jan 1986 ECJ European Â Denkavit France v Forma (Rec 1986,P 149) (Judgment) C-266/84 22 Jan 1986 ECJ European Â Denkavit France Sarl v Fonds D'Orientation Et De Regularisation Des Marches Agricoles (Forma). R-266/84; [1986] EUECJ R-266/84 22 Jan 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Eridania Zuccherifici Nazionali Spa And Others v Cassa Conguaglio Zucchero And The Italian Ministry Of Finance And Treasury. R-250/84; [1986] EUECJ R-250/84 22 Jan 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Iorio v Azienda Autonoma Delle Ferrovie Dello Stato (Rec 1986,P 247) (Judgment) C-298/84 23 Jan 1986 ECJ European Â Centrale Marketinggesellschaft Der Deutschen Agrarwirtschaft v Commission (Rec 1986,P 217) (Judgment) C-251/84; [1986] EUECJ C-251/84 23 Jan 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Trans Tirreno Express Spa v Ufficio Provinciale Iva. R-283/84; [1986] EUECJ R-283/84 23 Jan 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Paolo Iorio v Azienda Autonoma Delle Ferrovie Dello Stato. R-298/84; [1986] EUECJ R-298/84 23 Jan 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â G. Bergeres Becque v Chef De Service Interregional Des Douanes. R-39/85; [1986] EUECJ R-39/85 23 Jan 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Soma v Commission (Rec 1986,P 173) (Judgment) C-171/84; [1986] EUECJ C-171/84 23 Jan 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Trans Tirreno Express v Ufficio Provinciale Iva (Rec 1986,P 231) (Judgment) C-283/84 23 Jan 1986 ECJ European Â Rasmussen v Commission (Rec 1986,P 197) (Judgment) C-173/84; [1986] EUECJ C-173/84 23 Jan 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Bergeres-Becque v Service Interregional Des Douanes (Judgment) C-39/85 23 Jan 1986 ECJ European Â Italy v Commission (Rec 1986,P 343) (Judgment) C-130/84; [1986] EUECJ C-130/84 28 Jan 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v France (Rec 1986,P 419) (Judgment) C-188/84; [1986] EUECJ C-188/84 28 Jan 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v France (Rec 1986,P 273) (Sv86-389 Fi86-389) (Judgment) C-270/83; [1986] EUECJ C-270/83 28 Jan 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Italy v Commission (Rec 1986,P 309) (Judgment) C-129/84; [1986] EUECJ C-129/84 28 Jan 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Cofaz v Commission (Rec 1986,P 391) (Sv86-421 Fi86-421) (Judgment) C-169/84; [1986] EUECJ C-169/84; [1990] EUECJ C-169/84 28 Jan 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Pronuptia (Rec 1986,P 353) (Sv86-403 Fi86-403) (Judgment) C-161/84 28 Jan 1986 ECJ European Â Pronuptia De Paris Gmbh v Pronuptia De Paris Irmgard Schillgallis. R-161/84; [1986] EUECJ R-161/84 28 Jan 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Sahinler v Commission C-297/84; [1986] EUECJ C-297/84 29 Jan 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Ericus v Van Houten (Rec 1986,P 447) (Judgment) C-65/85 4 Feb 1986 ECJ European Â Hauptzollamt Hamburg Ericus v Van Houten International Gmbh. R-65/85; [1986] EUECJ R-65/85 4 Feb 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Procureur De La Republique v Chiron (Rec 1986,P 529) (Judgment) C-271/84 6 Feb 1986 ECJ European Â Â Deufil v Commission; ECJ 6-Feb-1986 - C-310/85; [1986] EUECJ C-310/85R Â Castille v Commission (Rec 1986,P 497) (Judgment) C-173/82; [1982] EUECJ C-173/82R; [1986] EUECJ C-173/82 6 Feb 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Procureur De La Republique Et Directeur Departemental De La Concurrence Et De La Consommation v J. Chiron And Others. R-274/84; [1986] EUECJ R-274/84 6 Feb 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Vlachou v Court Of Auditors (Rec 1986,P 459) (Judgment) C-143/84; [1986] EUECJ C-143/84 6 Feb 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Vlachou v Court Of Auditors (Rec 1986,P 481) (Judgment) C-162/84; [1986] EUECJ C-162/84 6 Feb 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1986,P 545) (Judgment) C-35/84; [1986] EUECJ C-35/84 18 Feb 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Bulk Oil v Sun International (Judgment) C-174/84 18 Feb 1986 ECJ European Â Bulk Oil (Zug) Ag v Sun International Limited And Sun Oil Trading Company. R-174/84; [1986] EUECJ R-174/84 18 Feb 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1986,P 599) (Judgment) C-309/84; [1986] EUECJ C-309/84 20 Feb 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Spruyt v Sociale Verzekeringsbank C-284/84 25 Feb 1986 ECJ European Judgment Â L. A. Spruyt v Bestuur Van De Sociale Verzekeringsbank. R-284/84; [1986] EUECJ R-284/84 25 Feb 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â De Jong v Sociale Verzekeringsbank (Rec 1986,P 671) (Judgment) C-254/84 25 Feb 1986 ECJ European Â Windsurfing International v Commission C-193/83; [1986] EUECJ C-193/83 25 Feb 1986 ECJ European, Intellectual Property Although the Commission is not competent to determine the scope of a patent, it is still the case that it may not refrain from all action when the scope of the patent is relevant for the purposes of determining whether there has been an infringement of article 85 or 86 of the treaty. Even in cases where the protection afforded by a patent is the subject of proceedings before the national courts, the Commission must be able to exercise its powers in accordance with the provisions of regulation no 17. The findings of the commission relating to the scope of a patent do not in any way pre-empt the determinations made later by national courts within their spheres of jurisdiction and are subject to review by the court of justice. That review must be limited to determining whether, in the light of the legal position existing in the state in which the patent was granted, the commission has made a reasonable assessment of the scope of the patent. The following clauses in patent licensing agreements do not fall within the specific subject-matter of the patent and are incompatible with article 85(1) of the treaty in so far as they restrict competition: quality controls to be exercised by the licensor either in respect of a product not covered by the patent or without being based on objective criteria laid down in advance, an obligation arbitrarily placed on the licensee only to sell the patented product in conjunction with a product outside the scope of the patent, a method of calculating royalties inducing the licensee to refuse to sell separately a product not covered by the patent, an obligation on the licensee to affix a notice of the patent to a product not covered by the patent, a no-challenge clause with regard to the licensor' s trade-marks and patents, and a clause prohibiting the licensee from manufacturing the patented product in a country where it has no patent protection. In order for an agreement between undertakings to be regarded as affecting intra-community trade within the meaning of article 85(1) of the treaty, it is not necessary for each individual clause to be capable of affecting such trade. Only if the agreement as a whole is capable of affecting trade is it necessary to examine which are the clauses of the agreement which have as their object or effect a restriction or distortion of competition. [ Bailii ] Â G. J. J. De Jong v Bestuur Van De Sociale Verzekeringsbank. R-254/84; [1986] EUECJ R-254/84 25 Feb 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Joan Roberts v Tate and Lyle Industries Limited R-151/84; [1986] EUECJ R-151/84 26 Feb 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â M H Marshall v Southampton And South West Hampshire Area Health Authority (Teaching) C-152/84; [1986] IRLR 140; [1986] ICR 335; R-152/84; [1986] EUECJ R-152/84; [1986] 2 WLR 780; [1986] 1 CMLR 688; [1986] 2 All ER 584; [1986] ECR 723; [1986] QB 401 26 Feb 1986 ECJ European, Discrimination ECJ The term 'dismissal' contained in article 5(1) of Directive no 76/207 must be given a wide meaning; an age limit for the compulsory dismissal of workers pursuant to an employer's general policy concerning retirement falls within the term 'dismissal' construed in that manner, even if the dismissal involves the grant of a retirement pension. In view of the fundamental importance of the principle of equality of treatment for men and women, article 1(2) of Directive no 76/207 on the implementation of that principle as regards access to employment and working conditions, which excludes social security matters from the scope of the directive, must be interpreted strictly. It follows that the exception to the prohibition of discrimination on grounds of sex provided for in article 7(1)(a) of directive no 79/7 on the progressive implementation of the principle of equal treatment in matters of social security applies only to the determination of pensionable age for the purposes of granting old-age and retirement pensions and the possible consequences thereof for other benefits. Article 5(1) of directive no 76/207 must be interpreted as meaning that a general policy concerning dismissal involving the dismissal of a woman solely because she has attained the qualifying age for a state pension, which age is different under national legislation for men and for women, constitutes discrimination on grounds of sex, contrary to that directive. Wherever the provisions of a directive appear, as far as their subject-matter is concerned, to be unconditional and sufficiently precise, those provisions may be relied upon by an individual against the state where that state fails to implement the directive in national law by the end of the period prescribed or where it fails to implement the directive correctly. It would in fact be incompatible with the binding nature which article 189 confers on the directive to hold as a matter of principle that the obligation imposed thereby cannot be relied on by those concerned. Consequently, a member state which has not adopted the implementing measures required by the directive within the prescribed period may not plead, as against individuals, its own failure to perform the obligations which the directive entails. In that respect the capacity in which the state acts, whether as employer or public authority, is irrelevant. In either case it is necessary to prevent the state from taking advantage of its own failure to comply with community law. According to article 189 of the EEC Treaty the binding nature of a directive, which constitutes the basis for the possibility of relying on the directive before a national court, exists only in relation to 'each member state to which it is addressed'. It follows that a directive may not of itself impose obligations on an individual and that a provision of a directive may not be relied upon as such against such a person. Article 5(1) of council directive no 76/207, which prohibits any discrimination on grounds of sex with regard to working conditions, including the conditions governing dismissal, may be relied upon as against a state authority acting in its capacity as employer, in order to avoid the application of any national provision which does not conform to article 5(1). Directive no 76/207 5(1) 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Roberts v Tate and Lyle (Judgment) C-151/84 26 Feb 1986 ECJ European, Employment, Discrimination Europa The term ' dismissal ' contained in article 5(1) of directive no 76/207 must be given a wide meaning ; an age limit for the compulsory redundancy of workers as part of a mass redundancy falls within the term ' dismissal ' construed in that manner, even if the redundancy involves the grant of an early retirement pension. In view of the fundamental importance of the principle of equality of treatment for men and women, article 1 (2) of directive no 76/207 on the implementation of that principle as regards access to employment and working conditions, which excludes social security matters from the scope of the directive, must be interpreted strictly. It follows that the exception to the prohibition of discrimination on grounds of sex provided for in article 7 (1)(a) of directive no 79/7 on the progressive implementation of the principle of equal treatment in matters of social security applies only to the determination of pensionable age for the purposes of granting old-age and retirement pensions and the possible consequences thereof for other benefits. Article 5 (1) of directive no 76/207 must be interpreted as meaning that a contractual provision which lays down a single age for the dismissal of men and women under a mass redundancy involving the grant of an early retirement pension, whereas the normal retirement age is different for men and women, does not constitute discrimination on grounds of sex, contrary to community law. Â Vera Mia Beets-Proper v F. Van Lanschot Bankiers Nv. R-262/84; [1986] EUECJ R-262/84 26 Feb 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Krohn v Commission (Rec 1986,P 753) (Sv86-475 Fi86-475) (Judgment) C-175/84; [1986] EUECJ C-175/84; [1987] EUECJ C-175/84 26 Feb 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Beets-Proper v Van Lanschot Bankiers (Rec 1986,P 773) (Judgment) C-262/84 26 Feb 1986 ECJ European Â Senelco Gmbh v Oberfinanzdirektion Muenchen. R-57/85; [1986] EUECJ R-57/85 27 Feb 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Senelco v Oberfinanzdirektion Munchen (Rec 1986,P 821) (Judgment) C-57/85 27 Feb 1986 ECJ European Â Bienengraber v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas (Rec 1986,P 811) (Judgment) C-38/85 27 Feb 1986 ECJ European Â Roser (Rec 1986,P 795) (Judgment) C-238/84 27 Feb 1986 ECJ European Â Criminal Proceedings Against Hans Roser. R-238/84; [1986] EUECJ R-238/84 27 Feb 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Bienengraber and Co. v Hauptzollamt Hamburg Jonas. R-38/85; [1986] EUECJ R-38/85 27 Feb 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Walker v Ministeriet For Skatter Og Afgifter C-243/84 4 Mar 1986 ECJ European Â Commission v Denmark (Rec 1986,P 833) (Sv86-487 Fi86-487) (Judgment) C-106/84; [1986] EUECJ C-106/84 4 Mar 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â John Walker and Sons Ltd v Ministeriet For Skatter Og Afgifter. R-243/84; [1986] EUECJ R-243/84 4 Mar 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Greis Unterweger (Rec 1986,P 955) (Order) C-318/85 5 Mar 1986 ECJ European Â Wunsche v Germany (Rec 1986,P 947) (Sv86-497 Fi86-497) (Order) C-69/85 5 Mar 1986 ECJ European Â Tezi v Minister Van Economische Zaken (Rec 1986,P 933) (Judgment) C-242/84 5 Mar 1986 ECJ European Â Tezi v Commission (Rec 1986,P 887) (Judgment) C-59/84; [1986] EUECJ C-59/84 5 Mar 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Criminal Proceedings Against Regina Greis Unterweger. R-318/85; [1986] EUECJ R-318/85 5 Mar 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Wuensche Handelsgesellschaft Gmbh and Co. v Federal Republic Of Germany. R-69/85; [1986] EUECJ R-69/85 5 Mar 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Tezi Bv v Minister For Economic Affairs. R-242/84; [1986] EUECJ R-242/84 5 Mar 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Finsider v Commission (Rec 1986,P 959) (Order) C-392/85 7 Mar 1986 ECJ European Â Sorani v Commission (Rec 1986,P 967) (Judgment) C-293/84; [1985] EUECJ C-293/84R; [1986] EUECJ C-293/84 11 Mar 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Conegate v Hm Customs and Excise (Rec 1986,P 1007) (Sv86-505 Fi86-505) (Judgment) C-121/85 11 Mar 1986 ECJ European Â Adams v Commission C-294/84; [1986] EUECJ C-294/84 11 Mar 1986 ECJ European 1. The fact that an official has submitted a request for reconsideration of a decision adversely affecting him cannot prevent the time for bringing an action against that decision from running. Any other solution - that is, if officials were able, by the repeated submission of requests of that sort, indefinitely to extend the time- limit for bringing an action - would be incompatible with the system of remedies instituted by the staff regulations and with the principle of legal certainty. 2. An action brought against a decision not to admit a candidate to a competition adopted after reconsideration of an identical previous decision is admissible in so far as it appears that the second decision actually replaced the first and cannot be regarded as merely confirming it. 3. An official cannot rely, in support of an action brought against a decision not to admit him to a competition, on submissions alleging irregularities in the competition notice if he did not challenge in good time the provisions of that notice which, in his view, adversely affected him. Were it otherwise, it would be possible to challenge a competition notice long after it had been published and after most or all of the operations carried out in connection with the competition had already taken place, and that would be contrary to the principles of legal certainty, legitimate expectation and sound administration. 4 . In the context of a competition the selection board is called upon to assess factors known to the candidates, whether it be qualifications which they hold, tests which they have undergone or periodic reports of which they are aware and on which they have had an opportunity to comment. That constitutes a guarantee that the competition will be properly conducted and a protection against arbitrariness, inasmuch as the candidates are aware of all the factors which entered into the selection board's assessment and are therefore well placed to contest that assessment if they consider that it is wrong. If, on the other hand, the selection board bases its decision at least in part, as it did in this case, on factors such as information supplied by, and the opinions of, the candidates' superiors, of which the candidates concerned have no knowledge, they have no opportunity to defend themselves against statements made by third parties which, though they may well be perfectly correct, may also be incorrect for one reason or another. The fact that candidates did not have an opportunity to state their views on the opinions expressed on them by their superiors, account of which was taken by the selection board, constitutes a breach of a principle governing the competition procedure which justifies annulment of decisions refusing to admit those candidates. [ Bailii ] Â Alexandre Deghillage v Caisse Primaire D'Assurance Maladie De Maubeuge. C-28/85; R-28/85; [1986] EUECJ R-28/85 11 Mar 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Conegate Limited v Hm Customs and Excise. R-121/85; [1986] EUECJ R-121/85 11 Mar 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Milac v Hauptzollamt Lorrach (Rec 1986,P 1027) (Judgment) C-10/85 12 Mar 1986 ECJ European Â Milac Gmbh, Gross Und Aussenhandel v Hauptzollamt Lorrach. R-10/85; [1986] EUECJ R-10/85 12 Mar 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ministere Public Against Xavier Mirepoix. R-54/85; [1986] EUECJ R-54/85 13 Mar 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Antonino Sinatra v Fonds National De Retraite Des Ouvriers Mineurs (Fnrom). R-296/84; [1986] EUECJ R-296/84 13 Mar 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Sinatra v Fnrom (Rec 1986,P 1047) (Judgment) C-296/84 13 Mar 1986 ECJ European Â Ministere Public v Mirepoix (Rec 1986,P 1067) (Judgment) C-54/85 13 Mar 1986 ECJ European Â Sergio v Commission C-64/86; [1986] EUECJ C-64/86R 14 Mar 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â United Kingdom v Parliament (Order) C-23/86; [1986] EUECJ C-23/86R 17 Mar 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ethicon Gmbh v Hauptzollamt Itzehoe R-58/85; [1986] EUECJ R-58/85 18 Mar 1986 ECJ European, Customs and Excise ECJ Suspension of customs duties - Yarn of polyglycollic acid. [ Bailii ] Â Meggle v Council and Commission (Rec 1986,P 1101) (Judgment) C-244/83; [1986] EUECJ C-244/83 18 Mar 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Â Spijkers v Gebroeders Benedik Abattoir; ECJ 18-Mar-1986 - [1986] 2 CMLR 296; C-24/85; [1986] ECR 1119; R-24/85; [1986] EUECJ R-24/85 Â Â Commission v Belgium; ECJ 18-Mar-1986 - C-85/85; [1986] EUECJ C-85/85 Â Costacurta v Commission (Rec 1986,P 1231) (Order) C-78/86; [1986] EUECJ C-78/86R; [1988] EUECJ C-78/86 20 Mar 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Germany (Rec 1986,P 1171) (Judgment) C-303/84; [1986] EUECJ C-303/84 20 Mar 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Procureur De La Republique v Gerard Tissier. R-35/85; [1986] EUECJ R-35/85 20 Mar 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Netherlands (Rec 1986,P 1219) (Judgment) C-72/85; [1986] EUECJ C-72/85 20 Mar 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1986,P 1199) (Judgment) C-17/85; [1986] EUECJ C-17/85 20 Mar 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Bevere v Commission (Rec 1986,P 1187) (Judgment) C-8/85; [1986] EUECJ C-8/85 20 Mar 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Procureur De La Republique v Tissier (Rec 1986,P 1207) (Judgment) C-35/85 20 Mar 1986 ECJ European Â Cauet and Joliot v Commission (Rec 1986,P 1237) (Order) C-48/86; [1986] EUECJ C-48/86R 9 Apr 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Belgium (Rec 1986,P 1247) (Judgment) C-237/84; [1986] EUECJ C-237/84 15 Apr 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Arposol v Council (Rec 1986,P 1331) (Order) C-55/86 22 Apr 1986 ECJ European Â Dillinger Huttenwerke v Commission (Rec 1986,P 1319) (Order) C-360/85; [1986] EUECJ C-360/85R; [1987] EUECJ C-360/85 22 Apr 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Antonio Ferraioli v Deutsche Bundespost. R-153/84; [1986] EUECJ R-153/84 23 Apr 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Les Verts v Parliament (Rec 1986,P 1339) (Sv86-529 Fi86-529) (Judgment) C-294/83; [1986] EUECJ C-294/83 23 Apr 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Sideradria v Commission (Rec 1986,P 1415) (Judgment) C-204/84; [1986] EUECJ C-204/84 23 Apr 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ferraioli v Deutsche Bundespost (Rec 1986,P 1401) (Judgment) C-153/84 23 Apr 1986 ECJ European Â Bernardi v Parliament (Rec 1986,P 1375) (Judgment) C-150/84; [1986] EUECJ C-150/84 23 Apr 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1986,P 1489) (Judgment) C-158/85; [1986] EUECJ C-158/85 30 Apr 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Akzo v Commission (Rec 1986,P 1503) (Order) C-62/86 30 Apr 1986 ECJ European Â Greece v Commission (Rec 1986,P 1497) (Order) C-57/86 30 Apr 1986 ECJ European Â Commission v France (Rec 1986,P 1475) (Judgment) C-96/85; [1986] EUECJ C-96/85 30 Apr 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Criminal Proceedings Against Claude Muller And Others. R-304/84; [1986] EUECJ R-304/84 6 May 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ministere Public v Muller (Judgment) C-304/84 6 May 1986 ECJ European Â Nuovo Campsider v Commission (Rec 1986,P 1531) (Judgment) C-25/85; [1985] EUECJ C-25/85R; [1986] EUECJ C-25/85 6 May 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Barcella v Commission (Rec 1986,P 1541) (Judgment) C-191/84; [1986] EUECJ C-191/84 7 May 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Emir Guel v Regierungsprasident Duesseldorf. R-131/85; [1986] EUECJ R-131/85 7 May 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Rihoux v Commission (Rec 1986,P 1555) (Judgment) C-52/85; [1986] EUECJ C-52/85 7 May 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Procureur De La Republique v Perles Eurotool And Others. R-156/85; [1986] EUECJ R-156/85 7 May 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Procureur De La Republique v Perles Eurotool (Judgment) C-156/85 7 May 1986 ECJ European Â Gul v Regierungsprasident Dusseldorf (Rec 1986,P 1573) (Sv86-569 Fi86-569) (Judgment) C-131/85 7 May 1986 ECJ European Â Â Bilka-Kaufhaus v Webers Von Hartz; ECJ 13-May-1986 - [1986] ECR 1607; [1987] ICR 110; C-170/84; R-170/84; [1986] EUECJ R-170/84; [1984] IRLR 317 Â Handelsonderneming J Mikx Bv v Minister Van Economische Zaken C-90/85; R-90/85; [1986] EUECJ R-90/85 15 May 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Oryzomyli Kavallas OEE and others v Commission of the European Communities [1986] EUECJ C-160/84 15 May 1986 ECJ European, Customs and Excise Remission of import duties - General equitable provision in Article 13 of Council Regulation No 1430/79 of 2 July 1979. 1 Cites [ Bailii ] Â Â Johnston v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary; ECJ 15-May-1986 - C-222/84; [1986] ECR 1651; [1987] QB 129; [1986] 3 WLR 1038; [1987] ICR 83; [1986] 3 All ER 135; R-222/84; [1986] EUECJ R-222/84 Â Societe Cooperative Des Laboratoires De Pharmacie Legia And Louis Gyselinx Et Fils Cophalux v Minister For Health. R-88/85; [1986] EUECJ R-88/85 27 May 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Legia v Ministre De La Sante (Rec 1986,P 1707) (Judgment) C-87/85 27 May 1986 ECJ European Â Commission v France (Rec 1986,P 1725) (Sv86-621 Fi86-621) (Judgment) C-307/84; [1986] EUECJ C-307/84 3 Jun 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Â Kempf v Staatssecretaris Van Justitie; ECJ 3-Jun-1986 - C-139/85; R-139/85; [1986] EUECJ R-139/85; [1986] ECR 1741 Â Groupe Des Droites Europeennes v Parliament (Rec 1986,P 1753) (Order) C-78/85; [1986] EUECJ C-78/85 4 Jun 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1986,P 1759) (Judgment) C-103/84; [1986] EUECJ C-103/84 5 Jun 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Usinor v Commission (Rec 1986,P 1777) (Judgment) C-81/85; [1986] EUECJ C-81/85 10 Jun 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ferriere San Carlo v Commission C-235/82 11 Jun 1986 ECJ European Â Miethe v Bundesanstalt Fur Arbeit (Rec 1986,P 1837) (Judgment) C-1/85 12 Jun 1986 ECJ European Â Michele Bertini And Giuseppe Bisignani And Others v Regione Lazio And Unita Sanitarie Locali. R-258/85; [1986] EUECJ R-258/85 12 Jun 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Hauptzollamt Itzehoe v Repenning (Rec 1986,P 1873) (Judgment) C-183/85 12 Jun 1986 ECJ European Â Bernhard Schloh v Auto Controle Technique Sprl. R-50/85; [1986] EUECJ R-50/85 12 Jun 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Sommerlatte v Commission (Rec 1986,P 1805) (Judgment) C-229/84; [1986] EUECJ C-229/84 12 Jun 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â A. A. Ten Holder v Direction De La Nieuwe Algemene Bedrijfsvereniging. C-302/84; R-302/84; [1986] EUECJ R-302/84 12 Jun 1986 ECJ European ECJ Article 13(2)(a) of regulation no 1408/71 must be interpreted as meaning that a worker who ceases to carry on an activity in the territory of a member state and who has not gone to work in the territory of another member state continues to be subject to the legislation of the member state in which he was last employed, regardless of the length of time which has elapsed since the termination of the activity in question and the end of the employment relationship. The effect of determining that a given member state ' s legislation is the legislation applicable to a worker pursuant to article 13 (2)(a) of regulation no 1408/71 is that only the legislation of that member state is applicable to him. [ Bailii ] Â Hauptzollamt Itzehoe v HJ Repenning Gmbh R-183/85; [1986] EUECJ R-183/85 12 Jun 1986 ECJ European, Customs and Excise ECJ Article 3(1) of Council Regulation No 1224/80 on the valuation of goods for customs purposes must be interpreted as meaning that where goods bought free of defects are damaged before being released for free circulation the price actually paid or payable, on which the transaction value is based, must be reduced in proportion to the damage suffered. Council Regulation No 1224/80 3(1) 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Bertini v Regione Lazio (Rec 1986,P 1885) (Judgment) C-98/85 12 Jun 1986 ECJ European Â Schloh v Auto Controle Technique (Rec 1986,P 1855) (Judgment) C-50/85 12 Jun 1986 ECJ European Â Bat and Reynolds v Commission (Order) C-142/84; [1987] EUECJ C-142/84 18 Jun 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Luigi Brugnoni And Roberto Ruffinengo v Cassa Di Risparmio Di Genova E Imperia. R-157/85; [1986] EUECJ R-157/85 24 Jun 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Developpement Sa and Clemessy v Commission (Rec 1986,P 1907) (Sv86-637 Fi86-637) (Judgment) C-267/82; [1986] EUECJ C-267/82 24 Jun 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Brugnoni and Ruffinengo v Cassa Di Risparmio Di Genova E Imperia (Rec 1986,P 2013) (Judgment) C-157/85 24 Jun 1986 ECJ European Â Anterist v Credit Lyonnais C-22/85 24 Jun 1986 ECJ European Europa Since article 17 of the Convention of 27 september 1968 embodies the principle of the parties 'autonomy to determine the court or courts with jurisdiction, the third paragraph of that provision must be interpreted in such a way as to respect the parties' common intention when the contract was concluded. Therefore, if an agreement conferring jurisdiction is to be regarded as having been 'concluded for the benefit of only one of the parties', the common intention to confer an advantage on one of the parties must be clear from the terms of the jurisdiction clause or from all the evidence to be found therein or from the circumstances in which the contract was concluded. It follows that an agreement conferring jurisdiction is not to be regarded as falling within the third paragraph of article 17 of the convention where all that is established is that the parties have agreed that a court or the courts of the contracting state in which that party is domiciled are to have jurisdiction. Â Drake v Chief Adjudication Officer (Rec 1986,P 1995) (Judgment) C-150/85 24 Jun 1986 ECJ European Â Akzo Chemie v Commission (Rec 1986,P 1965) (Sv86-649 Fi86-649) (Judgment) C-53/85; [1986] EUECJ C-53/85 24 Jun 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Malt Gmbh v Hauptzollamt Duesseldorf. R-236/84; [1986] EUECJ R-236/84 24 Jun 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Rudolf Anterist v Credit Lyonnais. R-22/85; [1986] EUECJ R-22/85 24 Jun 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Malt v Hauptzollamt Dusseldorf (Rec 1986,P 1923) (Judgment) C-236/84 24 Jun 1986 ECJ European Â Groothandel In, Im En Export Van Eieren En Eiprodukten Wulro Bv Against A Decision Of The Tuchtgerecht Of The Stichting Scharreleieren-Controle. R-130/85; [1986] EUECJ R-130/85 25 Jun 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Wulro (Rec 1986,P 2035) (Judgment) C-130/85 25 Jun 1986 ECJ European Â Nicolet Instrument Gmbh v Hauptzollamt Frankfurt Am Main Flughafen. R-203/85; [1986] EUECJ R-203/85 26 Jun 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Nicolet Instrument v Hauptzollamt Frankfurt Am Main-Flughafen C-203/85 26 Jun 1986 ECJ European Â Greece v Council and Commission (Rec 1986,P 2071) (Order) C-129/86 27 Jun 1986 ECJ European Â Epicheiriseon Metalleftikon Viomichanikon Kai Naftiliakon and Others v Council and Commission (Rec 1986,P 2063) (Order) C-121/86 27 Jun 1986 ECJ European Â Gisela Rummler v Dato-Druck Gmbh. R-237/85; [1986] EUECJ R-237/85 1 Jul 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Gisela Rummler v Dato-Druck [1987] ICR 774; C-237/85 1 Jul 1986 ECJ European, Discrimination In general Directive 75/117 on the approximation of the laws of the member states relating to the application of the principle of equal pay for men and women does not prohibit the use, in a job classification system as referred to in the second paragraph of article 1, for the purpose of determining rates of pay, of the criterion of muscular demand or muscular effort or that of the heaviness of the work if, in view of the nature of the tasks involved, the work to be performed does require the use of a certain degree of physical strength, so long as the system as a whole, by taking into account other criteria, precludes any discrimination on grounds of sex. In particular, it follows from the directive that: (a) the criteria governing pay-rate classification must ensure that work which is objectively the same attracts the same rate of pay whether it is performed by a man or a woman; (b) the use of values reflecting the average performance of workers of one sex as a basis for determining the extent to which work makes demands or requires effort or whether it is heavy constitutes a form of discrimination on grounds of sex, contrary to the directive; (c) in order for a job classification system not to be discriminatory as a whole, it must, in so far as the nature of the tasks carried out in the undertaking permits, take into account criteria for which workers of each sex may show particular aptitude. 1 Citers Â Usinor v Commission (Rec 1986,P 2079) (Judgment) C-185/85; [1986] EUECJ C-185/85 1 Jul 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Council Des Gouverneurs De La Eib (Rec 1986,P 2215) (Order) C-85/86 3 Jul 1986 ECJ European Â Â Deborah Lawrie-Blum v Land Baden-Wuerttemberg; ECJ 3-Jul-1986 - C-66/85; R-66/85; [1986] EUECJ R-66/85; [1986] ECR 2121; [1987] ICR 483 Â France v Parliament (Rec 1986,P 2149) (Order) C-358/85 3 Jul 1986 ECJ European Â Council v Parliament (Rec 1986,P 2155) (Sv86-673 Fi86-673) (Judgment) C-34/86; [1986] EUECJ C-34/86 3 Jul 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Hans-Dieter And Ute Kerrutt v Finanzamt Monchengladbach Mitte. R-73/85; [1986] EUECJ R-73/85 8 Jul 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Kerrutt v Finanzamt Monchengladbach-Mitte (Judgment) C-73/85 8 Jul 1986 ECJ European Â Spain v Council and Commission (Rec 1986,P 2241) (Order) C-119/86 9 Jul 1986 ECJ European Â Manchester Steel v Commission (Rec 1986,P 2351) (Judgment) C-46/85; [1986] EUECJ C-46/85 10 Jul 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Belgium v Commission (Rec 1986,P 2321) (Judgment) C-40/85; [1986] EUECJ C-40/85 10 Jul 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Pressler-Hoeft v Court Of Auditors (Rec 1986,P 2459) (Judgment) C-255/85; [1986] EUECJ C-255/85 10 Jul 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Hauptzollamt Osnabruck v Kleiderwerke Hela Lampe (Rec 1986,P 2449) (Judgment) C-222/85 10 Jul 1986 ECJ European Â Segers v Bedrijfsvereniging Voor Bank- En Verzekeringswezen, Groothandel En Vrije Beroepen C-79/85 10 Jul 1986 ECJ European Â Wybot v Faure (Judgment) C-149/85 10 Jul 1986 ECJ European Â Danhuber v Balm (Rec 1986,P 2413) (Judgment) C-151/85 10 Jul 1986 ECJ European Â Trenti v Esc (Rec 1986,P 2427) (Judgment) C-153/85; [1986] EUECJ C-153/85 10 Jul 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Roger Wybot v Edgar Faure And Others. R-149/85; [1986] EUECJ R-149/85 10 Jul 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ufade v Council and Commission (Rec 1986,P 2483) (Order) C-117/86; [1986] EUECJ C-117/86R; [1986] EUECJ C-117/86 10 Jul 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Defi v Commission (Rec 1986,P 2469) (Judgment) C-282/85; [1986] EUECJ C-282/85 10 Jul 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Carron v Germany (Rec 1986,P 2437) (Judgment) C-198/85 10 Jul 1986 ECJ European Â Spain v Commission (Rec 1986,P 2495) (Order) C-128/86 10 Jul 1986 ECJ European Â Fernand Carron v Federal Republic Of Germany. R-198/85; [1986] EUECJ R-198/85 10 Jul 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Darras and Tostain (Rec 1986,P 2253) (Judgment) C-95/84 10 Jul 1986 ECJ European Â Boriello v Alain Darras And Dominique Tostain R-95/84; [1986] EUECJ R-95/84 10 Jul 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â D. H. M. Segers v Bestuur Van De Bedrijfsvereniging Voor Bank En Verzekeringswezen, Groothandel En Vrije Beroepen. R-79/85; [1986] EUECJ R-79/85 10 Jul 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â M. E. S. Luijten v Raad Van Arbeid. R-60/85; [1986] EUECJ R-60/85 10 Jul 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Belgium v Commission (Rec 1986,P 2263) (Sv86-691 Fi86-691) (Judgment) C-234/84; [1986] EUECJ C-234/84 10 Jul 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Luijten v Raad Van Arbeid (Rec 1986,P 2365) (Judgment) C-60/85 10 Jul 1986 ECJ European Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1986,P 2291) (Judgment) C-235/84; [1986] EUECJ C-235/84 10 Jul 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Firma E. Danhuber v Bundesanstalt Fuer Landwirtschaftliche Marktordnung. R-151/85; [1986] EUECJ R-151/85 10 Jul 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Hauptzollamt Osnabrueck v Kleiderwerke Hela Lampe Gmbh and Co. Kg. R-222/85; [1986] EUECJ R-222/85 10 Jul 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Licata v Esc (Rec 1986,P 2305) (Judgment) C-270/84; [1984] EUECJ C-270/84R; [1986] EUECJ C-270/84 10 Jul 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Greece v Commission C-214/86 25 Aug 1986 ECJ European Â M v Council (Rec 1986,P 2511) (Order) C-175/86 5 Sep 1986 ECJ European Â Commission v Germany (Rec 1986,P 2549) (Judgment) C-48/85; [1986] EUECJ C-48/85 18 Sep 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Germany (Rec 1986,P 2519) (Judgment) C-116/82; [1986] EUECJ C-116/82 18 Sep 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Groupe Des Droites Europeennes v Parliament (Rec 1986,P 2579) (Order) C-221/86; [1986] EUECJ C-221/86R; [1986] EUECJ C-221/86R 18 Sep 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Du Besset v Council (Rec 1986,P 2619) (Order) C-130/86; [1986] EUECJ C-130/86 23 Sep 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Akzo Chemie v Commission (Rec 1986,P 2585) (Sv86-715 Fi86-715) (Judgment) C-5/85; [1986] EUECJ C-5/85 23 Sep 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Montedipe v Commission (Rec 1986,P 2623) (Order) C-213/86; [1986] EUECJ C-213/86R 24 Sep 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Greece v Commission (Rec 1986,P 2631) (Order) C-214/86 24 Sep 1986 ECJ European Â Breda-Geomineraria v Commission (Rec 1986,P 2639) (Order) C-231/86; [1986] EUECJ C-231/86R 26 Sep 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Allo v Commission (Rec 1986,P 2687) (Judgment) C-176/83 30 Sep 1986 ECJ European Â Agostini v Commission (Rec 1986,P 2709) (Judgment) C-233/83 30 Sep 1986 ECJ European Â Ambrosetti v Commission (Rec 1986,P 2729) (Judgment) C-247/83 30 Sep 1986 ECJ European Â Delhez v Commission (Rec 1986,P 2749) (Judgment) C-264/83 30 Sep 1986 ECJ European Â Culmsee and Others v Esc (Rec 1986,P 2667) (Judgment) C-175/83 30 Sep 1986 ECJ European Â Amman and Others v Council (Rec 1986,P 2647) (Judgment) C-174/83 30 Sep 1986 ECJ European Â V R v Commission (Rec 1986,P 2775) (Judgment) C-75/85; [1986] EUECJ C-75/85 2 Oct 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Sa Nicolas Corman Et Fils v Office Belge De L'Economie Et De L'Agriculture (Obea). R-143/85; [1986] EUECJ R-143/85 8 Oct 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ministere Public v Maniglier (Rec 1986,P 2917) (Judgment) C-320/85 8 Oct 1986 ECJ European Â S R Industries v Administration Des Douanes (Rec 1986,P 2929) (Judgment) C-385/85 8 Oct 1986 ECJ European Â Criminal Proceedings Against P. Maniglier. R-320/85; [1986] EUECJ R-320/85 8 Oct 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â S. R. Industries v Administration Des Douanes. R-385/85; [1986] EUECJ R-385/85 8 Oct 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Staatsanwaltschaft Freiburg v Franz Keller. R-234/85; [1986] EUECJ R-234/85 8 Oct 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Nordbutter v Germany (Rec 1986,P 2831) (Judgment) C-9/85 8 Oct 1986 ECJ European Â Leussink-Brummelhuis v Commission (Rec 1986,P 2801) (Judgment) C-169/83; [1986] EUECJ C-169/83 8 Oct 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Christ-Clemen v Commission (Rec 1986,P 2853) (Judgment) C-91/85; [1986] EUECJ C-91/85 8 Oct 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Corman v Obea (Rec 1986,P 2873) (Judgment) C-143/85 8 Oct 1986 ECJ European Â Criminal Proceedings Against Keller (Rec 1986,P 2897) (Judgment) C-234/85 8 Oct 1986 ECJ European Â Nordbutter Gmbh and Co. Kg v Federal Republic Of Germany. R-9/85; [1986] EUECJ R-9/85 8 Oct 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Tokyo Juki Industrial v Council and Commission (Rec 1986,P 2965) (Order) C-299/85; [1986] EUECJ C-299/85 15 Oct 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1986,P 2945) (Judgment) C-168/85; [1986] EUECJ C-168/85 15 Oct 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Groupe Des Droites Europeennes v Parliament (Rec 1986,P 2969) (Order) C-221/86 16 Oct 1986 ECJ European Â Fabbro v Commission (Rec 1986,P 2983) (Judgment) C-269/84; [1984] EUECJ C-269/84R 21 Oct 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Metro v Commission (Rec 1986,P 3021) (Judgment) C-75/84; [1986] EUECJ C-75/84 22 Oct 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Vaysse v Commission (Rec 1986,P 3131) (Judgment) C-26/85; [1986] EUECJ C-26/85 23 Oct 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Van Roosmalen v Bestuur Van De Bedrijfsvereniging Voor De Gezondheid (Rec 1986,P 3097) (Judgment) C-300/84; R-300/84; [1986] EUECJ R-300/84 23 Oct 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Schwiering v Court Of Auditors (Rec 1986,P 3177) (Judgment) C-142/85; [1986] EUECJ C-142/85 23 Oct 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Mr Driancourt, Commissioner Of Police, Thouars, Carrying Out The Duties Of Public Prosecutor v Michel Cognet. R-355/85; [1986] EUECJ R-355/85 23 Oct 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Schwiering v Court Of Auditors (Rec 1986,P 3199) (Judgment) C-321/85; [1986] EUECJ C-321/85 23 Oct 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Hoyer and Others v Court Of Auditors (Rec 1986,P 3215) (Judgment) C-322/85; [1986] EUECJ C-322/85 23 Oct 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Driancourt v Cognet (Rec 1986,P 3231) (Judgment) C-355/85 23 Oct 1986 ECJ European Â Hamai v Court Of Justice (Rec 1986,P 3157) (Judgment) C-92/85; [1986] EUECJ C-92/85 23 Oct 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1986,P 3245) (Judgment) C-160/85; [1986] EUECJ C-160/85 5 Nov 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ufade v Council and Commission (Rec 1986,P 3255) (Order) C-117/86 5 Nov 1986 ECJ European Â British Leyland v Commission (Judgment) C-226/84; [1986] EUECJ C-226/84 11 Nov 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Irish Grain Board v Minister For Agriculture (Rec 1986,P 3309) (Judgment) C-254/85 11 Nov 1986 ECJ European Â Irish Grain Board (Trading) Limited (In Liquidation) v Minister For Agriculture. R-254/85; [1986] EUECJ R-254/85 11 Nov 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Spa Iveco Fiat v Van Hool Nv. R-313/85; [1986] EUECJ R-313/85 11 Nov 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Richter v Commission (Rec 1986,P 3439) (Judgment) C-330/85; [1986] EUECJ C-330/85 13 Nov 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Fadex v Commission (Rec 1986,P 3387) (Judgment) C-220/85; [1986] EUECJ C-220/85 13 Nov 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Nederlandse Bakkerij Stichting And Others v Edah Bv. R-159/85; [1986] EUECJ R-159/85 13 Nov 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Luttgens v Commission (Rec 1986,P 3417) (Judgment) C-267/85; [1986] EUECJ C-267/85 13 Nov 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Becker v Commission C-232/85; [1986] EUECJ C-232/85 13 Nov 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Nederlandse Bakkerij Stichting v Edah (Judgment) C-80/85 13 Nov 1986 ECJ European Â Cerafel v Le Campion (Rec 1986,P 3513) (Judgment) C-218/85 25 Nov 1986 ECJ European Â Direction Generale Des Impots Et Procureur De La Republique v Marie-Louise Forest, Nee Sangoy, And Minoterie Forest Sa. R-148/85; [1986] EUECJ R-148/85 25 Nov 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Association Comite Economique Agricole Regional Fruits Et Legumes De Bretagne v A. Le Campion. R-218/85; [1986] EUECJ R-218/85 25 Nov 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Direction Generale Des Impots v Forest (Rec 1986,P 3449) (Judgment) C-148/85 25 Nov 1986 ECJ European Â Klensch v Secretaire D'Etat (Rec 1986,P 3477) (Sv86-729 Fi86-729) (Judgment) C-201/85 25 Nov 1986 ECJ European Â Marthe Klensch And Others v Secretaire D'Etat A L'Agriculture Et A La Viticulture. R-202/85; [1986] EUECJ R-202/85 25 Nov 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Maas v Bundesanstalt Fur Landwirtschaftliche Marktordnung (Rec 1986,P 3537) (Judgment) C-21/85 27 Nov 1986 ECJ European Â A. Maas and Co. Nv v Bundesanstalt Fuer Landwirtschaftliche Marktordnung. R-21/85; [1986] EUECJ R-21/85 27 Nov 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Strack v Parliament (Judgment) C-155/85; [1986] EUECJ C-155/85 27 Nov 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Belgium (Rec 1986,P 3645) (Judgment) C-239/85; [1986] EUECJ C-239/85 2 Dec 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission Of The European Communities v United Kingdom Of Great Britain And Northern Ireland. C-23/84; [1986] EUECJ C-23/84 2 Dec 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission Of The European Communities v United Kingdom Of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (Judgment) Case 23/84 2 Dec 1986 ECJ European, Agriculture Europa Agriculture - common organization of the market - milk and milk products - special rights of the milk marketing boards - price differentiation for whole milk according to its intended use - permissible - reference to the intended use of a processed product - not permissible (council regulation no 1422/78, art. 9 (1); commission regulation no 1565/79, art. 6 (2)) Â Commission v Germany (Rec 1986,P 3879) (Judgment) C-179/85; [1986] EUECJ C-179/85 4 Dec 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Germany (Rec 1986,P 3755) (Sv86-741 Fi86-741) (Judgment) C-205/84; [1986] EUECJ C-205/84 4 Dec 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Ireland (Rec 1986,P 3817) (Judgment) C-206/84; [1986] EUECJ C-206/84 4 Dec 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Netherlands State v Federatie Nederlandse Vakbeweging (Judgment) C-71/85 4 Dec 1986 ECJ European Â Commission v France (Rec 1986,P 3663) (Judgment) C-220/83; [1986] EUECJ C-220/83 4 Dec 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Denmark (Rec 1986,P 3713) (Judgment) C-252/83; [1986] EUECJ C-252/83 4 Dec 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Sideradria v Commission (Rec 1986,P 3917) (Judgment) C-41/85; [1986] EUECJ C-41/85 10 Dec 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Birra Dreher v Riseria Modenese, Council and Commission (Rec 1986,P 3901) (Third-Party Proceedings) C-267/80 10 Dec 1986 ECJ European Â Suss v Commission (Rec 1986,P 3929) (Order) C-25/86; [1986] EUECJ C-25/86 11 Dec 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1986,P 3953) (Judgment) C-200/85; [1986] EUECJ C-200/85 16 Dec 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Greece (Rec 1986,P 3935) (Judgment) C-124/85; [1986] EUECJ C-124/85 16 Dec 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Belkacem v Germany (Rec 1986,P 3975) (Order) C-276/86; [1986] EUECJ C-276/86 17 Dec 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Technointorg v Commission (Rec 1986,P 3979) (Order) C-294/86 17 Dec 1986 ECJ European Â Commission Of The European Communities v United Kingdom Of Great Britain And Northern Ireland. C-93/85; [1986] EUECJ C-93/85 18 Dec 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Kotsonis v Council (Rec 1986,P 3989) (Judgment) C-246/84; [1986] EUECJ C-246/84 18 Dec 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission of The European Communities v United Kingdom Of Great Britain And Northern Ireland (Judgment) Case 93/85 18 Dec 1986 ECJ European Europa Own resources of the European communities - establishment and making available by the member states - request by the commission for advance payment - binding on the member states (council regulation no 2891/77, art. 10 (2) and art. 12 (2)) 2. Own resources of the European communities - establishment and making available by the member states - crediting the commission ' s account -delay in crediting amounts - obligation to pay default interest - error of a member state as to the extent of its obligations - no effect (council regulation no 2891/77, art. 11) 1. In view of the autonomy conferred on the commission with regard to the management of own resources and of the allocation of tasks as between the commission and the member states under the system established by the decision of 21 April 1970 and regulation no 2891/77, the exercise of the power conferred on the commission by article 10 (2) of that regulation, if necessary, to invite the member states to bring forward by one month the entering of resources other than vat resources on the basis of the information available to them on the 15th of the same month cannot be dependent on the agreement of the various member states, for this would deprive article 10 (2) of its effectiveness. Since only the commission can assess whether it is necessary to bring forward the entering of own resources, the member states, which are responsible only for collecting the resources and making them available but not for their management, are under a duty to bring forward the entry of own resources as requested without expressing their agreement or disagreement. That finding is not affected by the fact that article 12 (2) of that regulation gives the commission an alternative means of resolving any cash-flow problems, since it is for the commission alone to choose between the two alternatives. 2. The very wording of article 11 of regulation no 2891/77 shows that default interest is payable in respect of 'any delay' in crediting own resources to the commission's account, regardless of the reason for the delay, and hence a member state cannot escape paying that interest by pleading that it was not satisfied that an invitation to bring forward the payment of own resources pursuant to article 10 (2) of the regulation was binding. The rate of that default interest is set at a flat rate by article 11 with regard to all the member states at a level which cannot be varied according to the particular circumstances of each individual case. Â Â Spa Villa Banfi v Regione Toscana and others; ECJ 18-Dec-1986 - C-312/85 Â Vag France Sa v Etablissements Magne Sa. R-10/86; [1986] EUECJ R-10/86 18 Dec 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Vag France SA v Etablissements Magne SA C-10/86 18 Dec 1986 ECJ European Europa 1. Competition - agreements, decisions and concerted practices -agreements between undertakings - automatic nullity - effects on those parts of the agreement which are not incompatible with article 85 (1) - matter for the national court to decide - application of national law (EEC treaty, art. 85 (1) and (2)) 2. Competition - agreements, decisions and concerted practices -prohibition - exemption by categories - regulation no 123/85 - purpose and scope (EEC treaty, art. 85 (1) to (3); commission regulation no 123/85). 1. The consequences of the fact that those contractual provisions which are incompatible with article 85 (1) of the EEC treaty are automatically void for all other parts of the agreement or for other obligations flowing from it are not a matter for community law. It is for the national court to determine in accordance with the relevant national law the extent and consequences of the nullity of certain contractual provisions by virtue of article 85 (2). 2. Commission regulation no 123/85 on the application of article 85 (3) of the EEC treaty to certain categories of motor vehicle distribution and servicing agreements does not lay down any mandatory provisions directly affecting the validity or the content of contractual provisions or oblige the contracting parties to adapt the contents of their agreement but merely lays down conditions which, if they are satisfied, exclude certain contractual provisions from the prohibition and consequently from the automatic nullity provided for in article 85 (1) of the EEC treaty. Â Spa Villa Banfi v Regione Toscana And Others. R-312/85; [1986] EUECJ R-312/85 18 Dec 1986 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission of the European Communities v Jan Zoubek C-426/85; [1986] EUECJ C-426/85 18 Dec 1986 ECJ European, Arbitration Europa Procedure - action brought before the court under an arbitration clause -jurisdiction to hear and determine a counterclaim - basis - conditions (ECSC treaty, art. 42; EEC treaty, art. 181; EAEC treaty, art. 153). Although under an arbitration clause the court is called upon to resolve a dispute in accordance with the national law governing the contract, the question whether it has jurisdiction to hear and determine a counterclaim and to consider whether it is admissible must be assessed solely in the light of article 42 of the ECSC treaty, article 181 of the EEC treaty, article 153 of the EAEC treaty and the court ' s rules of procedure. The jurisdiction of the court, where it is based on an arbitration clause, derogates from the ordinary rules of law and must therefore be given a restrictive interpretation. The court may hear and determine only claims arising from the contract containing the arbitration clause, which was concluded with the community, or claims that are directly connected with the obligations arising from that contract. [ Bailii ] Â Â Phoenix General Insurance Co of Greece SA v Halvanon Insurance Co Ltd; CA 1987 - [1988] QB 216; [1987] 2 All ER 152 Â Â Vicom/Computer-related invention; EPOBA 1987 - [1987] OJ EPO 14; (1986) T208/84; [1987] 2 EPOR 74 Â Porzelack KG v Porzelack (UK) Ltd [1987] 1 WLR 420; [1987] 1 All ER 1074 1987 Brown-Wilkinson VC European, Costs When considering an application for security for costs against a litigant resident in the EU, the courts must allow for the new additional scope for enforcement of any judgment under the 1982 Act. In this case, an order for security for costs against a plaintiff German company was refused because these additional powers made it unnecessary. The court should not go into the merits of the claim in detail unless it can clearly be demonstrated that there is a high degree of probability of success or failure. Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982$ 2(1) 1 Cites 1 Citers Â Conegate Ltd v HM Customs and Excise [1987] QB 254 1987 Customs and Excise, European Even though the terms of paragraph 6 of schedule 3 to CEMA appear to give the court in forfeiture proceedings no choice but to condemn the goods if they are 'liable to forfeiture' under the Act, the court must refuse to do this if to do so would be in breach of the applicant's rights under Community law. Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 Sch3 Para 6 1 Citers Â Germany v Commission C-278/84; [1984] EUECJ C-278/84R; [1987] EUECJ C-278/84 14 Jan 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Zuckerfabrik Bedburg v Council and Commission C-281/84; [1987] EUECJ C-281/84 14 Jan 1987 ECJ European 1. Article 215 of the Treaty does not prevent the court from being asked to declare the community liable for imminent damage foreseeable with sufficient certainty even if the damage cannot yet be precisely assessed. 2. The lawfulness of Regulations nos 855/84 and 2677/84 cannot be called in question with regard to article 39 (1) of the treaty since article 39(1)(b) cannot be interpreted as guaranteeing the processing industry a certain profit margin and the other objectives referred to in article 39 have not been jeopardized by the modification of the representative rates by the contested regulations. Neither the monetary compensatory amounts nor the representative rates are intended to guarantee that each individual trader will receive for his products a price that, expressed in the national currency, does not vary, so that a reduction of the value in national currency of the stocks held by traders following a revaluation of the representative rates intended to approximate those rates to the central rates cannot in itself constitute interference with the property rights of those traders. 3. In order to consider whether a provision of community law is in conformity with the principle of proportionality it is necessary to check whether the measures imposed by the provision are appropriate for achieving the intended objective and whether they exceed the limits of what is necessary to that end. 4. The community is not liable to sugar-processing undertakings in a member state for losses they suffer as a result of the alteration of the representative rates by regulations nos 855/84 and 2677/84, since the alteration and the terms of its implementation were not unforeseeable, met the general interest and contained transitional measures intended to mitigate the effects for the said undertakings. [ Bailii ] Â Hassan Shenavai v Klaus Kreischer R-266/85; [1987] EUECJ R-266/85; [1987] ECR 239; [1987] 3 CMLR 782 15 Jan 1987 ECJ European ECJ Whereas in the case of an action based on an obligation under a contract of employment or another contract with the same particularities for work other than on a self-employed basis the relevant obligation for the purpose of determining the place of performance within the meaning of article 5(1) of the convention of 27 September 1968 is the obligation which characterizes that contract, the position is different where no such particularities exist, as in the case of most contracts, where the general rule applies that the relevant obligation is that on which the plaintiff's action is based. In a dispute concerning proceedings for the recovery of fees commenced by an architect commissioned to draw up plans for the building of houses, therefore, the obligation to be taken into consideration is the contractual obligation which forms the actual basis of the legal proceedings. 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Misset v Council C-152/85; [1987] EUECJ C-152/85 15 Jan 1987 ECJ European ECJ (Judgment) Officials - Admissibility - Period allowed for commencing proceedings. [ Bailii ] Â Â Ainsworth v Commission and Council; ECJ 15-Jan-1987 - C-271/83; [1987] EUECJ C-271/83 Â Commission v Italy C-365/85; [1987] EUECJ C-365/85 15 Jan 1987 ECJ European ECJ Failure to adopt within the prescribed period the implementing measures provided for in directives on the marketing of straight feedingstuffs) [ Bailii ] Â Krohn v Commission (Rec 1987,P 97) (Judgment) C-175/84 15 Jan 1987 ECJ European Â Gaec De La Segaude v Council and Commission (Rec 1987,P 123) (Judgment) C-253/84; [1987] EUECJ C-253/84 15 Jan 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Enital v Council and Commission (Rec 1987,P 267) (Order) C-304/86 16 Jan 1987 ECJ European Â Powell v Commission (Rec 1987,P 339) (Judgment) C-219/84; [1985] EUECJ C-219/84; [1987] EUECJ C-219/84 21 Jan 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Rienzi v Commission (Rec 1987,P 315) (Judgment) C-76/84; [1987] EUECJ C-76/84 21 Jan 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Valsabbia v Commission (Rec 1987,P 353) (Judgment) C-268/84; [1987] EUECJ C-268/84 21 Jan 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Stroghili v Court Of Auditors (Rec 1987,P 389) (Judgment) C-204/85; [1987] EUECJ C-204/85 21 Jan 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Control Data v Commission (Rec 1987,P 275) (Judgment) C-13/84; [1987] EUECJ C-13/84 21 Jan 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Verband Der Sachversicherer v Commission (Rec 1987,P 405) (Sv87-9 Fi87-9) (Judgment) C-45/85; [1987] EUECJ C-45/85 27 Jan 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1987,P 465) (Judgment) C-275/85; [1987] EUECJ C-275/85 27 Jan 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1987,P 479) (Judgment) C-361/85; [1987] EUECJ C-361/85 29 Jan 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1987,P 487) (Judgment) C-364/85; [1987] EUECJ C-364/85 29 Jan 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Pressler-Hoeft v Court Of Auditors (Rec 1987,P 513) (Judgment) C-302/85; [1987] EUECJ C-302/85 4 Feb 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Maurissen v Court Of Auditors (Rec 1987,P 551) (Judgment) C-417/85; [1987] EUECJ C-417/85 4 Feb 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Bouteiller v Commission (Rec 1987,P 529) (Judgment) C-324/85; [1987] EUECJ C-324/85 4 Feb 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Cladakis v Commission (Rec 1987,P 495) (Judgment) C-276/85; [1987] EUECJ C-276/85 4 Feb 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Mouzourakis v Parliament (Rec 1987,P 589) (Judgment) C-280/85; [1987] EUECJ C-280/85 5 Feb 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas v Plange Kraftfutterwerke (Rec 1987,P 611) (Judgment) C-288/85 5 Feb 1987 ECJ European Â Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas v Plange Kraftfutterwerke Gmbh and Co. (Agriculture ) R-288/85; [1987] EUECJ R-288/85 5 Feb 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Denkavit v Belgian State (Rec 1987,P 565) (Judgment) C-145/85 5 Feb 1987 ECJ European Â Denkavit Belgie Nv v Belgian State. (Agriculture ) R-145/85; [1987] EUECJ R-145/85 5 Feb 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â F v Commission (Rec 1987,P 645) (Judgment) C-403/85; [1987] EUECJ C-403/85; [1991] EUECJ C-403/85R 5 Feb 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Huybrechts v Commission (Rec 1987,P 629) (Judgment) C-306/85; [1987] EUECJ C-306/85 5 Feb 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Belgium (Rec 1987,P 719) (Judgment) C-221/85; [1987] EUECJ C-221/85 12 Feb 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â France v Commission (Rec 1987,P 689) (Judgment) C-181/85; [1987] EUECJ C-181/85 12 Feb 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Belgium (Rec 1987,P 675) (Judgment) C-306/84; [1987] EUECJ C-306/84 12 Feb 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1987,P 773) (Judgment) C-69/86; [1987] EUECJ C-69/86 12 Feb 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Bonino v Commission (Rec 1987,P 739) (Judgment) C-233/85; [1987] EUECJ C-233/85 12 Feb 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Belgium (Rec 1987,P 761) (Judgment) C-390/85; [1987] EUECJ C-390/85 12 Feb 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Ireland (Rec 1987,P 783) (Order) C-45/87 16 Feb 1987 ECJ European Â Duke v GEC Reliance Systems Limited [1988] QB 108 16 Feb 1987 CA Lord Donaldson MR Litigation Practice, European The court was said to have failed to have proper regard to a European Directive. The court discussed the meaning of the phrase 'per incuriam': "I have always understood that the doctrine of per incuriam only applies where another division of this court has reached a decision in the absence of knowledge of a decision binding on it or a statute, and that in either case it has to be shown that had the court had this material, it must have reached a contrary decision . . I do not understand the doctrine to extend to a case where, if different arguments had been placed before it, or if different material had been placed before it, it might have reached a different conclusion." 1 Cites 1 Citers Â Birra Wuhrer v Council and Commission (Rec 1987,P 789) (Order) C-256/80 17 Feb 1987 ECJ European Â Â Samara v Commission; ECJ 17-Feb-1987 - C-21/86; [1987] ECR 795; [1987] EUECJ C-21/86 Â Criminal Proceedings Against Arthur Mathot. (Free Movement Of Goods ) R-98/86; [1987] EUECJ R-98/86 18 Feb 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ministere Public v Mathot (Rec 1987,P 809) (Judgment) C-98/86 18 Feb 1987 ECJ European Â Mogensen v Commission (Rec 1987,P 825) (Order) C-101/86; [1987] EUECJ C-101/86 19 Feb 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Epicheiriseon Metalleftikon Viomichanikon Kai Naftiliakon and Others v Council and Commission (Rec 1987,P 833) (Order) C-121/86 20 Feb 1987 ECJ European Â Deufil v Commission C-310/85; [1987] EUECJ C-310/85 24 Feb 1987 ECJ European ECJ 1. The aim of article 92 is to prevent trade between member states from being affected by benefits granted by the public authorities which, in various forms, distort or threaten to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods. That article does not therefore distinguish between the measures of state intervention concerned by reference to their causes or their aims but defines them in relation to their effects, with the result that the general objectives of national rules, such as those laying down measures of conjunctural policy within the meaning of article 103 of the treaty, are not in themselves sufficient to put those rules outside the scope of article 92. 2. In the application of article 92(3), the commission has a discretion the exercise of which involves economic and social assessments which must be made in a community context. The Commission in no way exceeded the limits of its discretion by considering that the granting of aid for an investment which increases production capacity in a sector in which there is already considerable over-production is contrary to the common interest and that aid of that sort is not of such a nature as to promote the economic development of the area at issue. 3. Where, contrary to the provisions of article 93(3) of the treaty, a member state grants the proposed aid before the end of the procedure initiated by the commission, the latter's decision that the aid which has been granted is incompatible with the common market may include an order to the national authorities to recover the aid without the beneficiary thereof being able to rely on a breach of a legitimate expectation in regard to that decision, provided that there could be no doubt on the part of the said beneficiary as to the scope of the community rules. 1 Cites [ Bailii ] Â Cram Rhone-Alpes v Giletti (Rec 1987,P 955) (Judgment) C-379/85 24 Feb 1987 ECJ European Â Deutz Und Geldermann v Council (Rec 1987,P 941) (Judgment) C-26/86; [1987] EUECJ C-26/86 24 Feb 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Falck v Commission (Rec 1987,P 871) (Judgment) C-304/85; [1987] EUECJ C-304/85 24 Feb 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Caisse Regionale D'Assurance Maladie Rhone-Alpes v Anna Giletti, Directeur Regional Des Affaires Sanitaires Et Sociales De Lorraine v Domenico Giardini, Caisse Regionale D'Assurance Maladie Du Nord-Est v Feliciano Tampan And Severino Severini v Ca R-381/85; [1987] EUECJ R-381/85 24 Feb 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Continentale Produkten-Gesellschaft v Commission (Rec 1987,P 841) (Judgment) C-312/84; [1987] EUECJ C-312/84 24 Feb 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Â Cockerill-Sambre v Commission; ECJ 24-Feb-1987 - C-350/85; [1987] EUECJ C-350/85 Â Banner v Parliament C-52/86; [1987] EUECJ C-52/86 25 Feb 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Procureur General v Yvette Rousseau C-168/86; R-168/86; [1987] EUECJ R-168/86 25 Feb 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Consorzio Cooperative D'Abruzzo v Commission (Judgment) C-15/85; [1987] EUECJ C-15/85 26 Feb 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1987,P 1061) (Judgment) C-386/85; [1987] EUECJ C-386/85 10 Mar 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1987,P 1039) (Judgment) C-199/85; [1987] EUECJ C-199/85 10 Mar 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Epicheiriseon Metalleftikon Viomichanikon Kai Naftiliakon and Others v Council and Commission (Rec 1987,P 1183) (Order) C-121/86 11 Mar 1987 ECJ European Â Rau v Commission (Rec 1987,P 1069) (Judgment) C-279/84; [1987] EUECJ C-279/84 11 Mar 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Vandemoortele v Commission (Rec 1987,P 1129) (Judgment) C-27/85; [1987] EUECJ C-27/85 11 Mar 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Greece v Council and Commission (Rec 1987,P 1189) (Order) C-129/86 11 Mar 1987 ECJ European Â Van Den Bergh En Jurgens v Commission (Rec 1987,P 1155) (Judgment) C-265/85; [1987] EUECJ C-265/85 11 Mar 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Belgium (Rec 1987,P 1331) (Judgment) C-9/86; [1987] EUECJ C-9/86 12 Mar 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Balm v Raiffeisen Hauptgenossenschaft (Rec 1987,P 1279) (Judgment) C-215/85 12 Mar 1987 ECJ European Â Rindone v Allgemeine Ortskrankenkasse Bad Urach-Munsingen (Rec 1987,P 1339) (Judgment) C-22/86 12 Mar 1987 ECJ European Â Commission v Germany (Rec 1987,P 1227) (Sv87-37 Fi87-37) (Judgment) C-178/84; [1987] EUECJ C-178/84 12 Mar 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Bundesanstalt Fuer Landwirtschaftliche Marktordnung v Raiffeisen Hauptgenossenschaft eG R-215/85; [1987] EUECJ R-215/85 12 Mar 1987 ECJ European, Agriculture ECJ Refusal of a claim for a special price increase in respect of rye bought into intervention. [ Bailii ] Â Cerealmangimi Spa Et Italgrani Spa v Commission of The European Communities C-245/85; [1987] EUECJ C-245/85 12 Mar 1987 ECJ European ECJ Remission of monetary compensatory amounts in relation to an inward processing operation with export to a Member State. [ Bailii ] Â Giuseppe Rindone v Allgemeine Ortskrankenkasse Bad Urach-Muensingen R-574/72; [1987] EUECJ R-574/72 12 Mar 1987 ECJ European Social Security For Migrant Workers [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Greece (Rec 1987,P 1193) (Judgment) C-176/84; [1987] EUECJ C-176/84 12 Mar 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Ireland (Rec 1987,P 1369) (Order) C-45/87 13 Mar 1987 ECJ European Â Mannesmannrohren-Werke v Council (Rec 1987,P 1381) (Judgment) C-333/85; [1987] EUECJ C-333/85 17 Mar 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ferriere San Carlo v Commission C-95/86; [1987] EUECJ C-95/86 17 Mar 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Von Bonkewitz-Lindner v Parliament (Rec 1987,P 1417) (Order) C-13/86; [1987] EUECJ C-13/86 18 Mar 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Societe Pour L'Exportation Des Sucres v Obea (Rec 1987,P 1423) (Judgment) C-56/86 18 Mar 1987 ECJ European Â Sa Societe Pour L'Exportation Des Sucres v Office Belge De L'Economie Et De L'Agriculture R-56/86; [1987] EUECJ R-56/86 18 Mar 1987 ECJ European, Agriculture [ Bailii ] Â Mcdermott and Cotter v Minister For Social Welfare and Attorney-General C-286/85; (1987) ECR 1453 24 Mar 1987 ECJ European Europa Where council directive 79/7 has not been implemented, article 4(1) of the directive, which prohibits all discrimination on grounds of sex in matters of social security, could be relied on as from 23 December 1984 in order to preclude the application of any national provision inconsistent with it. In the absence of measures implementing article 4(1) of the directive women are entitled to have the same rules applied to them as are applied to men who are in the same situation, since, where the directive has not been implemented, those rules remain the only valid point of reference. 1 Cites 1 Citers Â Commission v Council C-45/86; [1987] EUECJ C-45/86 26 Mar 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Hoechst v Commission (Rec 1987,P 1549) (Order) C-46/87 26 Mar 1987 ECJ European Â Cooperative Agricole D'Approvisionnement Des Avirons v Receveur Des Douanes De Saint-Denis And Directeur Regional Des Douanes, Reunion R-58/86; [1987] EUECJ R-58/86 26 Mar 1987 ECJ European, Agriculture [ Bailii ] Â Cooperative Agricole D'Approvisionnement Des Avirons v Receveur Des Douanes (Rec 1987,P 1525) (Judgment) C-58/86 26 Mar 1987 ECJ European Â Commission v Netherlands (Rec 1987,P 1471) (Judgment) C-235/85; [1987] EUECJ C-235/85 26 Mar 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ainsworth v Commission (Order) C-159/84; [1987] EUECJ C-159/84 1 Apr 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Dufay v Parliament (Rec 1987,P 1561) (Judgment) C-257/85; [1987] EUECJ C-257/85 1 Apr 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Dillinger Huttenwerke v Commission (Rec 1987,P 1621) (Judgment) C-226/85; [1987] EUECJ C-226/85 7 Apr 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Firma Karl-Heinz Neumann v Bundesanstalt Fuer Landwirtschaftliche Marktordnung. R-38/86; [1987] EUECJ R-38/86 7 Apr 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Criminal proceedings against Italo Bullo and Francesco Bonivento C-166/85; R-166/85; [1987] EUECJ R-166/85 7 Apr 1987 ECJ European Europa Council Directive 77/780 contains no provision governing the status which is to be given to credit institutions under the national law of the member states or the extent of any criminal liability on the part of their employees. Consequently the directive does not detract from the member states' power to lay down rules on the legal status of credit institutions and, in particular, does not put them under a duty to require that the duties and powers given by credit institutions to their employees should be of a private nature. The classification of employees of credit institutions as "public officials" or as "persons responsible for a public service" for the purposes of the application of the criminal law of a member state is therefore not contrary to the provisions or the objective of directive 77/780. Council Directive 77/780 [ Bailii ] Â Commission v France (Rec 1987,P 1597) (Sv87-65 Fi87-65) (Judgment) C-196/85; [1987] EUECJ C-196/85 7 Apr 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Neumann v Balm (Rec 1987,P 1675) (Judgment) C-38/86 7 Apr 1987 ECJ European Â Sisma v Commission (Rec 1987,P 1645) (Judgment) C-32/86; [1987] EUECJ C-32/86 7 Apr 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Pfizer v Commission (Order) C-65/87; [1987] EUECJ C-65/87R 8 Apr 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ministere Public v Verbrugge C-160/86; R-160/86; [1987] EUECJ R-160/86 9 Apr 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Assider and Italy v Commission (Rec 1987,P 1701) (Judgment) C-167/85; C-212/85; [1987] EUECJ C-212/85 9 Apr 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Belgium (Rec 1987,P 1773) (Judgment) C-5/86; [1987] EUECJ C-5/86 9 Apr 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Basset v Sacem (Rec 1987,P 1747) (Judgment) C-402/85; R-402/85; [1987] EUECJ R-402/85 9 Apr 1987 ECJ European ECJ Free Movement Of Goods - Articles 30 and 36 of the EEC treaty, on a true construction, do not preclude the application of national legislation allowing a national copyright-management society to charge a royalty called a "supplementary mechanical reproduction fee", in addition to a performance royalty, on the public performance of sound recordings, even where such a supplementary fee is not provided for in the member state where those sound recordings were lawfully placed on the market. The prohibitions laid down in article 86 of the eec treaty, properly construed, do not apply to the conduct of a national copyright-management society simply because it charges a royalty called a "supplementary mechanical reproduction fee", in addition to a performance royalty, on the public performance of sound recordings, even where such a supplementary fee is not provided for in the member state where those sound recordings were lawfully placed on the market. [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1987,P 1733) (Judgment) C-363/85; [1987] EUECJ C-363/85 9 Apr 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Technointorg v Council (Rec 1987,P 1793) (Order) C-77/87; [1987] EUECJ C-77/87R 9 Apr 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â W v Court Of Auditors (Rec 1987,P 1801) (Order) C-90/87; [1987] EUECJ C-90/87R 13 Apr 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Germany (Rec 1987,P 2061) (Judgment) C-189/85; [1987] EUECJ C-189/85 7 May 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Co-Frutta v Amministrazione Delle Finanze Dello Stato (Rec 1987,P 2085) (Sv87-89 Fi87-89) (Judgment) C-193/85 7 May 1987 ECJ European Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1987,P 2013) (Judgment) C-184/85; [1987] EUECJ C-184/85 7 May 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Nachi Fujikoshi v Council (Rec 1987,P 1861) (Judgment) C-255/84; [1987] EUECJ C-255/84 7 May 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Koyo Seiko v Council (Rec 1987,P 1899) (Judgment) C-256/84; [1987] EUECJ C-256/84 7 May 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Belgium (Rec 1987,P 2029) (Judgment) C-186/85; [1987] EUECJ C-186/85 7 May 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Cooperativa Co-Frutta Srl v Amministrazione Delle Finanze Dello Stato R-193/85; [1987] EUECJ R-193/85 7 May 1987 ECJ European Tax Provisions [ Bailii ] Â Toyo v Council (Rec 1987,P 1809) (Sv87-75 Fi87-75) (Judgment) C-240/84; [1984] EUECJ C-240/84R; [1987] EUECJ C-240/84 7 May 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Minebea v Council (Rec 1987,P 1975) (Judgment) C-260/84; [1987] EUECJ C-260/84 7 May 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1987,P 2115) (Judgment) C-419/85; [1987] EUECJ C-419/85 7 May 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Nippon Seiko v Council (Rec 1987,P 1923) (Judgment) C-258/84; [1984] EUECJ C-258/84R; [1987] EUECJ C-258/84 7 May 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Ministere public v Oscar Traen and others C-372/85; R-374/85; [1987] EUECJ R-374/85; [1987] ECR 2141 12 May 1987 ECJ European, Crime, Environment Articles 8 to 12 of Directive 75/442 on waste cover all waste-disposal activities and do not impose any limitation relating to the legal status of the operator or the frequency or purpose of the activities concerned. Article 5 of the directive does not lay down any restrictive criteria concerning the "competent ... Authorities to be responsible, in a given zone, for the planning, organization, authorization and supervision of waste-disposal operations" which are to be established or designated by the member states and the latter are therefore unrestricted in their choice of such authorities. The permit provided for in article 8 of the directive is issued by those authorities and cannot be replaced by the consent of the owner or occupier of the land where the waste is discharged . An owner or occupier of land, as an operator tipping his own waste on that land, does not need a permit under article 8 but a measure subjecting him to such a requirement may be adopted as one of the necessary measures to be taken by the member states under article 4 of the directive. Subject to the usual limitations on the exercise of a discretionary power, the power enjoyed by the member states regarding organization of the supervision provided for in article 10 of the directive is qualified only by the requirement that the objectives of that directive, namely protection of human health and of the environment, must be complied with. A directive may not of itself impose obligations on an individual and a provision of a directive may not therefore be relied upon as such against such a person . 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Champlor Sa And Others v Commission Of The European Communities. C-235/86; [1987] EUECJ C-235/86 20 May 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Enital v Council and Commission (Rec 1987,P 2257) (Order) C-304/86 20 May 1987 ECJ European Â Antib v Commission (Rec 1987,P 2201) (Judgment) C-272/85; [1987] EUECJ C-272/85 20 May 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Souna v Commission (Rec 1987,P 2229) (Judgment) C-432/85; [1987] EUECJ C-432/85 20 May 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Geist v Commission (Rec 1987,P 2181) (Judgment) C-242/85; [1987] EUECJ C-242/85 20 May 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Champlor v Commission (Rec 1987,P 2251) (Order) C-233/86 20 May 1987 ECJ European Â Gherardi Dandolo v Commission (Rec 1987,P 2163) (Judgment) C-214/85; [1987] EUECJ C-214/85 20 May 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Hamilton v Whitelock (Judgment) C-79/86 21 May 1987 ECJ European Â Walter Rau Lebensmittelwerke And Others v Bundesanstalt Fuer Landwirtschaftliche Marktordnung. (Application For Annulment ) R-136/85; [1987] EUECJ R-136/85 21 May 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â R. T. Hamilton v Joseph Stanley Wilson Whitelock. R-79/86; [1987] EUECJ R-79/86 21 May 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Deutsche Lebensmittelwerke v Commission (Rec 1987,P 2265) (Judgment) C-97/85; [1985] EUECJ C-97/85R; [1987] EUECJ C-97/85 21 May 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Albako Margarinefabrik Maria Von Der Linde Gmbh and Co. Kg v Bundesanstalt Fuer Landwirtschaftliche Marktordnung. R-249/85; [1987] EUECJ R-249/85 21 May 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Rau v Balm (Rec 1987,P 2289) (Judgment) C-133/85 21 May 1987 ECJ European Â Albako v Balm (Rec 1987,P 2345) (Sv87-101 Fi87-101) (Judgment) C-249/85 21 May 1987 ECJ European Â Muysers and Others v Court Of Auditors (Rec 1987,P 2381) (Order) C-161/87 3 Jun 1987 ECJ European Â Commission v Belgium (Rec 1987,P 2415) (Judgment) C-134/86; [1987] EUECJ C-134/86 4 Jun 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â P v Esc (Rec 1987,P 2409) (Order) C-16/86; [1987] EUECJ C-16/86 4 Jun 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Campana v Bundesanstalt Fur Arbeit (Rec 1987,P 2387) (Judgment) C-375/85 4 Jun 1987 ECJ European Â Pomar v Commission C-317/85; [1987] EUECJ C-317/85 10 Jun 1987 ECJ European Europa Any proceedings between an official and the institution by which he is employed, even if they involve an action for compensation, fall, where they originate in the relationship of employment between the person concerned and the institution, under article 179 of the eec treaty ( or article 152 of the eaec treaty ) and articles 90 and 91 of the staff regulations and, as regards in particular the admissibility of the application, outside the scope both of the articles of the constitutive treaties governing the general conditions of non-contractual liability of the communities and of the provisions of the statutes (ECSC, EEC and EAEC) of the Court of Justice which lay down a limitation period of five years for legal proceedings. [ Bailii ] Â Vincent v Parliament (Judgment) C-7/86; [1987] EUECJ C-7/86 10 Jun 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Gavanas v ESC and Council C-307/85; [1987] EUECJ C-307/85 10 Jun 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Aranovitch v Commission (Rec 1987,P 2425) (Order) C-736/79; [1987] EUECJ C-736/79 10 Jun 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Battaglia and Others v Commission (Rec 1987,P 2429) (Order) C-321/81; [1987] EUECJ C-321/81 10 Jun 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Procureur De La Republique v Gofette and Gilliard (Rec 1987,P 2525) (Judgment) C-406/85 11 Jun 1987 ECJ European Â Pretore Di Salo v X (Rec 1987,P 2545) (Sv87-111 Fi87-111) (Judgment) C-14/86 11 Jun 1987 ECJ European Â J W Teuling v Bestuur Van De Bedrijfsvereniging Voor De Chemische Industrie. (Social Policy ) R-79/7; [1987] EUECJ R-79/7 11 Jun 1987 ECJ European, Employment Europa 1. Article 4(1) of Council Directive 79/7/EEC of 19 December 1978 is to be interpreted as meaning that a system of benefits in respect of incapacity for work under which the amount of the benefit is determined in part by marital status and by the income earned from or in connection with work of a spouse is consistent with that provision if the system seeks to ensure an adequate minimum subsistence income for beneficiaries who have a dependent spouse or children, by means of a supplement to the social security benefit which compensates for the greater burdens they bear in comparison with single persons. 2. Article 4(1) of directive 79/7/eec is to be interpreted as meaning that legislation under which the guarantee previously applicable to all workers suffering from an incapacity for work whose income was approximately equal to the statutory minimum wage that their (net) benefits would be at least equal to the (net) statutory minimum wage is restricted to persons having a dependent spouse or child or whose spouse has a very small income is compatible with that provision. [ Bailii ] Â Openbaar Ministerie v Bodin And ETS Minguet And Thomas. R-241/86; [1987] EUECJ R-241/86 11 Jun 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Procureur De La Republique v Daniel Gofette And Alfred Gilliard. R-406/85; [1987] EUECJ R-406/85 11 Jun 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Teuling v Bedrijfsvereniging Voor De Chemische Industrie (Rec 1987,P 2497) (Judgment) C-30/85 11 Jun 1987 ECJ European Â Pretore Di Salo v Persons Unknown. (Preliminary Ruling ) R-14/86; [1987] EUECJ R-14/86 11 Jun 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Belgium v Commission (Rec 1987,P 2589) (Order) C-142/87 15 Jun 1987 ECJ European Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1987,P 2599) (Judgment) C-118/85; [1987] EUECJ C-118/85 16 Jun 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Romkes v Officier Van Justitie (Rec 1987,P 2671) (Judgment) C-46/86 16 Jun 1987 ECJ European Â Kolivas v Commission (Rec 1987,P 2643) (Judgment) C-40/86; [1987] EUECJ C-40/86 16 Jun 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1987,P 2625) (Sv87-121 Fi87-121) (Judgment) C-225/85; [1987] EUECJ C-225/85 16 Jun 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Albert Romkes v Officier Van Justitie For The District Of Zwolle. (Agriculture ) R-46/86; [1987] EUECJ R-46/86 16 Jun 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Officier Van Justitie v Romkes (Rec 1987,P 2691) (Judgment) C-53/86 16 Jun 1987 ECJ European Â Grumbach v Commission (Rec 1987,P 2705) (Judgment) C-54/86; [1987] EUECJ C-54/86 16 Jun 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Officier Van Justitie For The District Of Zwolle v L. Romkes And Others. R-53/86; [1987] EUECJ R-53/86 16 Jun 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Belgium (Rec 1987,P 2797) (Judgment) C-1/86; [1987] EUECJ C-1/86 17 Jun 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Frico v Voedselvoorzienings In- En Verkoopbureau (Rec 1987,P 2755) (Judgment) C-424/85 17 Jun 1987 ECJ European Â Universe Tankship v Commission C-1/87 17 Jun 1987 ECJ European Â Cooperatieve Melkproducentenbedrijven Noord-Nederland Ba ('Frico') And Others v Voedselvoorzienings In En Verkoopbureau. (Agriculture ) R-424/85; [1987] EUECJ R-424/85 17 Jun 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1987,P 2717) (Judgment) C-154/85; [1985] EUECJ C-154/85R; [1987] EUECJ C-154/85 17 Jun 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Universe Tankship Company Incorporated v Commission Of The European Communities. O-1/87; [1987] EUECJ O-1/87S 17 Jun 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1987,P 2741) (Judgment) C-394/85; [1987] EUECJ C-394/85 17 Jun 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Centre Public D'Aide Sociale De Courcelles v Lebon R-316/85; [1987] EUECJ R-316/85; [1987] ECR 2811 18 Jun 1987 ECJ European A right to equal treatment with regard to social and tax advantages accorded by article 7(2) of Regulation No. 1612/68 E.E.C. applied only to workers and not to nationals of Member States who move in search of employment. The latter were entitled only to equal treatment in regard to access to employment in accordance with article 48 of the Treaty and articles 2 and 5 of Regulation No. 1612/68 E.E.C. 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Virgili-Schettini v Parliament (Rec 1987,P 2847) (Order) C-24/87; [1987] EUECJ C-24/87R; [1988] EUECJ C-24/87 22 Jun 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Aldinger v Parliament (Rec 1987,P 2841) (Order) C-23/87 22 Jun 1987 ECJ European Â Von Neuhoff Von Der Ley v Commission (Rec 1987,P 2853) (Judgment) C-61/85; [1987] EUECJ C-61/85 24 Jun 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Â Borrie Clarke v Chief Adjudication Officer; ECJ 24-Jun-1987 - C-384/85 Â Â Nashua Corporation and Others v Commission and Council; ECJ 25-Jun-1987 - C-133/87; [1987] EUECJ C-133/87R Â Roquette Freres v Onic (Rec 1987,P 2889) (Judgment) C-47/86 30 Jun 1987 ECJ European Â Roquette Freres Sa v Office National Interprofessionnel Des Cereales (Onic). (Agriculture ) R-47/86; [1987] EUECJ R-47/86 30 Jun 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â F. Antonini v Prefetto Di Milano. (Agriculture ) R-216/86; [1987] EUECJ R-216/86 1 Jul 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Antonini v Prefetto Di Milano (Rec 1987,P 2919) (Judgment) C-216/86 1 Jul 1987 ECJ European Â Ministere Public v Lefevre (Rec 1987,P 2963) (Judgment) C-188/86 2 Jul 1987 ECJ European Â Ministere Public v Regis Lefevre. (Preliminary Questions ) R-188/86; [1987] EUECJ R-188/86 2 Jul 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Maizena v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas (Rec 1987,P 2941) (Judgment) C-94/86 2 Jul 1987 ECJ European Â Amesz v Commission (Rec 1987,P 2935) (Order) C-323/81; [1987] EUECJ C-323/81 2 Jul 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Maizena Gesellschaft Mbh And Others v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas. R-94/86; [1987] EUECJ R-94/86 2 Jul 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1987,P 2983) (Judgment) C-420/85; [1987] EUECJ C-420/85 7 Jul 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â L'Etoile Commerciale And Comptoir National Technique Agricole (Cnta) v Commission Of The European Communities. (Application For A Declaration That A Measure Is Void ) C-91/86; [1987] EUECJ C-91/86 7 Jul 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Etoile Commerciale and Cnta v Commission (Rec 1987,P 3005) (Judgment) C-89/86 7 Jul 1987 ECJ European Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1987,P 2995) (Judgment) C-49/86; [1987] EUECJ C-49/86 7 Jul 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Sermes v Commission (Rec 1987,P 3109) (Order) C-279/86; [1987] EUECJ C-279/86 8 Jul 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Garelly v Commission (Rec 1987,P 3117) (Order) C-295/86; [1987] EUECJ C-295/86 8 Jul 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1987,P 3073) (Judgment) C-262/85; [1987] EUECJ C-262/85 8 Jul 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Pedersen v Commission (Rec 1987,P 3123) (Order) C-301/86; [1987] EUECJ C-301/86 8 Jul 1987 ECJ European Europa An exclusive importer in a member state of products covered by anti-dumping duties who is not associated with the exporter and whose resale prices were not taken into account in the calculation of the dumping margin does not belong to the category of traders having a right to challenge the regulation imposing anti-dumping duties directly before the court by means of an action for annulment, even if the importer participated in the successive stages of the investigation which preceded the adoption of the regulation. [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Belgium (Rec 1987,P 3029) (Judgment) C-247/85; [1987] EUECJ C-247/85 8 Jul 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Cauet and Joliot v Commission (Rec 1987,P 3379) (Judgment) C-100/86; [1987] EUECJ C-100/86 9 Jul 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ancides v Commission (Rec 1987,P 3131) (Judgment) C-43/85; [1987] EUECJ C-43/85 9 Jul 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Hochbaum and Rawes v Commission (Judgment) C-44/85; [1987] EUECJ C-44/85 9 Jul 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Lutticke v Denkavit-Futtermittel (Rec 1987,P 3159) (Judgment) C-182/85 9 Jul 1987 ECJ European Â Germany, France, Netherlands, Denmark and United Kingdom v Commission (Judgment) C-281/85 9 Jul 1987 ECJ European Â Castagnoli v Commission (Rec 1987,P 3281) (Judgment) C-329/85; [1987] EUECJ C-329/85 9 Jul 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Misset v Council C-279/85; [1987] EUECJ C-279/85 9 Jul 1987 ECJ European ECJ (Judgment) Officials - Transfer of an official from the Language Service to a post in Category A. [ Bailii ] Â SA Constructions Et Entreprises Industrielles (Cei) And Others v Societe Cooperative 'Association Intercommunale Pour Les Autoroutes Des Ardennes' And Others. (Approximation Of Laws ) R-27/86; [1987] EUECJ R-27/86 9 Jul 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Maria Frascogna v Caisse Des Depots Et Consignations. (Free Movement Of Persons ) R-256/86; [1987] EUECJ R-256/86 9 Jul 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â CEI v Association Intercommunale Pour Les Autoroutes Des Ardennes (Judgment) C-27/86 9 Jul 1987 ECJ European Â Federal Republic Of Germany And Others v Commission Of The European Communities. (Procedure ) C-287/85; [1987] EUECJ C-287/85 9 Jul 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Belgium (Rec 1987,P 3299) (Sv87-147 Fi87-147) (Judgment) C-356/85; [1987] EUECJ C-356/85 9 Jul 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Alfons Luetticke Gmbh v Denkavit Futtermittel Gmbh. (Agriculture ) R-182/85; [1987] EUECJ R-182/85 9 Jul 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Laborero and Sabato v Ossom (Rec 1987,P 3401) (Judgment) C-82/86 9 Jul 1987 ECJ European Â Frascogna v Caisse Des Depots and Consignations (Rec 1987,P 3431) (Judgment) C-256/86 9 Jul 1987 ECJ European Â Maurissen v Court Of Auditors (Rec 1987,P 3445) (Order) C-193/87 10 Jul 1987 ECJ European Â Â Cockerill Sambre v Commission; ECJ 10-Aug-1987 - C-214/87; [1987] EUECJ C-214/87R Â Eisa v Commission (Order) C-209/87; [1987] EUECJ C-209/87R 10 Aug 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Assider v Commission (Rec 1987,P 3473) (Order) C-223/87; [1987] EUECJ C-223/87R 10 Aug 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Netherlands (Rec 1987,P 3483) (Judgment) C-291/84; [1987] EUECJ C-291/84 17 Sep 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Feldain v Directeur Des Services Fiscaux Du Departement Du Haut-Rhin R-433/85; [1987] EUECJ R-433/85 17 Sep 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Greece (Rec 1987,P 3545) (Judgment) C-70/86; [1987] EUECJ C-70/86 17 Sep 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Germany (Rec 1987,P 3503) (Judgment) C-412/85; [1987] EUECJ C-412/85 17 Sep 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Feldain v Services Fiscaux Du Departement Du Haut-Rhin (Rec 1987,P 3521) (Sv87-157 Fi87-157) (Judgment) C-433/85 17 Sep 1987 ECJ European Â Bolognese v Scharf and Commission (Rec 1987,P 3563) (Third-Party Proceedings) C-292/84 22 Sep 1987 ECJ European Â De Naeyer v Commission (Rec 1987,P 3569) (Order) C-43/83; [1987] EUECJ C-43/83 23 Sep 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Johanna Van Gastel, Nee Coenen, v Rijksdienst Voor Werknemerspensioenen And Rijkskas Voor Rust En Overlevingspensioenen. (Social Security For Migrant Workers ) R-37/86; [1987] EUECJ R-37/86 24 Sep 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Porto Nogaro v Commission (Rec 1987,P 3575) (Judgment) C-340/85; [1987] EUECJ C-340/85 24 Sep 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Vlachou v Court Of Auditors (Rec 1987,P 3633) (Order) C-134/87; [1987] EUECJ C-134/87 24 Sep 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Coenen v Onpts and Cnprs (Rec 1987,P 3589) (Judgment) C-37/86 24 Sep 1987 ECJ European Â Sociale Verzekeringsbank v De Rijke (Rec 1987,P 3611) (Judgment) C-43/86 24 Sep 1987 ECJ European Â De Boer Buizen v Council and Commission (Rec 1987,P 3677) (Sv87-165 Fi87-165) (Judgment) C-81/86; [1987] EUECJ C-81/86 29 Sep 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Gimenez Zaera v Instituto Nacional De La Seguridad Social and Tesoreria General De La Seguridad Social (Rec 1987,P 3697) (Judgment) C-126/86 29 Sep 1987 ECJ European Â Fernando Roberto Gimenez Zaera v Institut Nacional De La Seguridad Social And Tesoreria General De La Seguridad Social. (Eec Treaty ) R-126/86; [1987] EUECJ R-126/86 29 Sep 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Fabrique De Fer De Charleroi v Commission C-351/85; [1986] EUECJ C-351/85R 29 Sep 1987 ECJ European (Judgment) [ Bailii ] Â Brother Industries v Commission (Rec 1987,P 3757) (Order) C-229/86; [1987] EUECJ C-229/86 30 Sep 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Demirel v Stadt Schwabisch Gmund (Rec 1987,P 3719) (Sv87-175 Fi87-175) (Judgment) C-12/86 30 Sep 1987 ECJ European Â Meryem Demirel v Stadt Schwabisch Gmuend. (Preliminary Rulings ) R-12/86; [1987] EUECJ R-12/86 30 Sep 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Asbl Vereniging Van Vlaamse Reisbureaus v Asbl Sociale Dienst Van De Plaatselijke En Gewestelijke Overheidsdiensten. (Competition ) R-311/85; [1987] EUECJ R-311/85 1 Oct 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â United Kingdom v Commission (Judgment) C-84/85; [1987] EUECJ C-84/85 1 Oct 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Openbaar Ministerie v Nertsvoederfabriek Nederland Bv. R-118/86; [1987] EUECJ R-118/86 6 Oct 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Demouche v Fonds De Garantie Automobile (Judgment) C-152/83 6 Oct 1987 ECJ European Â Marcel Demouche And Others v Fonds De Garantie Automobile And Bureau Central Francais. R-152/83; [1987] EUECJ R-152/83 6 Oct 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Onpts v Stefanutti (Rec 1987,P 3855) (Sv87-201 Fi87-201) (Judgment) C-197/85 6 Oct 1987 ECJ European Â Openbaar Ministerie v Nertsvoederfabriek Nederland (Rec 1987,P 3883) (Judgment) C-118/86 6 Oct 1987 ECJ European Â Office National Des Pensions Pour Travailleurs Salaries (Onpts) v Domenica Stefanutti. (Social Security For Migrant Workers ) R-197/85; [1987] EUECJ R-197/85 6 Oct 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Schina v Commission (Rec 1987,P 3911) (Judgment) C-401/85 7 Oct 1987 ECJ European Â Bruggemann v ESC C-248/86; [1987] EUECJ C-248/86 7 Oct 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Strack v Commission (Rec 1987,P 3939) (Judgment) C-140/86; [1987] EUECJ C-140/86 7 Oct 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â D M v Council and Esc (Rec 1987,P 3933) (Order) C-108/86; [1987] EUECJ C-108/86 7 Oct 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Francesco Schina v Commission Of The European Communities O-401/85; [1987] EUECJ O-401/85 7 Oct 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Â Criminal Proceedings Against Kolpinghuis Nijmegen Bv; ECJ 8-Oct-1987 - [1989] 1 CEC 118; [1989] 2 CMLR 18; C-80/86; R-80/86; [1987] EUECJ R-80/86; [1987] ECR 3969 Â Commission v Netherlands (Rec 1987,P 3989) (Judgment) C-236/85; [1987] EUECJ C-236/85 13 Oct 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Denmark (Rec 1987,P 4069) (Judgment) C-278/85; [1987] EUECJ C-278/85 14 Oct 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Germany v Commission (Rec 1987,P 4013) (Judgment) C-248/84; [1985] EUECJ C-248/84R; [1987] EUECJ C-248/84 14 Oct 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Germany (Rec 1987,P 4045) (Judgment) C-208/85; [1987] EUECJ C-208/85 14 Oct 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Â Union Nationale Des Entraineurs Et Cadres Techniques Professionnels Du Football (UNECTEF) v Heylens And Others; ECJ 15-Oct-1987 - C-222/86; R-222/86; [1987] EUECJ R-222/86; [1987] ECR 4097 Â Spain v Commission (Rec 1987,P 4171) (Judgment) C-128/86; [1986] EUECJ C-128/86R; [1987] EUECJ C-128/86 20 Oct 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Spain v Council and Commission (Rec 1987,P 4121) (Judgment) C-119/86; [1986] EUECJ C-119/86R; [1987] EUECJ C-119/86 20 Oct 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Foto-Frost v Hauptzollamt Luebeck-Ost R-314/85; [1987] EUECJ R-314/85; [1987] ECR 4199 22 Oct 1987 ECJ European Europa Lack of jurisdiction of national courts to declare acts of Community institutions invalid - Validity of a decision on the post-clearance recovery of import duties. Case 314/85. 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Â Foto-Frost v Hauptzollamt Lubeck-Ost; ECJ 22-Oct-1987 - C-314/85 Â Ireland v Commission (Rec 1987,P 4237) (Judgment) C-337/85; [1987] EUECJ C-337/85 22 Oct 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Claus Diezler And Others v Economic And Social Committee Of The European Communities. (Officials ) C-431/85; [1987] EUECJ C-431/85; [1988] EUECJ C-431/85 27 Oct 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Ioannis Theodorakis Viomichania Elaiou Ae v Greek State. (Community Law ) R-109/86; [1987] EUECJ R-109/86 27 Oct 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Theodorakis v Greece (Rec 1987,P 4319) (Judgment) C-109/86 27 Oct 1987 ECJ European Â Arlette Houyoux And Maric-Catherine Guery v Commission Of The European Communities. (Officials ) C-177/86; [1987] EUECJ C-177/86 27 Oct 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Diezler v Esc (Rec 1987,P 4283) (Judgment) C-146/85; [1985] EUECJ C-146/85R 27 Oct 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Houyoux v Commission (Rec 1987,P 4333) (Judgment) C-176/86 27 Oct 1987 ECJ European Â Finsider v Commission (Rec 1987,P 4263) (Judgment) C-392/85; [1986] EUECJ C-392/85R; [1987] EUECJ C-392/85 27 Oct 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Damianos Soph. Symeonidis Anonimos Emboriki Eteria Sigaretton Kai Ikodomikon Epichirisseon Ae v Minister For Commerce. R-254/86; [1987] EUECJ R-254/86 28 Oct 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Dow Chemical Nederland v Commission (Rec 1987,P 4367) (Order) C-85/87 28 Oct 1987 ECJ European Â Symeonidis v Greek State (Rec 1987,P 4355) (Judgment) C-254/86 28 Oct 1987 ECJ European Â Frank v Court Of Auditors (Rec 1987,P 4375) (Order) C-322/87; [1987] EUECJ C-322/87R 10 Nov 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Â Nashua Corporation v Council and Commission; ECJ 11-Nov-1987 - C-150/87; [1987] EUECJ C-150/87 Â Commission v Greece (Rec 1987,P 4383) (Order) C-4/85; [1987] EUECJ C-4/85 11 Nov 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Nuova Ceam v Commission (Rec 1987,P 4427) (Order) C-205/87; [1987] EUECJ C-205/87 11 Nov 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â France v Commission (Rec 1987,P 4393) (Judgment) C-259/85; [1987] EUECJ C-259/85 11 Nov 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ferriere San Carlo v Commission C-344/85; [1987] EUECJ C-344/85 12 Nov 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Amro Aandelen Fonds v Inspecteur Der Registratie En Successie (Rec 1987,P 4453) (Judgment) C-112/86 12 Nov 1987 ECJ European Â Amro Aandelen Fonds v Inspecteur Der Registratie En Successie. R-112/86; [1987] EUECJ R-112/86 12 Nov 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Conradi v Direction De La Concurrence and Des Prix Des Hauts-De-Seine (Rec 1987,P 4469) (Judgment) C-198/86 12 Nov 1987 ECJ European Â Erwin Conradi And Others v Direction De La Concurrence Et Des Prix Des Hauts-De-Seine Et Ministere Public. (Free Movement Of Persons ) R-198/86; [1987] EUECJ R-198/86 12 Nov 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â British-American Tobacco Company Ltd and R J Reynolds Industries Inc v Commission of the European Communities Joined Cases 142 and 156/84; C-142/84 17 Nov 1987 ECJ European, Company, Judicial Review, Commercial Europa An investigation carried out by the commission in fulfilment of its duty to ensure that the rules on competition are observed does not constitute adversary proceedings between companies which have submitted an application under article 3 of regulation no 17/62, having shown that they have a legitimate interest in seeking an end to the alleged infringement, and companies which are the object of the investigation. Although complainants must be given the opportunity to defend their legitimate interests during the administrative proceedings and the commission must consider all the matters of fact and of law which they bring to its attention, their procedural rights are not as far-reaching as the right to a fair hearing of the companies which are the object of the commission' s investigation, and the limits of such rights are reached where they begin to interfere with those companies' rights to a fair hearing. The obligation of professional secrecy laid down in article 214 of the treaty and article 20(2) of regulation no 17/62 is mitigated in regard to complainants, but they may not in any circumstances be provided with documents containing business secrets. The legitimate interests of complainants are fully protected where they are informed of the outcome of the confidential negotiations between the commission and the companies which are the object of its investigation with a view to bringing the agreements or practices complained of into conformity with the rules laid down in the treaty; the right of the commission and those companies to enter into confidential negotiations would be imperilled if the complainants were given the right to attend such negotiations or be kept informed of the progress made in order to submit their observations on the proposals put forward by one party or the other. 2. Where the acquisition of shares in a competing company is the subject-matter of agreements entered into by companies which remain independent after the entry into force of the agreements, the issue must first be examined from the point of view of article 85 of the treaty. Although the acquisition by one company of an equity interest in a competitor does not in itself constitute conduct restricting competition, such an acquisition may nevertheless serve as an instrument for influencing the commercial conduct of the companies in question so as to restrict or distort competition on the market on which they carry on business. That would be true in particular where, by the acquisition of a shareholding or through subsidiary clauses in the agreement, the investing company obtains legal or de facto control of the commercial conduct of the other company or where the agreement provides for commercial cooperation between the companies or creates a structure likely to be used for such cooperation, or where the agreement gives the investing company the possibility of reinforcing its position at a later stage and taking effective control of the other company. Every agreement must be assessed in its economic context and in particular in the light of the situation on the relevant market. Where the companies concerned are multinational corporations which carry on business on a worldwide scale, their relationships outside the community cannot be ignored, and it is necessary in particular to consider the possibility that the agreement in question may be part of a policy of global cooperation between them. The commission must exercise particular vigilance in the case of a stagnant and oligopolistic market, such as that for cigarettes. 3. Although as a general rule the court undertakes a comprehensive review of the question whether or not the conditions for the application of article 85(1) of the treaty are met, its review of the commission' s appraisals of complex economic matters is necessarily limited to verifying whether the relevant rules on procedure and on the statement of reasons have been complied with, whether the facts have been accurately stated and whether there has been any manifest error of appraisal or a misuse of powers. 4. The acquisition by one company of a shareholding in a competing company can constitute an abuse of a dominant position within the meaning of article 86 of the treaty only where that shareholding results in effective control of the other company or at least in some influence on its commercial policy. 5. Where the commission rejects an application pursuant to article 3 of regulation no 17/62, it need only state the reasons for which it did not consider it possible to hold that an infringement of the rules on competition had occurred, and it is not obliged to explain any differences in relation to the statement of objections, since that is a preparatory document containing assessments which are purely provisional in nature and are intended to define the scope of the administrative proceedings with regard to the companies against which they are brought, or to discuss all the matters of fact and of law which may have been dealt with during the administrative proceedings. Â British-American Tobacco Company Ltd, R J Reynolds Industries Inc v Commission Of The European Communities (Competition ) C-156/84; [1987] EUECJ C-156/84 17 Nov 1987 ECJ European, Commercial Europa 1. An investigation carried out by the commission in fulfilment of its duty to ensure that the rules on competition are observed does not constitute adversary proceedings between companies which have submitted an application under article 3 of regulation no 17/62, having shown that they have a legitimate interest in seeking an end to the alleged infringement, and companies which are the object of the investigation. Although complainants must be given the opportunity to defend their legitimate interests during the administrative proceedings and the commission must consider all the matters of fact and of law which they bring to its attention, their procedural rights are not as far-reaching as the right to a fair hearing of the companies which are the object of the commission' s investigation, and the limits of such rights are reached where they begin to interfere with those companies' rights to a fair hearing. The obligation of professional secrecy laid down in article 214 of the treaty and article 20(2 ) of regulation no 17/62 is mitigated in regard to complainants, but they may not in any circumstances be provided with documents containing business secrets. The legitimate interests of complainants are fully protected where they are informed of the outcome of the confidential negotiations between the commission and the companies which are the object of its investigation with a view to bringing the agreements or practices complained of into conformity with the rules laid down in the treaty; the right of the commission and those companies to enter into confidential negotiations would be imperilled if the complainants were given the right to attend such negotiations or be kept informed of the progress made in order to submit their observations on the proposals put forward by one party or the other. 2. Where the acquisition of shares in a competing company is the subject-matter of agreements entered into by companies which remain independent after the entry into force of the agreements, the issue must first be examined from the point of view of article 85 of the treaty. Although the acquisition by one company of an equity interest in a competitor does not in itself constitute conduct restricting competition, such an acquisition may nevertheless serve as an instrument for influencing the commercial conduct of the companies in question so as to restrict or distort competition on the market on which they carry on business. That would be true in particular where, by the acquisition of a shareholding or through subsidiary clauses in the agreement, the investing company obtains legal or de facto control of the commercial conduct of the other company or where the agreement provides for commercial cooperation between the companies or creates a structure likely to be used for such cooperation, or where the agreement gives the investing company the possibility of reinforcing its position at a later stage and taking effective control of the other company. Every agreement must be assessed in its economic context and in particular in the light of the situation on the relevant market. Where the companies concerned are multinational corporations which carry on business on a worldwide scale, their relationships outside the community cannot be ignored, and it is necessary in particular to consider the possibility that the agreement in question may be part of a policy of global cooperation between them. The commission must exercise particular vigilance in the case of a stagnant and oligopolistic market, such as that for cigarettes. 3. Although as a general rule the court undertakes a comprehensive review of the question whether or not the conditions for the application of article 85(1 ) of the treaty are met, its review of the commission' s appraisals of complex economic matters is necessarily limited to verifying whether the relevant rules on procedure and on the statement of reasons have been complied with, whether the facts have been accurately stated and whether there has been any manifest error of appraisal or a misuse of powers. 4. The acquisition by one company of a shareholding in a competing company can constitute an abuse of a dominant position within the meaning of article 86 of the treaty only where that shareholding results in effective control of the other company or at least in some influence on its commercial policy. 5. Where the commission rejects an application pursuant to article 3 of regulation no 17/62, it need only state the reasons for which it did not consider it possible to hold that an infringement of the rules on competition had occurred, and it is not obliged to explain any differences in relation to the statement of objections, since that is a preparatory document containing assessments which are purely provisional in nature and are intended to define the scope of the administrative proceedings with regard to the companies against which they are brought, or to discuss all the matters of fact and of law which may have been dealt with during the administrative proceedings. [ Bailii ] Â Maizena Gesellschaft Mbh And Others v Bundesanstalt Fuer Landwirtschaftliche Marktordnung (BALM) R-137/85; [1987] EUECJ R-137/85 18 Nov 1987 ECJ European, Agriculture ECJ Legal nature of the security lodged in respect of an export licence. 1. Under community rules such as the second indent of article 38(1)(c ) of regulation no 3183/80, which requires the provision of fresh security after the release under special arrangements, before exportation actually takes place and at the request of the exporter, of security intended to ensure the performance by the licence holder of his obligation to export within a prescribed time-limit, where the said time-limit has not been complied with, the fresh security ceases to be a guarantee and becomes a penalty when the undertaking has not been complied with and no longer can be complied with. However, that penalty, which is intended to achieve the same objective as the security itself and whose only effect is to place the defaulting trader in the same position as if he had not voluntarily opted for advance release of the security, is an integral part of the system of security at issue and is not criminal in nature. 2. The forfeiture of two securities relating to the same export transactions but having different purposes, one intended to ensure repayment of the export refund paid in advance if exportation does not take place and the other intended to ensure that the undertaking to export during the validity of the export licence will be honoured, even if it is triggered by the same event, cannot be regarded as disproportionate if the different risks in respect of which the securities were lodged actually materialize. [ Bailii ] Â Maizena v Balm (Rec 1987,P 4587) (Judgment) C-137/85 18 Nov 1987 ECJ European Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1987,P 4669) (Judgment) C-125/86; [1987] EUECJ C-125/86 24 Nov 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Rsv v Commission (Rec 1987,P 4617) (Judgment) C-223/85; [1987] EUECJ C-223/85 24 Nov 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1987,P 4661) (Judgment) C-124/86; [1987] EUECJ C-124/86 24 Nov 1987 ECJ European (Judgment) [ Bailii ] Â Italy v Commission (Rec 1987,P 4677) (Judgment) C-342/85; [1987] EUECJ C-342/85 25 Nov 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Italy v Commission (Rec 1987,P 4711) (Judgment) C-343/85; [1987] EUECJ C-343/85 25 Nov 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Newstead v Department of Transport And Her Majesty's Treasury C-192/85; R-192/85; [1987] EUECJ R-192/85 3 Dec 1987 ECJ European ECJ Equal treatment for men and women - Pension for surviving spouse - Requirement to contribute. [ Bailii ] Â Bureau National Interprofessionnel Du Cognac v Yves Aubert R-136/86; [1987] EUECJ R-136/86 3 Dec 1987 ECJ European Competition [ Bailii ] Â Bnic v Aubert (Rec 1987,P 4789) (Judgment) C-136/86 3 Dec 1987 ECJ European Â Commission v Greece (Rec 1987,P 4737) (Judgment) C-194/84; [1987] EUECJ C-194/84 3 Dec 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ministere Public v Gauchard (Rec 1987,P 4879) (Judgment) C-20/87 8 Dec 1987 ECJ European Â Directeur General Des Douanes and Droits Indirects v Artimport (Rec 1987,P 4817) (Judgment) C-42/86 8 Dec 1987 ECJ European Â Â Gubisch Maschinenfabrik KG v Giulio Palumbo; ECJ 8-Dec-1987 - C-144/86; [1987] ECR 4861; R-144/86; [1987] EUECJ R-144/86; [1989] ECC 420, Â Montgomery v Parliament (Order) C-152/87; [1987] EUECJ C-152/87 8 Dec 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ministere Public v Andre Gauchard R-20/87; [1987] EUECJ R-20/87 8 Dec 1987 ECJ European ECJ Preliminary Questions - Freedom of establishment - Prior authorisation for the operation of a retail outlet. 1. Although the court has no jurisdiction under article 177 of the treaty to apply a rule of community law to a particular case and thus to judge a provision of national law by reference to such a rule it may, in the framework of the judicial cooperation provided for by that article and on the basis of the material presented to it, provide a national court with an interpretation of community law which may be useful to it in assessing the effects of that provision. where the question asked may be understood as requesting an interpretation of community law but does not state which provision or provisions of community law are in issue, the court must extract from all the factors provided by the national court, and in particular from the statement of grounds contained in the reference, the elements of community law requiring an interpretation, having regard to the subject-matter of the dispute. 2. Article 52 of the eec treaty and council directives 68/363/eec and 68/364/eec implementing article 52 in the field of activities of self-employed persons in retail trade do not apply to situations which are purely internal to a member state, such as that of a national of a member state who has never resided or worked in any other member state. [ Bailii ] Â Directeur General Des Douanes Et Droits Indirects v Artimport And Others R-42/86; [1987] EUECJ R-42/86 8 Dec 1987 ECJ European ECJ Common Customs Tariff - 1. Opinions of the committee for common customs tariff nomenclature are an important means of ensuring uniform application of the common customs tariff by the customs authorities of the member states and as such may be regarded as valid aids in its interpretation. However, such opinions are not binding in law, and it may be necessary to consider whether they correspond to the actual provisions of the common customs tariff and do not alter their scope. 2. On 23 may 1979 the common customs tariff was to be interpreted as meaning that suitcases and attache cases made from plastic sheeting composed of styrene resin, butadiene and acrylo-nitril made rigid by moulding or pressing and not by means of a rigid foundation fell within heading 39.07 e iv of the common customs tariff. [ Bailii ] Â Grands Moulins De Paris v Council and Commission (Judgment) C-50/86; [1987] EUECJ C-50/86 8 Dec 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Sar Schotte Gmbh v Parfums Rothschild Sarl C-218/86; R-218/86; [1987] EUECJ R-218/86 9 Dec 1987 ECJ European Article 5(5) of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on jurisdiction and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted as applying to a case in which a legal entity established in a contracting state maintains no dependent branch, agency or other establishment in another contracting state but nevertheless pursues its activities there through an independent company with the same name and identical management which negotiates and conducts business in its name and which it uses as an extension of itself. [ Bailii ] Â Del Plato v Commission (Rec 1987,P 4991) (Judgment) C-181/86; [1987] EUECJ C-181/86 10 Dec 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Universitat Bielefeld v Hauptzollamt Giessen C-164/86; R-164/86; [1987] EUECJ R-164/86 10 Dec 1987 ECJ European ECJ For the purpose of allowing the duty-free importation of a scientific apparatus, the equivalence of that apparatus and similar apparatus manufactured in the community must be appraised by reference to the situation obtaining when the order for the apparatus is placed and it is therefore wrong to compare an existing foreign apparatus with hypothetical versions of community apparatus. The competent authorities are nevertheless at liberty to verify whether the community apparatus existing when the order is placed can be adapted to the proposed research project within a period of time compatible with the third indent of article 3(3) of Regulation no 1798/75 [ Bailii ] Â Nicolet Instrument v Hauptzollamt Berlin-Packhof C-232/86; R-232/86; [1987] EUECJ R-232/86 10 Dec 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Bauer v Commission (Rec 1987,P 4951) (Judgment) C-151/86; [1987] EUECJ C-151/86 10 Dec 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Jansch v Commission (Rec 1987,P 4923) (Judgment) C-277/84; [1987] EUECJ C-277/84 10 Dec 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Germany v Commission (Rec 1987,P 5143) (Judgment) C-332/85; [1987] EUECJ C-332/85 15 Dec 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Denmark v Commission (Rec 1987,P 5225) (Judgment) C-348/85; [1987] EUECJ C-348/85 15 Dec 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â United Kingdom v Commission (Judgment) C-346/85; [1987] EUECJ C-346/85 15 Dec 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â France v Commission (Rec 1987,P 5173) (Judgment) C-336/85; [1987] EUECJ C-336/85 15 Dec 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ireland v Commission (Rec 1987,P 5271) (Judgment) C-239/86; [1987] EUECJ C-239/86 15 Dec 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Deutsche Babcock Handel Gmbh v Hauptzollamt Luebeck-Ost R-328/85; [1987] EUECJ R-328/85 15 Dec 1987 ECJ European European Communities' Own Resources - 1. Article 232(1) of the EEC Treaty must be interpreted as meaning that in so far as matters are not the subject of provisions in the ecsc treaty or rules adopted on the basis thereof, the eec treaty and the provisions adopted for its implementation can apply to products covered by the ECSC Treaty. That is the case in regard to regulation no 1430/79 on the repayment or remission of import or export duties. 2. The second indent of article 2(1) of regulation no 1430/79, which provides that import duties are to be repaid or remitted if it is obvious that the amount of such duties entered in the accounts exceeds for any reason the amount lawfully payable, applies, having regard to the recitals in the preamble to the regulation, to cases of error. It does not apply when the trader liable for the import duties has, at the time of entry of the goods for free circulation, declared a price higher than that which he actually had to pay, taking into account the discounts and bonuses granted to him on account of the quantities ordered, and when the declaration of the higher price was designed to enable the goods to be released for free circulation on the basis of a licence which made no mention of those discounts and bonuses. [ Bailii ] Â Deutsche Babcock v Hauptzollamt Lubeck-Ost C-328/85 15 Dec 1987 ECJ European Â Netherlands v Commission (Rec 1987,P 5091) (Judgment) C-326/85; [1987] EUECJ C-326/85 15 Dec 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ireland v Commission (Rec 1987,P 5041) (Judgment) C-325/85; [1987] EUECJ C-325/85 15 Dec 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Netherlands v Commission (Rec 1987,P 5251) (Judgment) C-237/86; [1987] EUECJ C-237/86 15 Dec 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Italy v Commission (Rec 1987,P 5321) (Order) C-289/85; [1987] EUECJ C-289/85 16 Dec 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Turner v Commission (Rec 1987,P 5367) (Judgment) C-178/86; [1987] EUECJ C-178/86 16 Dec 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Delauche v Commission (Rec 1987,P 5345) (Judgment) C-111/86; [1987] EUECJ C-111/86 16 Dec 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Beiten v Commission (Rec 1987,P 5301) (Judgment) C-206/85; [1987] EUECJ C-206/85 16 Dec 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1987,P 5337) (Order) C-11/86; [1987] EUECJ C-11/86 16 Dec 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Greece (Rec 1987,P 5293) (Order) C-132/85; [1987] EUECJ C-132/85 16 Dec 1987 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Â Criminal Proceedings Against Graziano Mattiazzo; ECJ 17-Dec-1987 - R-422/85; [1987] EUECJ R-422/85 Â Â Commission of the European Communities v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg; ECJ 17-Dec-1987 - C-315/85; [1987] EUECJ C-315/85 Â Â Bovo Tours Bv And Van Nood Touringcars Bv v Minister For Transport, Water Control And Construction And Others; ECJ 17-Dec-1987 - C-88/86; R-517/72; [1987] EUECJ R-517/72 Â Â Landsorganisationen I Danmark For Tjenerforbundet I Danmark v Ny Molle Kro; ECJ 17-Dec-1987 - R-287/86; [1987] EUECJ R-287/86 Â Â Saada Zaoui v Caisse Regionale D'Assurance Maladie De L'Ile-De-France (Cramif); ECJ 17-Dec-1987 - C-147/87; R-147/87; [1987] EUECJ R-147/87 Â Â Collini v Office National des Pensions pour Travailleurs Salaries; ECJ 17-Dec-1987 - C-323/86 Â Litster and Others v Forth Dry Dock and Engineering Co Ltd [1988] IRLR 289 1988 SCS Employment, Scotland, European (Second Division of the Inner House of the Court of Session) Twelve applicants worked for an employer who went into insolvent receivership. The receivers agreed to sell the business assets. An hour before completion the workers were dismissed and handed letters stating that no payments would be made for holiday pay or damages for failure to give the statutory period of notice. None were taken on by the new owners of the undertaking. The Industrial Tribunal had held that the dismissal was unfair, that the applicants were employed immediately before the transfer and were dismissed by reason of the transfer. Their dismissal was therefore unfair under Regulation 8 of TUPE and the liability of their former employers was transferred to the transferee. Held; The employer's appeal was allowed. Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 1981 1 Citers Â Hayward v Cammell Laird Shipbuilders Ltd (No. 2) [1988] 2 All ER 257; [1988] ICR 464; [1988] 2 WLR 1134; [1988] AC 894 1988 HL Lord Mackay of Clashfern LC, Lord Bridge, Lord Brandon and Lord Griffiths Employment, Discrimination, European A woman complained that she was not being paid as much as male colleagues who were doing work of equal value. An Act of Parliament had made certain provisions in that regard. Later, that Act had been amended for the purpose of complying with Community law and this had been done by regulations made under section 2(2) of the European Communities Act 1972. If the applicant has terms in her contract which are more favourable than equivalent terms in the comparator's contract the applicant keeps the benefit of those terms and in addition is entitled to have any less favourable term in her contract modified so as to be not less favourable than the equivalent term in the comparator's contract or, if the comparator has in his contract a beneficial term which does not appear in the applicant's contract, to have such a term included in her contract. It is not open to an employer to say "I have not modified that clause in the applicant's contract because although it is less favourable than the similar clause in the comparator's contract, looked at overall the applicant's contract is as favourable to her as the comparator's contract is favourable to him." Lord Mackay "Generally speaking primary legislation in the United Kingdom could confer a greater [employment] benefit on the appellant than she would be entitled to under the community legislation. The present case is special since the particular provisions on which the appellant relies for her case were inserted by regulations made under the European Communities Act 1972 and accordingly it might be questioned whether, if higher rights than those conferred under community law were provided in this way under domestic law, the making of the regulations was a proper exercise of the statutory power conferred by the European Communities Act 1972." European Communities Act 1972 2(2) 1 Cites 1 Citers Â Â Duke v GEC Reliance Systems Limited; HL 2-Jan-1988 - [1988] ICR 447; [1988] AC 618; [1988] 2 WLR 359; [1988] 1 All ER 626; [1988] IRLR 118; [1987] UKHL 10 Â Commission v Italy C-63/86 [1988] EUECJ C-63/86 14 Jan 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Arposol v Council (Rec 1988,P 13) (Judgment) C-55/86; [1986] EUECJ C-55/86R; [1988] EUECJ C-55/86 14 Jan 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Belgium (Judgment) C-227/85; C-228/85; C-229/85; C-230/85; [1988] ECR 1 11; [1988] EUECJ C-230/85 14 Jan 1988 ECJ European A Member State "may not plead provisions, practices or circumstances existing in its internal legal system in order to justify a failure to comply with its obligations under Community law". 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Regina v Customs and Excise, Ex Parte Imperial Tobacco (Judgment) C-141/86 19 Jan 1988 ECJ European Â Â Gullung v Conseil De L'Ordre Des Avocats Du Barreau De Colmar Et De Saverne; ECJ 19-Jan-1988 - R-292/86; [1988] EUECJ R-292/86 Â Biedermann v Court Of Auditors (Rec 1988,P 143) (Judgment) C-2/87; [1988] EUECJ C-2/87 19 Jan 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Â Regina v HM Customs and Excise Ex Parte Imperial Tobacco Ltd; ECJ 19-Jan-1988 - R-141/86; [1988] EUECJ R-141/86 Â Pesca Valentia Limited v Ministry For Fisheries And Forestry, Ireland And The Attorney General. (Fisheries ) R-223/86; [1988] EUECJ R-223/86 19 Jan 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Pesca Valentia v Minister For Fisheries and Forestry C-223/86 19 Jan 1988 ECJ European Â Gullung v Councils De L'Ordre Des Avocats Du Barreau De Colmar and De Saverne (Rec 1988,P 111) (Sv88-291 Fi88-291) (Judgment) C-292/86 19 Jan 1988 ECJ European Â Top Hit Holzvertrieb v Commission (Rec 1988,P 161) (Order) C-378/87 22 Jan 1988 ECJ European Â Distrivet v Council (Rec 1988,P 209) (Order) C-376/87; [1988] EUECJ C-376/87R 27 Jan 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Denmark v Commission (Rec 1988,P 169) (Judgment) C-349/85; [1988] EUECJ C-349/85 27 Jan 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Netherlands (Rec 1988,P 281) (Judgment) C-213/85; [1988] EUECJ C-213/85 2 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Blaizot v Universite De Liege and Others (Rec 1988,P 379) (Sv88-335 Fi88-335) (Judgment) C-24/86 2 Feb 1988 ECJ European Â Barra v Belgian State (Rec 1988,P 355) (Sv88-325 Fi88-325) (Judgment) C-309/85 2 Feb 1988 ECJ European Â United Kingdom v Commission (Judgment) C-305/85; [1988] EUECJ C-305/85 2 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Belgium (Rec 1988,P 305) (Judgment) C-293/85; [1985] EUECJ C-293/85R; [1988] EUECJ C-293/85 2 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Van Der Kooy v Commission (Rec 1988,P 219) (Sv88-305 Fi88-305) (Judgment) C-67/85; [1985] EUECJ C-67/85R 2 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ministeriet For Skatter Og Afgifter v Dansk Sparinvest C-36/86 2 Feb 1988 ECJ European Â United Kingdom v Commission (Judgment) C-61/86; [1988] EUECJ C-61/86 2 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Kwekerij Gebroeders Van Der Kooy Bv And Others v Commission Of The European Communities. (Application For Annulment ) C-70/85; [1988] EUECJ C-70/85 2 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Livestock Sales Transport Ltd And P. M. Johnson Esq. v Intervention Board For Agricultural Produce. R-162/86; [1988] EUECJ R-162/86 2 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Livestock Sales Transport v Intervention Board For Agricultural Produce (Rec 1988,P 489) (Judgment) C-162/86 2 Feb 1988 ECJ European Â Ministeriet For Skatter Og Afgifter v Investeringsforeningen Dansk Sparinvest. R-36/86; [1988] EUECJ R-36/86 2 Feb 1988 ECJ European, Taxes - Other (Tax Provisions ) [ Bailii ] Â Vincent Blaizot v University Of Liege And Others. (Social Policy ) R-24/86; [1988] EUECJ R-24/86 2 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Bruno Barra v Belgian State And City Of Liege. (Preliminary Questions ) R-309/85; [1988] EUECJ R-309/85 2 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Covale v Commission (Rec 1988,P 515) (Order) C-191/87; [1988] EUECJ C-191/87 3 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Mary Murphy and others v An Bord Telecom Eireann C-157/86; [1988] ICR 445; [1988] 1 CMLR 879 4 Feb 1988 ECJ European, Discrimination Article 119 of the EEC Treaty, which is directly applicable in the sense that the workers concerned may rely on it in legal proceedings and in the sense that national courts or tribunals must take it into account as a constituent part of community law, must be interpreted as covering, in addition to the case of unequal pay for equal work or work of equal value, the case where a worker who relies on that provision to obtain equal pay within the meaning thereof is engaged in work of higher value than that of the person with whom a comparison is to be made. It is for the national court or tribunal before which a party relies on a directly applicable Treaty provision, within the limits of its discretion under national law, when interpreting and applying domestic law, to give to it, where possible, an interpretation which accords with the requirements of the applicable community law and, to the extent that this is not possible, to hold such domestic law inapplicable. 1 Citers Â Hoffmann v Krieg R-145/86; [1988] EUECJ R-145/86 4 Feb 1988 ECJ European, Jurisdiction Europa Convention on Jurisdiction And The Enforcement Of Judgments - A foreign judgment which has been recognized by virtue of article 26 of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must in principle have the same effects in the state in which enforcement is sought as it does in the state in which judgment was given. A foreign judgment whose enforcement has been ordered in a contracting state pursuant to article 31 of the convention and which remains enforceable in the state in which it was given must not continue to be enforced in the state where enforcement is sought when, under the law of the latter state, it ceases to be enforceable for reasons which lie outside the scope of the convention. The convention does not preclude the court of the state in which enforcement is sought from drawing the necessary inferences from a national decree of divorce when considering the enforcement of the foreign order made in regard to maintenance obligations between spouses. A foreign judgment ordering a person to make maintenance payments to his spouse by virtue of his conjugal obligations to support her is irreconcilable within the meaning of article 27(3) of the convention with a national judgment pronouncing the divorce of the spouses. Europa Article 36 of the Convention must be interpreted as meaning that a party who has not appealed against the enforcement order referred to in that provision is thereafter precluded, at the stage of the execution of the judgment, from relying on a valid ground which he could have pleaded in such an appeal, and that that rule must be applied of their own motion by the courts of the state in which enforcement is sought. However, that rule does not apply when it has the result of obliging the national court to make the effects of a national judgment which lies outside the scope of the convention conditional on its recognition in the state in which the foreign judgment whose enforcement is at issue was given. [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Belgium (Rec 1988,P 579) (Judgment) C-391/85; [1988] EUECJ C-391/85 4 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Margetts and Addenbrooke v Cuddy C-143/86 4 Feb 1988 ECJ European Â Hoffmann v Krieg (Rec 1988,P 645) (Judgment) C-145/86 4 Feb 1988 ECJ European Â John Richard Alan East And Others (Margetts And Addenbrooke) v Thomas Cuddy And Winifred Cuddy. R-143/86; [1988] EUECJ R-143/86 4 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Mary Murphy And Others v An Bord Telecom Eireann. R-157/86; [1988] EUECJ R-157/86 4 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1988,P 607) (Judgment) C-113/86; [1988] EUECJ C-113/86 4 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Belgium (Rec 1988,P 693) (Judgment) C-255/86; [1988] EUECJ C-255/86 4 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v United Kingdom (Judgment) C-261/85; [1988] EUECJ C-261/85 4 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Italy v Commission (Rec 1988,P 521) (Judgment) C-256/85; [1988] EUECJ C-256/85 4 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Picciolo v Commission (Rec 1988,P 711) (Judgment) C-1/87; [1988] EUECJ C-1/87 9 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Foreningen Af Arbejdsledere I Danmark v Daddy's Dance Hall A/S [1989] 2 CMLR 517; C-324/86; R-324/86; [1988] EUECJ R-324/86; [1988] ECR 739; [1989] ICR 330; [1988] IRLR 315 10 Feb 1988 ECJ European, Employment The claimant, Mr Tellerup, was employed as a restaurant manager by the transferor, Irma Catering A/S. When its lease was terminated it dismissed all staff. Mr Tellerup's statutory period of notice expired on 30 April 1983. But it continued to run the business with the same staff until 25 February 1983, from when a new lease was concluded between the landlord and Daddy's Dance Hall A/S. Daddy's Dance Hall immediately re-employed the the staff including Mr Tellerup in the same jobs. The new contract with Mr Tellerup stated his remuneration, formerly of commission, would become a fixed salary. A trial period of three months was agreed on, during which either side could give 14 days' notice. This was a shorter period of notice than that to which Mr Tellerup was entitled if his employment with the transferor was taken into account. He was dismissed on 26 April 1983 with 14 days' notice. Held: One question was whether an employee may waive rights conferred on him by the Directive if the disadvantages resulting from his waiver are offset by such benefits that, taking the matter as a whole, he is not placed in a worse position. The court gave a qualified answer saying that the purpose of the Directive is to ensure that the rights of employees affected by the transfer of an undertaking are safeguarded, adding that: "Since this protection is a matter of public policy, and therefore independent of the will of the parties to the contract of employment, the rules of the Directive, in particular those concerning the protection of workers against dismissal by reason of the transfer, must be considered to be mandatory, so that it is not possible to derogate from them in a manner unfavourable to employees. The court said that it followed that employees are not entitled to waive the rights conferred on them by the Directive, and that those rights cannot be restricted even with their consent. But the Directive could be relied on only to ensure that the employee is protected in his relations with the transferee to the same extent as he was in his relations with the transferor under the legal rules of the Member State. "Consequently, in so far as national law allows the employment relationship to be altered in a manner unfavourable to employees in situations other than the transfer of an undertaking, in particular as regards their protection against dismissal, such an alternative is not precluded merely because the undertaking has been transferred in the meantime and the agreement has therefore been made with the new employer." 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â The Queen v Customs and Excise, Ex Parte National Dried Fruit Trade Association (Rec 1988,P 757) (Judgment) C-77/86 11 Feb 1988 ECJ European Â The Queen v H. M. Commissioners Of Customs And Excise, Ex Parte: The National Dried Fruit Trade Association. R-77/86; [1988] EUECJ R-77/86 11 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Office Belge De L'Economie Et De L'Agriculture (Obea) v Etablissements Soules and Cie Sa. R-79/87; [1988] EUECJ R-79/87 23 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Obea v Etablissements Soules and Cie (Rec 1988,P 937) (Judgment) C-79/87 23 Feb 1988 ECJ European Â United Kingdom v Council (Rec 1988,P 905) (Judgment) C-131/86; [1988] EUECJ C-131/86 23 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v France (Rec 1988,P 793) (Judgment) C-216/84; [1988] EUECJ C-216/84 23 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v United Kingdom (Rec 1988,P 817) (Judgment) C-353/85; [1988] EUECJ C-353/85 23 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1988,P 843) (Judgment) C-429/85; [1988] EUECJ C-429/85 23 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â United Kingdom v Council (Rec 1988,P 855) (Sv88-367 Fi88-367) (Judgment) C-68/86; [1988] EUECJ C-68/86 23 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Groupement De Producteurs De Coton &Quot;Omada Paragogon Vamvakiou AndrianouGizinou and Sia Thiva/Ega&Quot; v Hellenic Republic. R-8/87; [1988] EUECJ R-8/87 24 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â AndrianouGizinou v Greece (Rec 1988,P 1001) (Judgment) C-8/87 24 Feb 1988 ECJ European Â France v Commission (Rec 1988,P 973) (Judgment) C-264/86; [1988] EUECJ C-264/86 24 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Belgium (Rec 1988,P 955) (Judgment) C-260/86; [1988] EUECJ C-260/86 24 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Les Verts v Parliament (Rec 1988,P 1017) (Sv88-381 Fi88-381) (Judgment) C-190/84; [1988] EUECJ C-190/84 25 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Greece (Rec 1988,P 1037) (Judgment) C-194/85; [1988] EUECJ C-194/85 25 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Netherlands v Commission (Rec 1988,P 1191) (Judgment) C-238/86; [1988] EUECJ C-238/86 25 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Criminal Proceedings Against Rainer Drexl. (Tax Provisions ) R-299/86; [1988] EUECJ R-299/86 25 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Bianco and Girard v Directeur General Des Douanes and Droits Indirects (Rec 1988,P 1099) (Sv88-387 Fi88-387) (Judgment) C-331/85 25 Feb 1988 ECJ European Â Raiffeisen Hauptgenossenschaft Eg v Bundesanstalt Fuer Landwirtschaftliche Marktordnung (Balm). (Agriculture ) R-199/86; [1988] EUECJ R-199/86 25 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Raiffeisen v Balm (Rec 1988,P 1169) (Judgment) C-199/86 25 Feb 1988 ECJ European Â Commission v Germany (Rec 1988,P 1123) (Sv88-395 Fi88-395) (Judgment) C-427/85; [1988] EUECJ C-427/85 25 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Netherlands v Commission (Rec 1988,P 1065) (Judgment) C-327/85; [1988] EUECJ C-327/85 25 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Drexl (Rec 1988,P 1213) (Sv88-413 Fi88-413) (Judgment) C-299/86 25 Feb 1988 ECJ European Â Sa Les Fils De Jules Bianco And J. Girard Fils Sa v Directeur General Des Douanes Et Droits Indirects. R-331/85; [1988] EUECJ R-331/85 25 Feb 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1988,P 1237) (Judgment) C-309/86; [1988] EUECJ C-309/86 2 Mar 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Council Des Gouverneurs De La Eib (Rec 1988,P 1281) (Judgment) C-85/86; [1988] EUECJ C-85/86 3 Mar 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Bergandi v Directeur General Des Impots (Rec 1988,P 1343) (Judgment) C-252/86 3 Mar 1988 ECJ European Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1988,P 1323) (Judgment) C-116/86; [1988] EUECJ C-116/86 3 Mar 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Gabriel Bergandi v Directeur General Des Impots. (Tax Provisions ) R-252/86; [1988] EUECJ R-252/86 3 Mar 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Allen and Hanburys Ltd v Generics (UK) Ltd (Rec 1988,P 1245) C-434/85; [1988] 2 All ER 454 3 Mar 1988 ECJ European Â Allen And Hanburys Ltd v Generics (Uk) Ltd. (Free Movement Of Goods ) R-434/85; [1988] EUECJ R-434/85 3 Mar 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â A. Topfer and Co. Gmbh v Hauptzollamt Hildesheim. R-321/86; [1988] EUECJ R-321/86 8 Mar 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Intiem v Staatssecretaris Van Financien (Rec 1988,P 1471) (Judgment) C-165/86 8 Mar 1988 ECJ European Â Brunotti v Commission (Rec 1988,P 1379) (Judgment) C-339/85; [1988] EUECJ C-339/85 8 Mar 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Brown v Court Of Justice C-125/87; [1988] EUECJ C-125/87; [1989] EUECJ C-125/87 8 Mar 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Â Dik v College Van Burgemeester En Wethouders; ECJ 8-Mar-1988 - C-80/87 Â Leesportefeuille 'Intiem' Cv v Staatssecretaris Van Financien. R-165/86; [1988] EUECJ R-165/86 8 Mar 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Nicolet Instrument Gmbh v Hauptzollamt Frankfurt Am Main-Flughafen R-43/87; [1988] EUECJ R-43/87 8 Mar 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Sprl Arcado v Sa Haviland [1989] ECC 1; [1988] ECR 1539; R-9/87; [1988] EUECJ R-9/87 8 Mar 1988 ECJ European ECJ The concept of "matters relating to a contract" in article 5(1) of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters is to be regarded as an independent concept which, for the purpose of the application of the convention, must be interpreted by reference principally to the system and objectives of the Convention in order to ensure that it is fully effective. Proceedings relating to the wrongful repudiation of an independent commercial agency agreement and the payment of commission due under such an agreement are proceedings in matters relating to a contract within the meaning of article 5(1) of the Convention. [ Bailii ] Â Anthony McNicholl Ltd And Others v Minister For Agriculture R-296/86; [1988] EUECJ R-296/86 8 Mar 1988 ECJ European, Contract ECJ Whilst the concept of force majeure does not presuppose absolute impossibility, it nevertheless requires the non-performance of the act in question to be due to circumstances beyond the control of the person claiming force majeure, which are abnormal and unforeseeable and of which the consequences could not have been avoided despite the exercise of all due care. The failure of a purchaser of beef held in intervention storage and intended for exportation to fulfil his obligations to export it, as a result of fraud or negligence or a combination of fraud and negligence on the part of an independent carrier to whom the transport of the goods was subcontracted, does not constitute a case of force majeure within the meaning of article 11 of commission regulation (eec) no 1687/76 laying down common detailed rules for verifying the use and/or destination of products from intervention. Where the fulfilment of an obligation to export a quantity of beef purchased from an intervention agency is guaranteed by the security referred to in regulation no 1687/76, the principle of proportionality is properly applied in the case of a failure to observe this principal obligation if the intervention agency determines the amount of the security to be declared forfeit by reference to the tonnage which was not exported. Except in the case of force majeure, that principle does not require the intervention agency to take into consideration other circumstances such as the moral blame attaching to the exporter, the loss suffered by community funds or the profit which might have been made on a resale within the community. [ Bailii ] Â Sergio v Commission C-64/86 8 Mar 1988 ECJ European Â Â Apple and Pear Development Council v Commissioners of Customs and Excise; ECJ 8-Mar-1988 - C-102/86; R-102/86; [1988] EUECJ R-102/86; [1988] STC 221 Â Mcnicholl v Minister For Agriculture (Rec 1988,P 1491) (Judgment) C-296/86 8 Mar 1988 ECJ European Â Nicolet Instrument v Hauptzollamt Frankfurt Am Main-Flughafen C-43/87 8 Mar 1988 ECJ European Â Executif Regional Wallon v Commission (Rec 1988,P 1573) (Judgment) C-62/87; [1988] EUECJ C-62/87 8 Mar 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Maindiaux and Others v Esc (Rec 1988,P 1659) (Order) C-63/88; [1988] EUECJ C-63/88R 15 Mar 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Greece (Rec 1988,P 1637) (Sv88-439 Fi88-439) (Judgment) C-147/86 15 Mar 1988 ECJ European Â De Compte v Parliament C-44/88; [1988] EUECJ C-44/88R 16 Mar 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Hecq v Commission (Rec 1988,P 1681) (Judgment) C-19/87; [1988] EUECJ C-19/87 23 Mar 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Mouriki v Commission (Rec 1988,P 1721) (Judgment) C-248/87; [1988] EUECJ C-248/87 23 Mar 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Giubilini v Commission (Rec 1988,P 1735) (Order) C-289/87; [1988] EUECJ C-289/87 23 Mar 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Morabito v Parliament (Rec 1988,P 1707) (Judgment) C-105/87; [1988] EUECJ C-105/87 23 Mar 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â La Terza v Court Of Justice (Rec 1988,P 1741) (Order) C-76/88; [1988] EUECJ C-76/88R 23 Mar 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Goossens v Commission (Rec 1988,P 1819) (Judgment) C-228/86; [1988] EUECJ C-228/86 24 Mar 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1988,P 1799) (Judgment) C-104/86; [1988] EUECJ C-104/86 24 Mar 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Greece C-240/86 [1988] EUECJ C-240/86 24 Mar 1988 ECJ European (Judgment) [ Bailii ] Â United Kingdom v Commission (Rec 1988,P 1749) (Judgment) C-347/85; [1988] EUECJ C-347/85 24 Mar 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Versele-Laga v Robegra (Rec 1988,P 1961) (Judgment) C-64/87 19 Apr 1988 ECJ European Â Greek State v Inter-Kom (Rec 1988,P 1979) (Judgment) C-71/87 19 Apr 1988 ECJ European Â Erauw-Jacquery v La Hesbignonne (Rec 1988,P 1919) (Judgment) C-27/87 19 Apr 1988 ECJ European Â Greek State v Inter-Kom Emboriki Kai Biomichaniki Epicheirisis Elaion, Liparon Kai Trofimon Ae. R-71/87; [1988] EUECJ R-71/87 19 Apr 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Nv Versele-Laga v Nv Robegra. (Agriculture ) R-64/87; [1988] EUECJ R-64/87 19 Apr 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Misset v Council C-319/85; [1988] EUECJ C-319/85 19 Apr 1988 ECJ European (Judgment) Officials - Disciplinary measures. [ Bailii ] Â Sperber v Court Of Justice (Rec 1988,P 1943) (Judgment) C-37/87; [1988] EUECJ C-37/87 19 Apr 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Sprl Louis Erauw-Jacquery v La Hesbignonne Sc. (Competition ) R-27/87; [1988] EUECJ R-27/87 19 Apr 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Santarelli v Commission (Rec 1988,P 1875) (Judgment) C-149/86; [1988] EUECJ C-149/86 19 Apr 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â M v Council (Rec 1988,P 1891) (Judgment) C-175/86; [1986] EUECJ C-175/86R; [1988] EUECJ C-175/86 19 Apr 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Criminal Proceedings Against Guy Bekaert. (Preliminary Questions ) R-204/87; [1988] EUECJ R-204/87 20 Apr 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Criminal Proceedings Against Bekaert (Rec 1988,P 2029) (Judgment) C-204/87 20 Apr 1988 ECJ European Â Bakker v Rwp (Rec 1988,P 2009) (Judgment) C-151/87 20 Apr 1988 ECJ European Â Maindiaux and Others v Esc (Rec 1988,P 2003) (Order) C-146/85 20 Apr 1988 ECJ European Â Cornelis G. Bakker v Rijksdienst Voor Werknemerspensionen. R-151/87; [1988] EUECJ R-151/87 20 Apr 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Fratelli Pardini Spa v Ministero Del Commercio Con L'Estero And Banca Toscana (Lucca Branch). (Preliminary Rulings ) R-338/85; [1988] EUECJ R-338/85 21 Apr 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Pardini v Ministero Del Commercio Con L'Estero (Rec 1988,P 2041) (Judgment) C-338/85 21 Apr 1988 ECJ European Â Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas v Firma P. Kruecken. (Agriculture ) R-316/86; [1988] EUECJ R-316/86 26 Apr 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Germany (Rec 1988,P 2139) (Judgment) C-74/86; [1988] EUECJ C-74/86 26 Apr 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Bond Van Adverteerders And Others v The Netherlands State. (Freedom To Supply Services ) R-352/85; [1988] EUECJ R-352/85 26 Apr 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Asteris v Commission (Rec 1988,P 2181) (Judgment) C-97/86 26 Apr 1988 ECJ European Â Bond Van Adverteerders v Netherlands State (Judgment) C-352/85 26 Apr 1988 ECJ European Â Apesco v Commission EEC (Rec 1988,P 2151) (Judgment) C-207/86; [1988] EUECJ C-207/86 26 Apr 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas v Krucken (Rec 1988,P 2213) (Judgment) C-316/86 26 Apr 1988 ECJ European Â Asteris Ae And Others And Hellenic Republic v Commission Of The European Communities. (Action For Annulment ) C-215/86; [1988] EUECJ C-215/86 26 Apr 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1988,P 2271) (Judgment) C-225/86 27 Apr 1988 ECJ European Â Commission v France (Rec 1988,P 2243) (Judgment) C-252/85; [1988] EUECJ C-252/85 27 Apr 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Farzoo and Kortmann v Commission (Rec 1988,P 2281) (Order) C-352/87; [1988] EUECJ C-352/87 27 Apr 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Laisa v Council (Rec 1988,P 2285) (Judgment) C-31/86 28 Apr 1988 ECJ European Â Levantina Agricola Industrial Sa (Laisa) And Cpc Espana Sa v Council Of The Ec. (Action For A Declaration That A Measure Is Void ) C-35/86; [1988] EUECJ C-35/86 28 Apr 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Mulder v Minister Van Landbouw En Visserij C-120/86 28 Apr 1988 ECJ European Â G. Seguela And A. Lachkar And Others v Administration Des Impots. R-149/87; [1988] EUECJ R-149/87 28 Apr 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Seguela v Administration Des Impots (Rec 1988,P 2397) (Judgment) C-76/87 28 Apr 1988 ECJ European Â Thevenot v Centrale Laitiere De Franche-Comte (Rec 1988,P 2375) (Judgment) C-61/87 28 Apr 1988 ECJ European Â Vanhaeren v Rijksdienst Voor Arbeidsvoorziening (Rec 1988,P 2411) (Judgment) C-192/87 28 Apr 1988 ECJ European Â Von Deetzen v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas. R-170/86; [1988] EUECJ R-170/86 28 Apr 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Von Deetzen v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas (Rec 1988,P 2355) (Judgment) C-170/86 28 Apr 1988 ECJ European Â Andre Thevenot And Others v Centrale Laitiere De Franche-Comte. (Agriculture ) R-61/87; [1988] EUECJ R-61/87 28 Apr 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Assider v Commission (Rec 1988,P 2425) (Order) C-92/88; [1988] EUECJ C-92/88R 2 May 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Bodson v Pompes Funebres Des Regions Liberees (Rec 1988,P 2479) (Judgment) C-30/87 4 May 1988 ECJ European Â Viva v Fnrom (Rec 1988,P 2521) (Judgment) C-83/87 4 May 1988 ECJ European Â Clasen v Parliament (Rec 1988,P 2453) (Judgment) C-268/86; [1988] EUECJ C-268/86 4 May 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Contini v Commission (Rec 1988,P 2537) (Order) C-95/87; [1988] EUECJ C-95/87 4 May 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Watgen v Caisse De Pension Des Employes Prives (Rec 1988,P 2435) (Judgment) C-64/85 4 May 1988 ECJ European Â Fernand Watgen v Caisse De Pension Des Employes Prives. R-64/85; [1988] EUECJ R-64/85 4 May 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Bodson v Sa Pompes Funebres Des Regions Liberees (State Monopolies Of A Commercial Character) [1988] EUECJ R-30/87 4 May 1988 ECJ European, Commercial [ Bailii ] Â Jaenicke Cendoya v Commission (Rec 1988,P 2585) (Order) C-108/88 5 May 1988 ECJ European Â Berg And Busschers v Besselsen C-144/87; R-145/87; [1988] EUECJ R-145/87; [1988] ECR 2559 5 May 1988 ECJ European, Employment Europa Social Policy - Article 3(1) of Directive 77/187/EEC which concerns the safeguarding of employees' rights in the event of transfers of undertakings must be interpreted as meaning that after the date of transfer, and by virtue of the transfer alone, the transferor is discharged from all obligations arising under the contract or the employment relationship, even if the workers employed in the undertaking do not consent or if they object, subject however to the power of the Member States to provide for joint liability of the transferor and the transferee after the date of transfer. Article 1(1) of Directive 77/187/EEC of 14 February 1977 must be interpreted as meaning that the directive applies both to the transfer of an undertaking pursuant to a lease-purchase agreement of the kind available under Netherlands law and to the retransfer of the undertaking upon the termination of the lease-purchase agreement by judicial decision. The Acquired Rights Directive is "intended to safeguard the rights of workers in the event of a change of employer by making it possible for them to continue to work for the transferee under the same conditions as those agreed with the transferor. Its purpose is not, however, to ensure that the contract of employment or the employment relationship with the transferor is continued where the undertaking's employees do not wish to remain in the transferee's employ." Directive 77/187/EEC 3(1) 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Gutshof-Ei v Land Rheinland-Pfalz (Rec 1988,P 2541) (Judgment) C-91/87 5 May 1988 ECJ European Â Erzeugergemeinschaft Gutshof-Ei Gmbh v Land Rheinland-Pfalz. R-91/87; [1988] EUECJ R-91/87 5 May 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Crete Citron Producers Association v Commission C-112/88; [1988] EUECJ C-112/88R 6 May 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Greece v Commission (Rec 1988,P 2591) (Order) C-111/88 6 May 1988 ECJ European Â Warner Brothers Inc. And Metronome Video Aps v Erik Viuff Christiansen R-158/86; [1988] EUECJ R-158/86 17 May 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Marcel Erpelding v Secretaire D'Etat A L'Agriculture Et A La Viticulture. (Community Law ) R-84/87; [1988] EUECJ R-84/87 17 May 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Arendt v Parliament (Rec 1988,P 2633) (Judgment) C-28/87; [1988] EUECJ C-28/87 17 May 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Warner Brothers and Others v Christiansen C-158/86 17 May 1988 ECJ European Â Erpelding v Secretaire D'Etat A L'Agriculture and A La Viticulture (Rec 1988,P 2647) (Judgment) C-84/87 17 May 1988 ECJ European Â Santarelli v Commission (Rec 1988,P 2699) (Order) C-78/87; [1988] EUECJ C-78/87 24 May 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1988,P 2685) (Judgment) C-122/87; [1988] EUECJ C-122/87 24 May 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Belgium (Rec 1988,P 2677) (Judgment) C-307/86; [1988] EUECJ C-307/86 24 May 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Agro-Pecuaria Vicente Nobre v Council (Rec 1988,P 2725) (Judgment) C-253/86; [1988] EUECJ C-253/86 31 May 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â D. Goerrig Gmbh v Hauptzollamt Geldern. R-74/87; [1988] EUECJ R-74/87 31 May 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Goerrig v Hauptzollamt Geldern (Rec 1988,P 2771) (Judgment) C-74/87 31 May 1988 ECJ European Â Muller v Landwirtschaftskammer Rheinland-Pfalz C-265/86 31 May 1988 ECJ European Â Rousseau v Court Of Auditors (Rec 1988,P 2705) (Judgment) C-167/86; [1988] EUECJ C-167/86 31 May 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Nunez v Commission (Rec 1988,P 2791) (Judgment) C-211/87; [1988] EUECJ C-211/87 31 May 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Egon Mueller v Landwirtschaftskammer Rheinland-Pfalz. R-265/86; [1988] EUECJ R-265/86 31 May 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Mario Roviello v Landesversicherungsanstalt Schwaben. R-20/85; [1988] EUECJ R-20/85 7 Jun 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Greece v Commission (Rec 1988,P 2855) (Judgment) C-57/86; [1986] EUECJ C-57/86R; [1988] EUECJ C-57/86 7 Jun 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Roviello v Landesversicherungsanstalt Schwaben (Rec 1988,P 2805) (Judgment) C-20/85 7 Jun 1988 ECJ European Â Commission v Greece (Rec 1988,P 2875) (Judgment) C-63/87; [1988] EUECJ C-63/87 7 Jun 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ireland v Commission (Rec 1988,P 2895) (Order) C-242/86; [1988] EUECJ C-242/86 8 Jun 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Vlachou v Court Of Auditors (Rec 1988,P 2901) (Judgment) C-135/87; [1988] EUECJ C-135/87 8 Jun 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1988,P 2919) (Judgment) C-56/87; [1988] EUECJ C-56/87 9 Jun 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Sofrimport v Commission (Rec 1988,P 2931) (Order) C-152/88 10 Jun 1988 ECJ European Â Dansk Denkavit v Landbrugsministeriet (Rec 1988,P 2965) (Judgment) C-29/87 14 Jun 1988 ECJ European Â Â Lucas v Commission; ECJ 14-Jun-1988 - C-47/87; [1988] EUECJ C-47/87 Â Dansk Denkavit Aps v Danish Ministry Of Agriculture. (Agriculture ) R-29/87; [1988] EUECJ R-29/87 14 Jun 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Heyl v Commission (Rec 1988,P 2943) (Judgment) C-12/87; [1988] EUECJ C-12/87 14 Jun 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Muysers and Others v Court Of Auditors (Rec 1988,P 3037) (Judgment) C-161/87; [1987] EUECJ C-161/87R; [1988] EUECJ C-161/87 14 Jun 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Christianos v Court Of Justice (Rec 1988,P 2995) (Judgment) C-33/87; [1988] EUECJ C-33/87 14 Jun 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Â P Bork International A/S, in liquidation v Foreningen af Arbejdsledere I Danmark; ECJ 15-Jun-1988 - C-101/87; R-101/87; [1988] EUECJ R-101/87; [1989] IRLR 41 Â Progoulis v Commission (Rec 1988,P 3081) (Order) C-371/87; [1988] EUECJ C-371/87 16 Jun 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Progoulis v Commission (Rec 1988,P 3091) (Order) C-372/87; [1988] EUECJ C-372/87 16 Jun 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â The Queen v Customs and Excise, Ex Parte Tattersalls Ltd (Rec 1988,P 3281) (Judgment) C-10/87 21 Jun 1988 ECJ European Â Sylvie Lair v Universitat Hannover C-39/86; R-39/86; [1988] EUECJ R-39/86; [1988] ECR 3161 21 Jun 1988 ECJ Lord Mackenzie Stuart, P European, Benefits European law draws a distinction between member state nationals who have not yet entered into an employment relationship in the host member state where they are looking for work and those who are already working in that state or who, having worked there but no longer being in an employment relationship, are nevertheless considered to be workers. 'the rights guaranteed to migrant workers do not necessarily depend on the actual or continuing existence of an employment relationship'. Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 of the Council of 15 October 1968 on freedom of movement for workers within the Community 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Albani and Others v Commission (Rec 1988,P 3361) (Order) C-148/88; [1988] EUECJ C-148/88R 21 Jun 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Brown v Secretary Of State For Scotland (Rec 1988,P 3205) (Sv88-489 Fi88-489) (Judgment) (1988) ECR 3205; C-197/86 21 Jun 1988 ECJ European 1 Citers Â Commission v Belgium (Rec 1988,P 3271) (Judgment) C-283/86; [1988] EUECJ C-283/86 21 Jun 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Ireland (Rec 1988,P 3097) (Judgment) C-415/85; [1988] EUECJ C-415/85 21 Jun 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Greece (Rec 1988,P 3333) (Judgment) C-127/87; [1988] EUECJ C-127/87 21 Jun 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v United Kingdom C-416/85; [1990] 2 QB 130; [1988] EUECJ C-416/85; [1988] STC 456 21 Jun 1988 ECJ Advocate General Darmon European, VAT Europa An action by the Commission pursuant to Article 169 of the Treaty against a Member State for failure to fulfil its obligations, the bringing of which is a matter for the Commission in its entire discretion, is objective in nature. In the context of the balance of powers between the institutions laid down in the Treaty, it is not for the Court to consider what objectives are pursued in such an action. Its role is to decide whether or not the Member State in question has failed to fulfil its obligations as alleged. The identification of "cleary defined social reasons" for which certain reduced rates and exemptions from value-added tax may be retained on a transitional basis pursuant to the last indent of Article 17 of the Second Directive and Article 28 (2) of the Sixth Directive is in principle a matter of political choice for the Member States and can be the subject-matter of supervision at the Community level only in so far as, by distorting that concept, it leads to measures which because of their effects and their true objectives lie outside its scope. Since, under the general scheme of value-added tax, the final consumer is the person who acquires goods or services for personal use, as opposed to an economic activity, and thus bears the tax, the second condition laid down in those provisions for the retention of certain reduced rates and exemptions, that is to say that they must be "for the benefit of the final consumer" must in the light of the social purpose of Article 17 be understood as meaning that the beneficiary must not use exempted goods or services in the course of an economic activity. The provision of goods or services at a stage higher in the production or distribution chain which is nevertheless sufficiently close to the consumer to be of advantage to him must also be considered to be for the benefit of the final consumer as so defined. "With regard to buildings intended for housing, the Commission's arguments cannot be upheld. The measures adopted by the United Kingdom to implement its social policy in housing matters, that is to say, facilitating home ownership for the whole population, fall within the purview of 'social reasons' for the purposes of the last indent of article 17 of the Second Directive." 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1988,P 3249) (Judgment) C-257/86; [1988] EUECJ C-257/86 21 Jun 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Steven Malcolm Brown v The Secretary Of State For Scotland. (Free Movement Of Persons ) R-197/86; [1988] EUECJ R-197/86 21 Jun 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Industrie Siderurgiche Associate (Isa) And Others v Commission Of The European Communities. C-57/87; [1988] EUECJ C-57/87 21 Jun 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Isa v Commission (Rec 1988,P 3305) (Judgment) C-32/87 21 Jun 1988 ECJ European Â Sportex v Oberfinanzdirektion Hamburg (Rec 1988,P 3351) (Judgment) C-253/87 21 Jun 1988 ECJ European Â The Queen v Commissioners Of Customs And Excise Ex Parte Tattersalls Ltd. R-10/87; [1988] EUECJ R-10/87 21 Jun 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Sportex Gmbh and Co. v Oberfinanzdirektion Hamburg. R-253/87; [1988] EUECJ R-253/87 21 Jun 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1988,P 3369) (Judgment) C-3/86; [1988] EUECJ C-3/86 28 Jun 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Council (Rec 1988,P 3401) (Judgment) C-7/87; [1988] EUECJ C-7/87 28 Jun 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Gritzmann-Martignoni v Commission (Rec 1988,P 3491) (Judgment) C-124/87; [1988] EUECJ C-124/87 29 Jun 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Luc Van Landschoot v Nv Mera. R-300/86; [1988] EUECJ R-300/86 29 Jun 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Josef Rebmann v Bundesversicherungsanstalt Fuer Angestellte. R-58/87; [1988] EUECJ R-58/87 29 Jun 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Van Landschoot v Mera (Rec 1988,P 3443) (Sv88-503 Fi88-503) (Judgment) C-300/86 29 Jun 1988 ECJ European Â Rebmann v Bundesversicherungsanstalt Fur Angestellte (Rec 1988,P 3467) (Judgment) C-58/87 29 Jun 1988 ECJ European Â Deville v Administration Des Impots (Rec 1988,P 3513) (Judgment) C-240/87 29 Jun 1988 ECJ European Â C. Deville v Administration Des Impots. R-240/87; [1988] EUECJ R-240/87 29 Jun 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Â Thetford Corporation And Others v Fiamma Spa And Others; ECJ 30-Jun-1988 - C-35/87; R-35/87; [1988] EUECJ R-35/87; [1987] 3 CMLR 266 Â Commission v France (Rec 1988,P 3559) (Judgment) C-318/86; [1988] EUECJ C-318/86 30 Jun 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Â Cida v Council; ECJ 30-Jun-1988 - C-297/86; [1988] EUECJ C-297/86 Â Â Commission v Greece; ECJ 30-Jun-1988 - C-226/87; [1988] EUECJ C-226/87 Â Happy Family v Inspecteur Der Omzetbelasting (Rec 1988,P 3655) (Sv88-515 Fi88-515) (Judgment) C-289/86 5 Jul 1988 ECJ European Â Â W J R Mol v Inspecteur Der Invoerrechten En Accijnzen; ECJ 5-Jul-1988 - R-269/86; [1988] EUECJ R-269/86 Â Vereniging Happy Family Rustenburgerstraat v Inspecteur Der Omzetbelasting R-289/86; [1988] EUECJ R-289/86 5 Jul 1988 ECJ European, VAT ECJ Tax provisions - Harmonization of laws - Turnover tax - Common system of value-added tax - Tax on the supply of goods within the territory of a Member State - Application to unlawful traffic in narcotic drugs - Not permissible - Criminal sanctions for offences - Powers of the Member States - Policy of selective prosecution with regard to supplies of hemp-based drugs - Circumstance not justifying the imposition of tax. Council Directive 77/388 2 [ Bailii ] Â Borowitz v Bundesversicherungsanstalt Fur Angestellte (Rec 1988,P 3715) (Judgment) C-21/87 5 Jul 1988 ECJ European Â Central-Import Munster v Hauptzollamt Munster (Rec 1988,P 3679) (Judgment) C-291/86 5 Jul 1988 ECJ European Â Mol v Inspecteur Der Invoerrechten En Accijnzen (Rec 1988,P 3627) (Judgment) C-269/86 5 Jul 1988 ECJ European Â Central-Import Muenster Gmbh and Co. Kg v Hauptzollamt Muenster. R-291/86; [1988] EUECJ R-291/86 5 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â R. O. E. Scherrens v M. G. Maenhout And Others. R-158/87; [1988] EUECJ R-158/87 6 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Dillinger Huttenwerke v Commission (Rec 1988,P 3761) (Judgment) C-236/86; [1988] EUECJ C-236/86 6 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ministere Public And Ministre Des Finances Du Royaume De Belgique v Yves Ledoux. R-127/86; [1988] EUECJ R-127/86 6 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Criminal Proceedings Against Ledoux (Rec 1988,P 3741) (Judgment) C-127/86 6 Jul 1988 ECJ European Â Scherrens v Maenhout and Others (Rec 1988,P 3791) (Judgment) C-158/87 6 Jul 1988 ECJ European Â Simonella v Commission (Rec 1988,P 3807) (Judgment) C-164/87; [1988] EUECJ C-164/87 6 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Agazzi Leonard v Commission (Rec 1988,P 3823) (Judgment) C-181/87; [1988] EUECJ C-181/87 6 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Moksel v Balm (Rec 1988,P 3845) (Judgment) C-55/87 7 Jul 1988 ECJ European Â Rijksinstituut Voor De Sociale Verzekering Des Zelfstandigen (Rsvz) v Heinrich Wolf Et Nv Microtherm Europe And Others. (Free Movement Of Persons ) R-155/87; [1988] EUECJ R-155/87 7 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Christopher Stanton And Sa Belge D'Assurances 'L'Etoile 1905' v Institut National D'Assurances Sociales Pour Travailleurs Independants (Inasti). (Free Movement Of Persons ) R-143/87; [1988] EUECJ R-143/87 7 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Alexander Moksel Import Und Export Gmbh and Co. Handels-Kg v Bundesanstalt Fuer Landwirtschaftliche Marktordnung. (Agriculture ) R-55/87; [1988] EUECJ R-55/87 7 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Stanton v Inasti (Judgment) C-143/87 7 Jul 1988 ECJ European Â Inasti v Wolf and Others (Rec 1988,P 3897) (Judgment) C-154/87 7 Jul 1988 ECJ European Â Hanning v Parliament (Rec 1988,P 3915) (Order) C-176/88; [1988] EUECJ C-176/88R 11 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v United Kingdom (Rec 1988,P 3921) (Judgment) C-60/86; [1988] EUECJ C-60/86 12 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1988,P 3987) (Judgment) C-310/86; [1988] EUECJ C-310/86 12 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Direct Cosmetics Ltd v Commissioners Of Customs and Excise (Judgment) C-138/86 12 Jul 1988 ECJ European Â Commission v Council (Rec 1988,P 4051) (Judgment) C-383/87; [1988] EUECJ C-383/87 12 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Parliament v Council (Rec 1988,P 4017) (Judgment) C-377/87; [1988] EUECJ C-377/87 12 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1988,P 3995) (Judgment) C-322/86; [1988] EUECJ C-322/86 12 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1988,P 4009) (Judgment) C-326/87; [1988] EUECJ C-326/87 12 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Direct Cosmetics Ltd And Laughtons Photographs Ltd v Commissioners Of Customs And Excise. R-138/86; [1988] EUECJ R-138/86 12 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â France v Commission (Rec 1988,P 4067) (Judgment) C-102/87; [1988] EUECJ C-102/87 13 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v France (Rec 1988,P 4093) (Judgment) C-169/87; [1988] EUECJ C-169/87 13 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Federation Europeenne De La Sante Animale and Others v Council (Rec 1988,P 4121) (Order) C-160/88; [1988] EUECJ C-160/88R; [1988] EUECJ C-160/88 13 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Gerd Weissgerber v Finanzamt Neustadt/Weinstrasse. R-207/87; [1988] EUECJ R-207/87 14 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Lea Jorion, Nee Jeunehomme, and Societe Anonyme D'Etude Et De Gestion Immobiliere 'Egi' v Belgian State R-77/38; [1988] EUECJ R-77/388 14 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Stahlwerke Peinc-Salzgitter Ag And Hoogovens Groep Bv v Commission Of The European Communities. (Ecsc ) C-285/86; [1988] EUECJ C-285/86 14 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ministere Public v Lambert (Rec 1988,P 4369) (Judgment) C-308/86 14 Jul 1988 ECJ European Â Proceedings For Compulsory Reconstruction Against Smanor Sa. (Preliminary Rulings ) R-298/87; [1988] EUECJ R-298/87 14 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Aldinger and Others v Parliament (Rec 1988,P 4395) (Judgment) C-23/87; [1987] EUECJ C-23/87R 14 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Greece (Rec 1988,P 4415) (Judgment) C-38/87; [1988] EUECJ C-38/87 14 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Stahlwerke Peine-Salzgitter v Commission (Rec 1988,P 4131) (Judgment) C-103/85; [1988] EUECJ C-103/85 14 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Syndicat Des Libraires De Normandie v L'Aigle Distribution. R-254/87; [1988] EUECJ R-254/87 14 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Jeunehomme and Others v Belgian State; Jorion v Belgium State C-123/87; [1988] ECR 4517 14 Jul 1988 ECJ European, VAT It was legitimate for Belgium to require, as a condition of a VAT deduction, that the invoice on the sale of a motor car should contain a good deal of information enabling the car to be identified and thereby to prevent substitution and fraud. But there was no requirement that the information had to be provided in any particular form and the court noted, that: "As regards invoices which are irregular as to form, the deduction is allowed when the genuine nature of the transaction is not open to doubt." 1 Citers Â Commission v Belgium (Rec 1988,P 4343) (Judgment) C-298/86; [1988] EUECJ C-298/86 14 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Criminal Proceedings Against Zoni. (Free Movement Of Goods ) R-90/86; [1988] EUECJ R-90/86 14 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Criminal Proceedings Against R. Lambert. R-308/86; [1988] EUECJ R-308/86 14 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â 3 Glocken Gmbh And Gertraud Kritzinger v Usl Centro-Sud And Provincia Autonoma Di Bolzano. (Free Movement Of Goods ) R-407/85; [1988] EUECJ R-407/85 14 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Smanor (Rec 1988,P 4489) (Judgment) C-298/87 14 Jul 1988 ECJ European Â Criminal Proceedings Against Zoni (Rec 1988,P 4285) (Judgment) C-90/86 14 Jul 1988 ECJ European Â Schaflein v Commission (Rec 1988,P 4475) (Judgment) C-284/87; [1988] EUECJ C-284/87 14 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Fediol v Commission EEC (Judgment) C-187/85; [1988] EUECJ C-187/85 14 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Stahlwerke Peine-Salzgitter and Others v Commission (Rec 1988,P 4309) (Judgment) C-33/86 14 Jul 1988 ECJ European Â Fediol v Commission EEC (Rec 1988,P 4193) (Sv88-553 Fi88-553) (Judgment) C-188/85; [1988] EUECJ C-188/85 14 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â 3 Glocken and Others v Usl Centro-Sud and Others (Rec 1988,P 4233) (Sv88-567 Fi88-567) (Judgment) C-407/85 14 Jul 1988 ECJ European Â Weissgerber v Finanzamt Neustadt/Weinstrasse (Judgment) C-207/87 14 Jul 1988 ECJ European, VAT Europa In the absence of implementation of the Sixth Council Directive (77/388/EEC) on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes, a credit negotiator may rely on the tax exemption provision contained in Article 13B(d)(1) of the directive in respect of transactions carried out between 1 January 1978 and 30 June 1978 and as from 1 January 1979 if he did not pass that tax on to the person receiving his services so as to entitle that person to deduct the input tax. Such a right to deduct could arise only if the tax was passed on in accordance with the formalities prescribed by the directive in that regard and if the recipient of the services is himself subject to VAT. Â Syndicat Des Libraires De Normandie v L'Aigle Distribution (Rec 1988,P 4457) (Judgment) C-254/87 14 Jul 1988 ECJ European Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1988,P 4547) (Order) C-194/88; [1988] EUECJ C-194/88R; [1988] EUECJ C-194/88R 20 Jul 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Co-Frutta v Commission (Rec 1988,P 4551) (Order) C-191/88; [1988] EUECJ C-191/88R; [1989] EUECJ C-191/88 19 Aug 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1988,P 4559) (Order) C-194/88 13 Sep 1988 ECJ European Â Hauptzollamt Hamburg-St Annen v Kiwall C-252/87 20 Sep 1988 ECJ European Europa Article 36(1) of Council Regulation No 222/77 of 13 December 1976 on Community transit must be interpreted as precluding the incurring of a customs debt on the release for free circulation in a Member State of goods from a non-member country which were first smuggled into another Member State and then transported under the internal Community transit procedure into the Member State where they were released for free circulation, since the offences or irregularities committed in the other Member State have already given rise to a customs debt in that State. Â Gebroeders Beentjes Bv v State Of The Netherlands. (Approximation Of Laws ) R-31/87; [1988] EUECJ R-31/87 20 Sep 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Hauptzollamt Hamburg-St. Annen v Wilhelm Kiwall Kg. R-252/87; [1988] EUECJ R-252/87 20 Sep 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Denmark C-302/86; [1988] EUECJ C-302/86 20 Sep 1988 ECJ European Europa 1. In the absence of common rules relating to the marketing of the products in question, obstacles to free movement within the Community resulting from disparities between the national laws must be accepted in so far as such rules, applicable to domestic and imported products without distinction, may be recognized as being necessary in order to satisfy mandatory requirements recognized by Community law and are proportionate to the aim in view, in so far as they constitute a measure which least restricts the free movement of goods . Since the protection of the environment constitutes one of the Community' s essential objectives, it is such a requirement. 2. The obligation imposed by national legislation on manufacturers and importers, as part of a system under which the marketing of beer and soft drinks is authorized only in re-usable containers, to establish a deposit-and-return system for empty containers must be regarded as necessary to achieve the objectives pursued in relation to the protection of the environment so that the resulting restrictions on the free movement of goods cannot be regarded as disproportionate. However, the requirement that foreign manufacturers must either use only containers approved by the national authorities, which may refuse approval even if a manufacturer is prepared to ensure that returned containers are re-used, or not market annually more than a certain volume of drinks in non-approved containers is to be regarded as disproportionate and therefore unacceptable since whilst the system of returnable non-approved containers does not ensure a maximum rate of re-use, unlike the system established for approved containers, it is capable of protecting the environment, especially as the quantity of beverages likely to be imported is limited in relation to total national consumption by reason of the restrictive effect of the requirement that containers should be returnable. 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â John Friedr. Krohn (Gmbh and Co.) Kg And Van Es Douane-Agenten Bv v Hoofproduktschap Voor Akkerbouwprodukten. R-217/87; [1988] EUECJ R-217/87 20 Sep 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ubbink Isolatie v Dak- En Wandtechniek (Rec 1988,P 4665) (Judgment) C-136/87 20 Sep 1988 ECJ European Â Oberkreisdirektor Des Kreises Borken and Others v Moormann (Rec 1988,P 4689) (Judgment) C-190/87 20 Sep 1988 ECJ European Â Oberkreisdirektor Des Kreises, Borken And Vertreter Des Offentlichen Interesses Beim Oberverwaltungsgericht Fuer Das Land Nordrhein-Westfalen v Handelsonderneming Moormann Bv. (Free Movement Of Goods ) R-190/87; [1988] EUECJ R-190/87 20 Sep 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ubbink Isolatie Bv v Dak En Wandtechniek Bv. R-136/87; [1988] EUECJ R-136/87 20 Sep 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Krohn and Others v Hoofdproduktschap Voor Akkerbouwprodukten (Rec 1988,P 4727) (Judgment) C-217/87 20 Sep 1988 ECJ European Â Spain v Council (Rec 1988,P 4563) (Judgment) C-203/86; [1988] EUECJ C-203/86 20 Sep 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Beentjes v Netherlands State (Rec 1988,P 4635) (Judgment) C-31/87 20 Sep 1988 ECJ European Â Pascal Van Eycke v Aspa Nv. (Competition ) R-267/86; [1988] EUECJ R-267/86 21 Sep 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v France (Rec 1988,P 4797) (Sv88-599 Fi88-599) (Judgment) C-50/87; [1988] EUECJ C-50/87 21 Sep 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Van Eycke v Aspa (Rec 1988,P 4769) (Sv88-587 Fi88-587) (Judgment) C-267/86 21 Sep 1988 ECJ European Â Criminal Proceedings Against X (Rec 1988,P 5099) (Judgment) C-228/87 22 Sep 1988 ECJ European, Crime Â Bergemann v Bundesanstalt Fur Arbeit (Rec 1988,P 5125) (Judgment) C-236/87 22 Sep 1988 ECJ European Â Land De Sarre v Ministre De L'Industrie (Rec 1988,P 5013) (Sv88-643 Fi88-643) (Judgment) C-187/87 22 Sep 1988 ECJ European Â Cargill v Inspecteur Der Invoerrechten En Accijnzen C-268/87 22 Sep 1988 ECJ European Â Frydendahl Pedersen v Commission (Rec 1988,P 4993) (Judgment) C-148/87; [1988] EUECJ C-148/87 22 Sep 1988 ECJ European Europa If the Commission, to which a Member State has submitted a request for a decision that the repayment of import duties pursuant to Article 13 of Regulation No 1430/79 is justified, asks the Member State concerned to withdraw its request and to re-submit it at a later date in order to prevent its failure to take a decision within the four-month period laid down in the second paragraph of Article 5 of Regulation No 1575/80 from having the effect that, by virtue of Article 7 of that regulation, as amended by Regulation No 945/83, the application has to be granted by the national authorities, this constitutes a misuse of procedure . Consequently, the Commission' s decision, which was not adopted within the four-month period which started to run from the date of the initial request, must be declared void because it was adopted on the basis of a procedure which was vitiated in its entirety. [ Bailii ] Â Anna Bergemann v Bundesanstalt Fuer Arbeit. (Social Security For Migrant Workers ) R-236/87; [1988] EUECJ R-236/87 22 Sep 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Unilec v Larroche Freres (Rec 1988,P 5075) (Judgment) C-212/87 22 Sep 1988 ECJ European Â Pizziolo v Commission (Rec 1988,P 5165) (Judgment) C-292/87; [1988] EUECJ C-292/87 22 Sep 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Jensen v Landbrugsministeriet (Rec 1988,P 5045) (Judgment) C-199/87 22 Sep 1988 ECJ European Â Commission v Greece (Rec 1988,P 4875) (Judgment) C-272/86; [1988] EUECJ C-272/86 22 Sep 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Land De Sarre And Others v Ministre De L'Industrie, Des P Et T Et Du Tourisme And Others. R-187/87; [1988] EUECJ R-187/87 22 Sep 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â France v Parliament (Rec 1988,P 4821) (Sv88-607 Fi88-607) (Judgment) C-358/85; [1988] EUECJ C-358/85 22 Sep 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Mads Peder Jensen v Landbrugsministeriet. (Agriculture ) R-199/87; [1988] EUECJ R-199/87 22 Sep 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Cargill Bv v Inspecteur Der Invoerrechten En Accijnzen. R-268/87; [1988] EUECJ R-268/87 22 Sep 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ministere Public v Deserbais (Rec 1988,P 4907) (Sv88-621 Fi88-621) (Judgment) C-286/86 22 Sep 1988 ECJ European Â Union Nationale Interprofessionnelle Des Legumes De Conserve (Unilec) v Etablissements Larroche Freres R-212/87; [1988] EUECJ R-212/87 22 Sep 1988 ECJ European, Agriculture ECJ 1. The rules of the common organization of the market set up by Regulation No 1035/72 must be applied to fruit and vegetables coming within the scope of that organization, irrespective of the use to which they are ultimately to be put . The fact that they are intended for processing does not mean that at the marketing stage they fall within the ambit of Regulation No 516/77 on the common organization of the market in products processed from fruit and vegetables. 2. Regulation No 1035/72 on the common organization of the market in fruit and vegetables, in the version applicable prior to the entry into force of Regulation No 3284/83, must be interpreted as leaving the Member States no power to extend to national producers and processors who are not affiliated to an intertrade organization in the sector the rules adopted by that organization under agreements fixing minimum purchase prices for certain vegetables. 3. The obligation imposed on non-affiliated producers to contribute to the financing of funds established by a producers' organization in the fruit and vegetables sector is unlawful in so far as it serves to finance activities which are themselves held to be contrary to Community law. [ Bailii ] Â Ministere Public v Gerard Deserbais. (Free Movement Of Goods ) R-286/86; [1988] EUECJ R-286/86 22 Sep 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Canters v Commission (Rec 1988,P 4859) (Judgment) C-159/86; [1988] EUECJ C-159/86 22 Sep 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Pretura Unificata Di Torino v X R-228/87; [1988] EUECJ R-228/87 22 Sep 1988 ECJ European, Utilities ECJ The authorization to exceed the maximum permitted concentrations set out in Annex I to Directive 80/778/EEC relating to the quality of water intended for human consumption (Article 10 (1)) must be granted only in an urgent situation in which the national authorities are required to cope suddenly with difficulties in the supply of water for human consumption . Such an authorization must be limited to the time normally necessary to restore the quality of the water affected, must not pose any unacceptable risk to human health and may be granted only if the supply of water for human consumption cannot be maintained in any other way. Directive 80/778/EEC [ Bailii ] Â Laf v Commission (Rec 1988,P 4967) (Judgment) C-69/87; [1988] EUECJ C-69/87 22 Sep 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Ireland (Rec 1988,P 4929) (Sv88-631 Fi88-631) (Judgment) C-45/87; [1987] EUECJ C-45/87R; [1987] EUECJ C-45/87R; [1988] EUECJ C-45/87 22 Sep 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Cargill v Commission C-229/88 26 Sep 1988 ECJ European Â Matteucci v Communaute Francaise De Belgium (Rec 1988,P 5589) (Judgment) C-235/87 27 Sep 1988 ECJ European Â Commission v Germany (Rec 1988,P 5427) (Judgment) C-18/87; [1988] EUECJ C-18/87 27 Sep 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Belgium (Rec 1988,P 5445) (Judgment) C-42/87; [1988] EUECJ C-42/87 27 Sep 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â The Queen v H. M. Treasury And Commissioners Of Inland Revenue, Ex Parte Daily Mail And General Trust Plc. (Free Movement Of Persons ) R-81/87; [1988] EUECJ R-81/87 27 Sep 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Parliament v Council (Rec 1988,P 5615) (Sv88-739 Fi88-739) (Judgment) C-302/87; [1988] EUECJ C-302/87 27 Sep 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Greece v Council (Rec 1988,P 5323) (Sv88-669 Fi88-669) (Judgment) C-204/86; [1988] EUECJ C-204/86 27 Sep 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â A Ahlstrom Osakeyhtio And Others v Commission Of The European Communities C-129/85; [1988] EUECJ C-129/85; [1988] ECR 5193 27 Sep 1988 ECJ European The court considered the territorial scope of Articles 81 and 82. in the context of producers outside the Community selling to purchasers established in the Community. The external producers had engaged in price fixing and therefore restricted competition. The Commission had determined that there had been an infringement of Article 85. On appeal they argued that such a finding was inconsistent with public international law. Held: The contention was not accepted. Infringement of Article 81 involved two elements, namely the agreement, decision or concerted practice on the one hand and its implementation on the other: "If the applicability of prohibitions laid down under competition law were made to depend on the place where the agreement, decision or concerted practice was formed, the result would obviously be to give undertakings an easy means of evading those prohibitions. The decisive factor is therefore the place where it is implemented. The producers in this case implemented their pricing agreement within the common market. It is immaterial in that respect whether or not they had recourse to subsidiaries, agents, sub-agents, or branches within the Community in order to make their contacts with purchasers within the Community. Accordingly the Community's jurisdiction to apply its competition rules to such conduct is covered by the territoriality principle as universally recognized in public international law." 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Belgian State v Rene Humbel And Marie-Therese Edel (Social Policy) C-263/86; R-263/86; [1988] EUECJ R-263/86; [1989] 1 CMLR 393 27 Sep 1988 ECJ European, Education So far as a right of residence in order to receive services, so far as a student is concerned the relevant services are limited to those provided for remuneration. Europa A year of study which is part of a programme forming an indivisible body of instruction preparing for a qualification for a particular profession, trade or employment or providing the necessary training and skills for such a profession, trade or employment constitutes vocational training for the purposes of the EEC Treaty. The various years of a study programme cannot be assessed individually but must be considered within the framework of the programme as a whole, particularly in the light of the programme' s purpose, provided, however, that the programme forms a coherent single entity and cannot be divided into two parts, one of which does not constitute vocational training while the other does. Courses taught in a technical institute which form part of the secondary education provided under the national education system cannot be regarded as services for the purposes of Article 59 of the EEC Treaty. The first paragraph of Article 60 of the EEC Treaty provides that only services "normally provided for remuneration" are to be considered to be "services" within the meaning of the Treaty . The essential characteristic of remuneration, which lies in the fact that it constitutes consideration for the service in question, is absent in the case of courses provided under the national education system because, first of all, the State, in establishing and maintaining such a system, is not seeking to engage in gainful activity but is fulfilling its duties towards its own population in the social, cultural and educational fields and, secondly, the system in question is, as a general rule, funded from the public purse and not by pupils or their parents. The nature of that activity is not affected by the fact that pupils or their parents must sometimes pay teaching or enrolment fees in order to make a certain contribution to the operating expenses of the system. Article 12 of Regulation No 1612/68, which provides that the children of a national of a Member State who is or has been employed in the territory of another Member State are to be admitted to that State' s general educational, apprenticeship and vocational training courses under the same conditions as the nationals of that State, if such children are residing in its territory, refers not only to rules relating to admission but also to general measures intended to facilitate educational attendance. However, the wording used in that provision lays obligations only on the Member State in which the migrant worker resides. It does not, therefore, preclude a Member State from imposing an enrolment fee or "minerval", as a condition for admission to ordinary schooling within its territory, on children of migrant workers residing in another Member State, even when the nationals of the other Member State in question are not required to pay such a fee . 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Lenoir v Caisse D'Allocations Familiales Des Alpes-Maritimes (Rec 1988,P 5391) (Sv88-683 Fi88-683) (Judgment) C-313/86 27 Sep 1988 ECJ European Â United Kingdom v Commission (Rec 1988,P 5289) (Judgment) C-114/86; [1988] EUECJ C-114/86 27 Sep 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Regina v Treasury and Commissioners of Inland Revenue, Ex Parte Daily Mail and General Trust Plc C-81/87 27 Sep 1988 ECJ European 1 Citers Â Annunziata Matteucci v Communaute Francaise Of Belgium And Commissariat General Aux Relations Internationales Of The Communaute Francaise Of Belgium. (Free Movement Of Persons ) R-235/87; [1988] EUECJ R-235/87 27 Sep 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Asteris Ae And Others v Hellenic Republic And Eec. (Action For Damages ) R-120/87; [1988] EUECJ R-120/87 27 Sep 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1988,P 5647) (Order) C-194/88 27 Sep 1988 ECJ European Â Commission v Council (Rec 1988,P 5545) (Sv88-721 Fi88-721) (Judgment) C-165/87; [1988] EUECJ C-165/87 27 Sep 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Council (Rec 1988,P 5459) (Judgment) C-51/87; [1988] EUECJ C-51/87 27 Sep 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Asteris v Greece (Rec 1988,P 5515) (Sv88-705 Fi88-705) (Judgment) C-106/87 27 Sep 1988 ECJ European Â Â Kalfelis v Bankhaus Schroder, Munchmeyer, Hengst and Co and others; ECJ 27-Sep-1988 - C-189/87; [1988] ECR 5565; R-189/87; [1988] EUECJ R-189/87; [1988] ECT 6656 Â Bayer Ag And Maschinenfabrik Hennecke Gmbh v Heinz Suellhofer. (Competition ) R-65/86; [1988] EUECJ R-65/86 27 Sep 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Bayer v Sullhofer (Rec 1988,P 5249) (Judgment) C-65/86 27 Sep 1988 ECJ European Â Fingruth v Caisse De Pension Des Employes Prives (Rec 1988,P 6121) (Judgment) C-129/87 5 Oct 1988 ECJ European Â Firme Albert Schmid v Hauptzollamt Stuttgart-West. (Common Customs Tariff ) R-357/87; [1988] EUECJ R-357/87 5 Oct 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Remo Padovani And The Successors Of Otello Mantovani v Amministrazione Delle Finanze Dello Stato. R-210/87; [1988] EUECJ R-210/87 5 Oct 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Volvo v Veng C-238/87 5 Oct 1988 ECJ European Â Consorzio Italiano Della Componentistica Di Ricambio Per Autoveicoli And Maxicar v Regie Nationale Des Usines Renault. (Free Movement Of Goods ) R-53/87; [1988] EUECJ R-53/87 5 Oct 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Â Sharp Corporation v Council of the European Communities; ECJ 5-Oct-1988 - Case 301/85; C-301/85; [1988] EUECJ C-301/85 Â Steymann v Staatssecretaris Van Justitie (Rec 1988,P 6159) (Sv88-751 Fi88-751) (Judgment) C-196/87 5 Oct 1988 ECJ European Â Tec v Council (Rec 1988,P 5855) (Judgment) C-260/85; [1985] EUECJ C-260/85R; [1988] EUECJ C-260/85 5 Oct 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Schmid v Hauptzollamt Stuttgart-West (Rec 1988,P 6239) (Judgment) C-357/87 5 Oct 1988 ECJ European Â Brother Industries Ltd v Commission of the European Communities (Rec 1988,P 5655) (Judgment) Case 56/85; C-56/85; [1988] EUECJ C-56/85 5 Oct 1988 ECJ European, Commercial Europa Application for a declaration that a measure is void - Action brought against a regulation imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty - Adoption during the proceedings of a regulation (also challenged) imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty at a lower rate, which was rendered applicable ab initio - Application devoid of purpose - Decision unnecessary (EEC Treaty, Art. 173) An application against a regulation imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty becomes devoid of purpose, with the result that the Court no longer has to give a decision upon it, where that regulation is replaced during the proceedings by a regulation - which is also challenged by the applicant -imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and the definitive rate of duty, which is lower than the rate of the provisional duty, applies to the collection of the amounts secured by the latter. [ Bailii ] Â Brother v Council (Rec 1988,P 5683) (Judgment) C-250/85; [1985] EUECJ C-250/85R; [1988] EUECJ C-250/85 5 Oct 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Udo Steymann v Staatssecretaris Van Justitie. (Eec Treaty ) R-196/87; [1988] EUECJ R-196/87 5 Oct 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Hamill v Commission (Rec 1988,P 6141) (Judgment) C-180/87; [1988] EUECJ C-180/87 5 Oct 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Technointorg v Commission and Council (Rec 1988,P 6077) (Judgment) C-294/86; [1986] EUECJ C-294/86R; [1988] EUECJ C-294/86 5 Oct 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Societe Alsacienne Et Lorraine De Telecommunications Et D'Electronique (Alsatel) v Sa Novasam. (Preliminary Questions ) R-247/86; [1988] EUECJ R-247/86 5 Oct 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Canon v Council (Rec 1988,P 5731) (Judgment) C-277/85; [1988] EUECJ C-277/85 5 Oct 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â De Szy-Tarisse and Others v Commission (Rec 1988,P 6013) (Judgment) C-314/86; [1988] EUECJ C-314/86 5 Oct 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ab Volvo v Erik Veng (Uk) Ltd. (Free Movement Of Goods ) R-238/87; [1988] EUECJ R-238/87 5 Oct 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Silver Seiko v Council (Rec 1988,P 5927) (Judgment) C-273/85; [1985] EUECJ C-273/85R; [1988] EUECJ C-273/85 5 Oct 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Eva Fingruth v Caisse De Pension Des Employes Prives. R-129/87; [1988] EUECJ R-129/87 5 Oct 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Padovani and Others v Amministrazione Delle Finanze Dello Stato (Rec 1988,P 6177) (Judgment) C-210/87 5 Oct 1988 ECJ European Â Alsatel v Novasam (Rec 1988,P 5987) (Judgment) C-247/86 5 Oct 1988 ECJ European Â Cicra and Others v Renault (Rec 1988,P 6039) (Judgment) C-53/87 5 Oct 1988 ECJ European Â Cevap and Others v Council (Rec 1988,P 6265) (Order) C-34/88; [1988] EUECJ C-34/88 12 Oct 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Goldenes Rheinhessen v Land Rheinland-Pfalz (Rec 1988,P 6295) (Judgment) C-311/87 18 Oct 1988 ECJ European Â Erzeugergemeinschaft Goldenes Rheinhessen W.V. v Land Rheinland-Pfalz. R-311/87; [1988] EUECJ R-311/87 18 Oct 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Bayernwald Fruchteverwertung v Germany C-121/87 18 Oct 1988 ECJ European Â Bayernwald Fruechteverwertung Gmbh v Federal Republic Of Germany. R-121/87; [1988] EUECJ R-121/87 18 Oct 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v France (Rec 1988,P 6315) (Judgment) C-312/86; [1988] EUECJ C-312/86 25 Oct 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Valle Fernandez v Commission (Rec 1988,P 6341) (Order) C-264/88 8 Nov 1988 ECJ European Â M. Valle Fernandez v Commission Of The European Communities O-264/88; [1988] EUECJ O-264/88 8 Nov 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Greece (Rec 1988,P 6347) (Judgment) C-229/87; [1988] EUECJ C-229/87 15 Nov 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Naturally Yours Cosmetics Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise C-230/87; [1988] ECR 6365 23 Nov 1988 ECJ European, VAT A cosmetics wholesaler offered to a beauty consultant, acting as retailer, a pot of rejuvenating cream at the special price of £1.50. The consultant was to give the cream to a chosen retail customer (referred to as a hostess) as a reward for the hostess arranging a sales party, and the special price was available only if the sales party was actually held. The issue was as to the quantification of the consideration received by the wholesaler from the consultant. Held: "In the present case, the parties to the contract have reduced the wholesale price of the pot of cream [£10.14] by a specific amount [£8.64] in exchange for the supply of a service by the beauty consultant which consists in procuring hostesses to arrange sales parties by offering them the pots of cream as gifts. In those circumstances, it is possible to ascertain the monetary value which the two parties to the contract attributed to that service; that value must be considered to be the difference [£8.64] between the price actually paid [£1.50] and the normal wholesale price [£10.14]." 1 Citers Â Naturally Yours Cosmetics Limited v Commissioners Of Customs And Excise. R-230/87; [1988] EUECJ R-230/87 23 Nov 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Flourez v Council (Rec 1988,P 6393) (Order) C-138/88; [1988] EUECJ C-138/88 7 Dec 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Federation Europeenne De La Sante Animale and Others v Council (Rec 1988,P 6399) (Order) C-160/88 7 Dec 1988 ECJ European Â Sparr v Commission C-321/88; [1988] EUECJ C-321/88R 13 Dec 1988 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Greece (Rec 1989,P 1) (Judgment) C-128/87; [1989] EUECJ C-128/87 17 Jan 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Stempels v Commission C-310/87; [1989] EUECJ C-310/87 17 Jan 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Vainker v Parliament (Rec 1989,P 23) (Judgment) C-293/87; [1989] EUECJ C-293/87 17 Jan 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Opagac v Commission (Rec 1989,P 55) (Order) C-167/87; [1989] EUECJ C-167/87 18 Jan 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Casio Computer Co. Gmbh Deutschland v Oberfinanzdirektion Muenchen. (Common Customs Tariff ) R-234/87; [1989] EUECJ R-234/87 20 Jan 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Casio Computer v Oberfinanzdirektion Munchen (Rec 1989,P 63) (Judgment) C-234/87 20 Jan 1989 ECJ European Â Emi Electrola Gmbh v Patricia Im Und Export And Others. (Free Movement Of Goods ) R-341/87; [1989] EUECJ R-341/87 24 Jan 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Emi Electrola v Patricia Im- Und Export and Others (Rec 1989,P 79) (Judgment) C-341/87 24 Jan 1989 ECJ European Â Godfroy v Court of Justice C-259/88; [1989] EUECJ C-259/88 26 Jan 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Koutchoumoff v Commission (Rec 1989,P 99) (Judgment) C-224/87; [1989] EUECJ C-224/87 26 Jan 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Klein v Commission (Rec 1989,P 125) (Judgment) C-307/87; [1989] EUECJ C-307/87 31 Jan 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1989,P 143) (Judgment) C-22/87; [1989] EUECJ C-22/87 2 Feb 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1989,P 263,Summ Pub ) (Judgment) C-353/87; [1989] EUECJ C-353/87 2 Feb 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Germany (Rec 1989,P 229) (Judgment) C-274/87; [1989] EUECJ C-274/87 2 Feb 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Germany (Rec 1989,P 175) (Judgment) C-94/87; [1989] EUECJ C-94/87 2 Feb 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Cowan v Tresor Public (Judgment) C-186/87 2 Feb 1989 ECJ European Â Ian William Cowan v Tresor Public R-186/87; [1989] EUECJ R-186/87 2 Feb 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Netherlands v Commission (Rec 1989,P 225,Summ Pub ) (Judgment) C-262/87; [1989] EUECJ C-262/87 2 Feb 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Council (Rec 1989,P 259,Summ Pub ) (Judgment) C-275/87; [1989] EUECJ C-275/87 2 Feb 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1989,P 267) (Order) C-352/88; [1989] EUECJ C-352/88R 3 Feb 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Knoeckel, Schmidt and Cie, Papierfabriken Ag v Hauptzollamt Landau/Pfalz. R-13/88; [1989] EUECJ R-13/88 14 Feb 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Star Fruit v Commission (Rec 1989,P 291) (Judgment) C-247/87; [1989] EUECJ C-247/87 14 Feb 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Bossi v Commission (Rec 1989,P 303) (Judgment) C-346/87; [1989] EUECJ C-346/87 14 Feb 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Lefebvre Frere and Soeur v Commission C-206/87; [1989] EUECJ C-206/87 14 Feb 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Six Constructions Ltd v Paul Humbert R-32/88; [1989] EUECJ R-32/88 15 Feb 1989 ECJ European, International, Employment Europa Article 5(1) of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters must be interpreted as meaning that, as regards contracts of employment, the obligation to be taken into consideration is that which characterizes such contracts, in particular the obligation to carry out the agreed work . Where the obligation of the employee to carry out the agreed work was performed and had to be performed outside the territory of the Contracting States, Article 5(1) of the Convention is not applicable; in such a case jurisdiction is to be determined on the basis of the place of the defendant's domicile in accordance with Article 2 of the Convention. [ Bailii ] Â Six Constructions v Humbert (Judgment) C-32/88 15 Feb 1989 ECJ European Â Greece v Commission (Rec 1989,P 367,Summ Pub ) (Judgment) C-214/86; [1986] EUECJ C-214/86R; [1986] EUECJ C-214/86R; [1989] EUECJ C-214/86 21 Feb 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1989,P 371) (Judgment) C-203/87; [1989] EUECJ C-203/87 21 Feb 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission Of The European Communities v French Republic And United Kingdom Of Great Britain And Northern Ireland. (Free Movement Of Goods ) C-93/87; [1989] EUECJ C-93/87 22 Feb 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1989,P 385) (Judgment) C-54/87; [1989] EUECJ C-54/87 22 Feb 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v France and United Kingdom (Rec 1989,P 405) (Judgment) C-92/87 22 Feb 1989 ECJ European Â International Container Et Transport (Ict) And Bfi Electronique Sa v Direction Generale Des Douanes Et Droits Indirects De Roissy. R-19/88; [1989] EUECJ R-19/88 28 Feb 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Merkur Aussenhandel Gmbh and Co. Kg v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas. R-233/87; [1989] EUECJ R-233/87 28 Feb 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Blaupunkt-Werke Gmbh v Oberfinanzdirektion Berlin. R-245/87; [1989] EUECJ R-245/87 28 Feb 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Wilhelm Schmitt v Bundesversicherungsanstalt Fuer Angestellte. R-29/88; [1989] EUECJ R-29/88 28 Feb 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Blaupunkt-Werke v Oberfinanzdirektion Berlin (Rec 1989,P 573,Summ Pub ) (Judgment) C-245/87 28 Feb 1989 ECJ European Â Ict and Others v Direction Generale Des Douanes and Droits Indirects (Rec 1989,P 577,Summ Pub ) (Judgment) C-19/88 28 Feb 1989 ECJ European Â Schmitt v Bundesversicherungsanstalt Fur Angestellte (Rec 1989,P 581,Summ Pub ) (Judgment) C-29/88 28 Feb 1989 ECJ European Â Trouw and Co. Bv v Hoofdproduktschap Voor Akkerbouwprodukten. R-182/87; [1989] EUECJ R-182/87 28 Feb 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Basch and Others v Commission (Rec 1989,P 447) (Judgment) C-100/87; [1989] EUECJ C-100/87 28 Feb 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Van Der Stijl and Others v Commission (Rec 1989,P 511) (Judgment) C-341/85; [1985] EUECJ C-341/85R; [1989] EUECJ C-341/85 28 Feb 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Merkur Aussenhandel v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas C-233/87 28 Feb 1989 ECJ European Â Cargill v Produktschap Voor Margarine, Vetten En Olien C-201/87 28 Feb 1989 ECJ European Â Trouw v Hoofdproduktschap Voor Akkerbouwprodukten (Rec 1989,P 469) (Judgment) C-182/87 28 Feb 1989 ECJ European Â Cargill Bv v Produktschap Voor Margarine, Vetten En Olien R-201/87; [1989] EUECJ R-201/87 28 Feb 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Pietro Pinna v Caisse D'Allocations Familiales De La Savoie. R-359/87; [1989] EUECJ R-359/87 2 Mar 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Pinna v Caisse D'Allocations Familiales De La Savoie (Rec 1989,P 585) (Judgment) C-359/87 2 Mar 1989 ECJ European Â Schumacher v Hauptzollamt Frankfurt Am Main-Ost (Rec 1989,P 617) (Judgment) C-215/87 7 Mar 1989 ECJ European Â Heinz Schumacher v Hauptzollamt Frankfurt Am Main-Ost. R-215/87; [1989] EUECJ R-215/87 7 Mar 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Del Plato v Commission (Rec 1989,P 643) (Judgment) C-126/87; [1989] EUECJ C-126/87 10 Mar 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Adalino Baldi v Caisse De Compensation Pour Allocations Familiales. (Social Security For Migrant Workers ) R-1/88; [1989] EUECJ R-1/88 14 Mar 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Del Amo Martinez v Parliament (Judgment) C-133/88; [1989] EUECJ C-133/88 14 Mar 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Baldi v Caisse De Compensation Pour Allocations Familiales (Rec 1989,P 667) (Judgment) C-1/88 14 Mar 1989 ECJ European Â G. B. -c- Echternach And A. Moritz v Minister Van Onderwijs En Wetenschappen. (Free Movement Of Persons ) R-389/87; [1989] EUECJ R-389/87 15 Mar 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Co-Frutta v Commission (Rec 1989,P 793) (Order) C-191/88 15 Mar 1989 ECJ European Â Knut Hamann v Finanzamt Hamburg-Eimsbuettel R-51/88; [1989] EUECJ R-51/88 15 Mar 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Philippe Lambert And Others v Directeur Des Services Fiscaux De L'Orne And Others. (Tax Provisions ) R-317/86; [1989] EUECJ R-317/86 15 Mar 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Bevan v Commission (Rec 1989,P 701,Summ Pub ) (Judgment) C-140/87; [1989] EUECJ C-140/87 15 Mar 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Universitat Stuttgart v Hauptzollamt Stuttgart-Ost. R-303/87; [1989] EUECJ R-303/87 15 Mar 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Lambert and Others v Directeur Des Services Fiscaux De L'Orne and Others (Rec 1989,P 787,Summ Pub ) (Judgment) C-317/86 15 Mar 1989 ECJ European Â Echternach and Others v Minister Van Onderwijs En Wetenschappen (Rec 1989,P 723) (Judgment) C-389/87 15 Mar 1989 ECJ European Â Â Litster and Others v Forth Dry Dock and Engineering Co Ltd; HL 16-Mar-1989 - [1989] 2 WLR 634; [1989] 1 All ER 1134; [1989] ICR 341; [1990] 1 AC 546; 1989 SC (HL) 96; [1982] IRLR 161; [1988] UKHL 10 Â Italy v Commission (Rec 1989,P 801,Summ Pub ) (Order) C-303/88 17 Mar 1989 ECJ European Â Sa Generale De Banque v Commission (Rec 1989,P 857) (Order) C-1/88 11 Apr 1989 ECJ European Â Sa Generale De Banque v Commission Of The European Communities. O-1/88; [1989] EUECJ O-1/88S 11 Apr 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Di Felice v Inasti (Rec 1989,P 923) (Judgment) C-128/88 18 Apr 1989 ECJ European Â Francois Retter v Caisse De Pension Des Employes Prives. (Officials ) R-130/87; [1989] EUECJ R-130/87 18 Apr 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Di Felice v Institut National D'Assurances Sociales Pour Travailleurs Independants. (Social Security For Migrant Workers ) R-128/88; [1989] EUECJ R-128/88 18 Apr 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Kurt Drewes v Bezirksregierung Lueneburg. (Agriculture ) R-358/87; [1989] EUECJ R-358/87 18 Apr 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Retter v Caisse De Pension Des Employes Prives (Rec 1989,P 865) (Judgment) C-130/87 18 Apr 1989 ECJ European Â Drewes v Bezirksregierung Luneburg (Rec 1989,P 891) (Judgment) C-358/87 18 Apr 1989 ECJ European Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1989,P 943) (Judgment) C-141/87; [1989] EUECJ C-141/87 25 Apr 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Greece v Commission (Rec 1989,p 985) (Order) C-32/89 26 Apr 1989 ECJ European Â Fedeli v Parliament (Rec 1989,P 993,Summ Pub ) (Judgment) C-271/87; [1989] EUECJ C-271/87 27 Apr 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Turner v Commission (Rec 1989,P 1017,Summ Pub ) (Judgment) C-192/88; [1989] EUECJ C-192/88 27 Apr 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Belgium (Rec 1989,P 997) (Judgment) C-321/87; [1989] EUECJ C-321/87 27 Apr 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1989,P 1013,Summ Pub ) (Judgment) C-324/87; [1989] EUECJ C-324/87 27 Apr 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Criminal Proceedings Against Esther Renee Bouchara, Nee Wurmser, And Norlaine Sa. R-25/88; [1989] EUECJ R-25/88 11 May 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Criminal Proceedings Against Wurmser and Others (Rec 1989,P 1105) (Judgment) C-25/88 11 May 1989 ECJ European Â Denmark v Commission (Rec 1989,P 1081) (Judgment) C-263/87; [1989] EUECJ C-263/87 11 May 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â RTE and others v Commission (Rec 1989,p 1141) (Order) C-76/89 11 May 1989 ECJ European Â Maurissen and Union Syndicale v Court Of Auditors C-193/87; [1987] EUECJ C-193/87R; [1990] EUECJ C-193/87 11 May 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Germany (Rec 1989,P 1021) (Judgment) C-76/86; [1989] EUECJ C-76/86 11 May 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Radio Telefis Eireann And Others v Commission Of The European Communities. (Application For Interim Measures) C-91/89; [1989] EUECJ C-91/89R; [1989] ECR 1141; [1990] FSR 87; [1989] 4 CMLR 749 11 May 1989 ECJ T Koopmans, P European, Commercial, Intellectual Property, Media ECJ Competition - Abuse of a dominant position - Practices preventing the publishing and sale of comprehensive weekly television guides. Joined cases 76, 77 and 91/89 R. Application for interim measures - Suspension of operation - Conditions for grant - Serious and irreparable damage (EEC Treaty, Art. 185; Rules of Procedure, Art . 83(2)) [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Belgium (Rec 1989,P 1137,Summ Pub ) (Judgment) C-52/88; [1989] EUECJ C-52/88 11 May 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Henri Maurissen And European Public Service Union v Court Of Auditors Of The European Communities. (Officials ) C-194/87; [1989] EUECJ C-194/87 11 May 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Belgium (Rec 1989,P 1133,Summ Pub ) (Judgment) C-46/88; [1989] EUECJ C-46/88 11 May 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Continentale Produkten-Gesellschaft v Hauptzollamt Munchen-West (Rec 1989,P 1151) (Judgment) C-246/87 12 May 1989 ECJ European Â Kai Ottung v Klee and Weilbach A/S And Thomas Schmidt A/S. (Competition ) R-320/87; [1989] EUECJ R-320/87 12 May 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Bestuur Van De Nieuwe Algemene Bedrijfsvereniging v Warmerdam-Steggerda (Rec 1989,P 1203) (Judgment) C-388/87 12 May 1989 ECJ European Â Continentale Produkten-Gesellschaft Erhardt-Renken Gmbh and Co. v Hauptzollamt Muenchen-West. (Common Commercial Policy ) R-246/87; [1989] EUECJ R-246/87 12 May 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â R. Buet And Educational Business Services (Ebs) v Ministere Public. R-382/87; [1989] EUECJ R-382/87 16 May 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Buet and Others v Ministere Public (Rec 1989,P 1235) (Judgment) C-382/87 16 May 1989 ECJ European Â Italy v Commission (Rec 1989,P 1255) (Order) C-151/88; [1989] EUECJ C-151/88 17 May 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Regina v Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain, Ex Parte Association of Pharmaceutical Importers Joined cases 266 and 267/87; C-266/87 18 May 1989 ECJ European, Intellectual Property Europa Free movement of goods - Quantitative restrictions - Measures having equivalent effect - Concept - Measures adopted by a professional body for pharmacy (EEC Treaty, Art. 30) 2. Free movement of goods - Derogations - Protection of public health -Rules prohibiting pharmacists from substituting a therapeutically equivalent medicinal product for that prescribed by the doctor - Whether acceptable (EEC Treaty, Art. 36) 1. Measures adopted by a professional body for pharmacy, in whose register all pharmacists must be enrolled in order to carry on their business, which lays down rules of ethics applicable to the members of the profession and which has a committee upon which national legislation has conferred disciplinary powers that could involve the removal from the said register, may, if they are capable of affecting trade between the Member States, constitute "measures" within the meaning of Article 30 of the EEC Treaty. 2. A national rule of a Member State requiring a pharmacist, in response to a prescription calling for a medicinal product by its trade mark or proprietary name, to dispense only a product bearing that trade mark or proprietary name may be justified under Article 36 of the Treaty on grounds of the protection of public health even where the effect of such a rule is to prevent the pharmacist from dispensing a therapeutically equivalent product licensed by the competent national authorities pursuant to rules adopted in conformity with Community law and manufactured by the same company or group of companies or by a licensee of that company but bearing a trade mark or proprietary name applied to it in another Member State which differs from the trade mark or proprietary name appearing in the prescription. Such a provision does not go beyond what is necessary to achieve the objective in view, which is to leave the entire responsibility for the treatment of the patient in the hands of the doctor treating him, who may often prescribe a given medicinal product for psychosomatic reasons. Â Â Regina v Secretary of State for Transport, Ex parte Factortame Ltd; HL 18-May-1989 - [1990] 2 AC 85; [1989] 2 WLR 997; [1989] UKHL 1; [1989] 3 CMLR 1; [1989] COD 531; [1989] 2 All ER 692 Â Lieselotte Hartmann Troiani v Landesversicherungsanstalt Rheinprovinz. (Social Security For Migrant Workers ) R-368/87; [1989] EUECJ R-368/87 18 May 1989 ECJ European Europa 1.Article 9 of Regulation No 1408/71 must be construed as meaning that the requirement of affiliation to a compulsory insurance scheme in a Member State, which, according to the legislation of that State, must be fulfilled at the time of the submission of an application to make retroactive payment of voluntary pension-insurance contributions, cannot be considered to be satisfied if the person making the application is at that date affiliated to a compulsory insurance scheme in another Member State. 2.Articles 48 and 51 of the Treaty do not preclude the application to nationals of a Member State of a provision of national legislation laying down, for the exercise of the right to purchase pension rights, a requirement of affiliation to the national compulsory insurance scheme . It is for the legislation of each Member State to lay down the conditions concerning the right or the obligation to become affiliated to a social security scheme or to a particular branch under such a scheme, provided always that in this connection there is no discrimination between nationals of the host State and the nationals of other Member States . [ Bailii ] Â The Queen v Royal Pharmaceutical Society Of Great Britain, Ex Parte Association Of Pharmaceutical Importers And Others R-267/87; [1989] EUECJ R-267/87 18 May 1989 ECJ European ECJ (Free Movement Of Goods) 1. Measures adopted by a professional body for pharmacy, in whose register all pharmacists must be enrolled in order to carry on their business, which lays down rules of ethics applicable to the members of the profession and which has a committee upon which national legislation has conferred disciplinary powers that could involve the removal from the said register, may, if they are capabe of affecting trade between the Member States, constitute "measures" within the meaning of Article 30 of the EEC Treaty. 2. A national rule of a Member State requiring a pharmacist, in response to a prescription calling for a medicinal product by its trade mark or proprietary name, to dispense only a product bearing that trade mark or proprietary name may be justified under Artice 36 of the Treaty on grounds of the protection of public health even where the effect of such a rule is to prevent the pharmacist from dispensing a therapeutically equivalent product licensed by the competent national authorities pursuant to rules adopted in conformity with Community law and manufactured by the same company or group of companies or by a licensee of that company but bearing a trade mark or proprietary name applied to it in another Member State which differs from the trade mark or proprietary name appearing in the prescription. Such a provision does not go beyond what is necessary to achieve the objective in view, which is to leave the entire responsibility for the treatment of the patient in the hands of the doctor treating him, who may often prescribe a given medicinal product for psychosomatic reasons . [ Bailii ] Â Hartmann Troiani v Landesversicherungsanstalt Rheinprovinz (Rec 1989,P 1333) (Judgment) C-368/87 18 May 1989 ECJ European Â Commission v Germany (Rec 1989,P 1263) (Sv89-31 Fi89-31) (Judgment) C-249/86; [1989] EUECJ C-249/86 18 May 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Caturla-Poch v Parliament (Rec 1989,p 1357,Summ pub ) (Order) C-107/89; [1989] EUECJ C-107/89R 19 May 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Top Hit Holzvertrieb v Commission (Rec 1989,P 1359) (Judgment) C-378/87; [1988] EUECJ C-378/87R; [1989] EUECJ C-378/87 23 May 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Weber v Milchwerke Paderborn-Rimbeck (Rec 1989,P 1395) (Judgment) C-40/88 25 May 1989 ECJ European Â Maxi Di v Ufficio Del Registro Di Bolzano (Rec 1989,P 1391,Summ Pub ) (Judgment) C-15/88 25 May 1989 ECJ European Â Paul F. Weber (In Liquidation) v Milchwerke Paderborn-Rimbeck Eg. R-40/88; [1989] EUECJ R-40/88 25 May 1989 ECJ European, Customs and Excise Common Customs Tariff. [ Bailii ] Â Spa Maxi Di v Ufficio Del Registro Di Bolzano. R-15/88; [1989] EUECJ R-15/88 25 May 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Greece (Rec 1989,P 1461) (Judgment) C-305/87; [1989] EUECJ C-305/87 30 May 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1989,P 1483) (Judgment) C-340/87; [1989] EUECJ C-340/87 30 May 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Council (Rec 1989,P 1425) (Sv89-41 Fi89-41) (Judgment) C-242/87; [1989] EUECJ C-242/87 30 May 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â United Kingdom v Council (Rec 1989,P 1615,Summ Pub ) (Judgment) C-56/88; [1989] EUECJ C-56/88 30 May 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Roquette Freres v Commission (Rec 1989,P 1553) (Judgment) C-20/88; [1989] EUECJ C-20/88 30 May 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Pilar Allue And Carmel Mary Coonan v Universita Degli Studi Di Venezia. (Free Movement Of Persons ) R-33/88; [1989] EUECJ R-33/88 30 May 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Allue and Others v Universita Degli Studi Di Venezia (Rec 1989,P 1591) (Judgment) C-33/88 30 May 1989 ECJ European Â Commission v Council (Rec 1989,P 1517) (Judgment) C-355/87; [1989] EUECJ C-355/87 30 May 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â I. Bettray v Staatssecretaris Van Justitie. (Free Movement Of Persons ) R-344/87; [1989] EUECJ R-344/87 31 May 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Bettray v Staatssecretaris Van Justitie (Rec 1989,P 1621) (Judgment) C-344/87 31 May 1989 ECJ European Â Commission v Netherlands (Rec 1989,P 1649,Summ Pub ) (Judgment) C-43/88; [1989] EUECJ C-43/88 31 May 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Association Generale Des Producteurs De Ble And Others Cereales (Agpb) v Office National Interprofessionnel Des Cereales (Onic). (Agriculture ) R-167/88; [1989] EUECJ R-167/88 8 Jun 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Association Generale Des Producteurs De Ble and Autres Cereales v Onic (Rec 1989,P 1653) (Sv89-55 Fi89-55) (Judgment) C-167/88 8 Jun 1989 ECJ European Â Nakajima All Precision v Council (Rec 1989,p 1689,Summ pub ) (Order) C-69/89 8 Jun 1989 ECJ European Â Publishers Association v Commission (Rec 1989,p 1693) (Order) C-56/89; [1989] EUECJ C-56/89R 13 Jun 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Gonzalez Holguera v Parliament (Rec 1989,p 1705) (Order) C-171/89; [1989] EUECJ C-171/89R 13 Jun 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Hoogovens Groep v Commission (Rec 1989,P 1717) (Judgment) C-219/87; [1989] EUECJ C-219/87 14 Jun 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Hoogovens Groep and Others v Commission (Rec 1989,P 1711,Summ Pub ) (Judgment) C-218/87; [1989] EUECJ C-218/87 14 Jun 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Stute Nahrungsmittelwerke Gmbh and Co. Kg v Bundesamt Fuer Ernahrung Und Forstwirtschaft. (Agriculture ) R-77/88; [1989] EUECJ R-77/88 15 Jun 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Stichting Uitvoering Financiele Acties v Staatssecretaris Van Financien (Judgment) C-348/87; [1989] ECR 1737 15 Jun 1989 ECJ European, VAT For VAT the general rule is that a turnover tax is levied on all services supplied for consideration by a taxable person. Exemptions are to be strictly construed in the VAT legislation. 1 Citers Â Stichting Uitvoering Financiele Acties v Staatssecretaris Van Financien. R-348/87; [1989] EUECJ R-348/87 15 Jun 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Stute Nahrungsmittelwerke v Bundesamt Fur Ernahrung Und Forstwirtschaft (Rec 1989,P 1755) (Judgment) C-77/88 15 Jun 1989 ECJ European Â Fratelli Costanzo v Comune Di Milano (Rec 1989,P 1839) (Sv89-83 Fi89-83) (Judgment) C-103/88 22 Jun 1989 ECJ European Â Brus v Commission (Rec 1989,P 1873,Summ Pub ) (Judgment) C-104/88; [1989] EUECJ C-104/88 22 Jun 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Fratelli Costanzo Spa v Comune Di Milano. (Approximation Of Laws ) R-103/88; [1989] EUECJ R-103/88 22 Jun 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Fediol v Commission EEC (Rec 1989,P 1781) (Sv89-67 Fi89-67) (Judgment) C-70/87; [1989] EUECJ C-70/87 22 Jun 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Â Giordani v Commission; ECJ 27-Jun-1989 - C-200/87; [1989] EUECJ C-200/87 Â Karl Leukhardt v Hauptzollamt Reutlingen. (Agriculture ) R-113/88; [1989] EUECJ R-113/88 27 Jun 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Kuhne v Finanzamt Munchen Iii (Rec 1989,P 1925) (Judgment) C-50/88 27 Jun 1989 ECJ European Â Rewe v Uberwachungsstelle Fur Milcherzeugnisse Und Handelsklassen C-88/88 27 Jun 1989 ECJ European Â Rewe-Handelsgesellschaft Nord Mbh v Ueberwachungsstelle Fuer Milcherzeugnisse Und Handelsklassen. R-88/88; [1989] EUECJ R-88/88 27 Jun 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Leukhardt v Hauptzollamt Reutlingen (Rec 1989,P 1991) (Judgment) C-113/88 27 Jun 1989 ECJ European Â Achterberg-Te Riele E A v Sociale Verzekeringsbank (Rec 1989,P 1963) (Judgment) C-48/88 27 Jun 1989 ECJ European Â Heinz Kuehne v Finanzamt Muenchen Iii. (Tax Provisions ) R-50/88; [1989] EUECJ R-50/88 27 Jun 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Georges v Onafts (Rec 1989,P 1905) (Judgment) C-24/88 27 Jun 1989 ECJ European Â Ministere Public v Rispal and Others (Rec 1989,P 2041,Summ Pub ) (Judgment) C-164/88 28 Jun 1989 ECJ European Â Ministere Public v J-P M Rispal And Others R-164/88; [1989] EUECJ R-164/88 28 Jun 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Cooperatieve Melkverwerkingsvereniging Doc Wa v Produktschap Voor Zuivel C-270/87; R-270/87; [1989] EUECJ R-270/87 28 Jun 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Rar v Council and Commission (Rec 1989,P 2045,Summ Pub ) (Judgment) C-250/86; [1989] EUECJ C-250/86 29 Jun 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Vreugdenhil and Others v Minister Van Landbouw En Visserij (Rec 1989,P 2049) (Judgment) C-22/88 29 Jun 1989 ECJ European Â Industrie En Handelsonderneming Vreugdenhil Bv And Gijs Van Der Kolk Douane Expediteur Bv v Minister Van Landbouw En Visserij. R-22/88; [1989] EUECJ R-22/88 29 Jun 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Kerzmann v Court of Auditors C-198/87; [1989] EUECJ C-198/87 4 Jul 1989 ECJ European 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 . [ Bailii ] Â Francesconi and Others v Commission C-326/86; [1989] EUECJ C-326/86 4 Jul 1989 ECJ European ECJ (Judgment) Action for damages - Compensation for loss suffered as a result of the Commission's failure to disclose information permitting the identification of the producers and distributors of adulterated wines containing methanol. [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1989,P 2275) (Judgment) C-323/87; [1989] EUECJ C-323/87 11 Jul 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Belasco and Others v Commission (Rec 1989,P 2117) (Judgment) C-246/86; [1989] EUECJ C-246/86 11 Jul 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Schrader v Hauptzollamt Gronau C-265/87 11 Jul 1989 ECJ European Â Cornee and Others v Copall and Others (Rec 1989,P 2309) (Judgment) C-196/88 11 Jul 1989 ECJ European Â Cehave v Hoofdproduktschap Voor Akkerbouwprodukten (Rec 1989,P 2199) (Judgment) C-195/87 11 Jul 1989 ECJ European Â Cehave Nv v Hoofdproduktschap Voor Akkerbouwprodukten. (Agriculture ) R-195/87; [1989] EUECJ R-195/87 11 Jul 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Hermann Schrader Hs Kraftfutter Gmbh and Co. Kg v Hauptzollamt Gronau. (Agriculture ) R-265/87; [1989] EUECJ R-265/87 11 Jul 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ford Espana Sa v Estado Espanol. (Free Movement Of Goods ) R-170/88; [1989] EUECJ R-170/88 11 Jul 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Daniel Cornee And Others v Cooperative Agricole Laitiere De Loudeac (Copall) And Laiterie Cooperative Du Trieux. (Agriculture ) R-196/88; [1989] EUECJ R-196/88 11 Jul 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ford Espana v Spanish State (Rec 1989,P 2305,Summ Pub ) (Judgment) C-170/88 11 Jul 1989 ECJ European Â Binder v Hauptzollamt Bad Reichenhall (Rec 1989,P 2415) (Judgment) C-161/88 12 Jul 1989 ECJ European Â Caisse Nationale D'Assurance Vieillesse Des Travailleurs Salaries v Jordan (Rec 1989,P 2387) (Judgment) C-141/88 12 Jul 1989 ECJ European Â Belardinelli v Court Of Justice (Rec 1989,P 2353) (Judgment) C-225/87; [1989] EUECJ C-225/87 12 Jul 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Friedrich Binder Gmbh and C Kg v Hauptzollamt Bad Reichenhall R-161/88; [1989] EUECJ R-161/88; [1988] ECR 2415 12 Jul 1989 ECJ European ECJ A trader is not entitled under Article 5(2) of Regulation No 1697/79 to the waiver of the post-clearance recovery of import duties if the error made by the customs authorities from which he benefited was due to the fact that those authorities, instead of applying the Community provisions relating to the customs tariff published in the Official Journal of the European Communities, referred to a national tariff manual which wrongly incorporated an anticipated reduction in duty proposed by the Commission but rejected by the Council, since it was an error which the trader could reasonably have detected within the meaning of that regulation. Community provisions relating to the customs tariff constitute, from the date of their publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities, the sole relevant positive law, of which all are deemed to be aware . A tariff manual drawn up by national authorities constitutes no more than a handbook for customs clearance; it can have no more than indicative character and in no case lead to the calling in question of the primacy of Community law . Moreover, an error in relation to the rate of duty can be detected by an attentive trader from a reading of the Official Journal of the European Communities, in which the relevant provisions are published. Furthermore, a commercial trader whose activities consist, essentially, of import-export operations cannot derive a legitimate expectation as to the applicable rate of duty merely from a Commission proposal incorporated in a national tariff manual, since it is not unreasonable to expect him to consult the relevant Official Journals . 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Amministrazione Delle Finanze Dello Stato v Societa Politi and Co. Srl C-214/88; R-214/88; [1989] EUECJ R-214/88 13 Jul 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Enichem Base And Others v Comune Di Cinisello Balsamo R-380/87; [1989] EUECJ R-380/87 13 Jul 1989 ECJ European Approximation of Laws [ Bailii ] Â Chimica Del Friuli Spa And Others v Amministrazione Delle Finanze Dello Stato. C-248/88; R-248/88; [1989] EUECJ R-248/88 13 Jul 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Pirzio-Biroli v Commission C-80/79; [1989] EUECJ C-80/79 13 Jul 1989 ECJ European ECJ Judgment - Officials - Status of official - Conditions for acquiring not fulfilled - Calculation of length of service of an official in regard to the Community pensions scheme - Taking into account of period of employment prior to taking up duties - Excluded [ Bailii ] Â Skatteministeriet v Henriksen C-173/88; [1990] STC 768; [1989] ECR 2763 13 Jul 1989 ECJ European, VAT Europa Article 13B(b ) of the Sixth Directive ( 77/388 ) on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes must be interpreted as meaning that the phrase "premises and sites for parking vehicles", which introduces an exception to the exemption laid down in that provision in regard to the leasing or letting of immovable property, covers the letting of all places designed to be used for parking vehicles, including closed garages, but that such lettings cannot be excluded from the exemption if they are closely linked to lettings of immovable property for another purpose which are themselves exempt from value-added tax. Member States may not exempt from value-added tax lettings of premises and sites for parking which are not covered by the exemption. 1 Citers Â Wisselink En Co. Bv And Others v Staatssecretaris Van Financien. R-93/88; [1989] EUECJ R-93/88 13 Jul 1989 ECJ European ECJ First, Second and Sixth Directive on turnover tax - Special consumption tax on passenger cars. [ Bailii ] Â Skatteministeriet v Morten Henriksen R-173/88; [1989] EUECJ R-173/88 13 Jul 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Â Ministere Public v Tournier; ECJ 13-Jul-1989 - R-395/87; [1989] EUECJ R-395/87 Â Jaeger v Commission (Rec 1989,P 2467,Summ Pub ) (Judgment) C-161/86; [1989] EUECJ C-161/86 13 Jul 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Lambregts Transportbedrijf Pvba v Belgian State. R-4/88; [1989] EUECJ R-4/88 13 Jul 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Caturla-Poch and Others v Parliament (Rec 1989,P 2471) (Judgment) C-361/87; [1989] EUECJ C-361/87 13 Jul 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Lambregts Transportbedrijf v Belgian State (Rec 1989,P 2583) (Judgment) C-4/88 13 Jul 1989 ECJ European Â Criminal Proceedings Against Tournier C-395/87 13 Jul 1989 ECJ European Â Casa Fleischhandel v Balm (Rec 1989,P 2789) (Judgment) C-215/88 13 Jul 1989 ECJ European Â Alexis and Others v Commission (Rec 1989,P 2445) (Judgment) C-286/83; [1989] EUECJ C-286/83 13 Jul 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Casa Fleischhandels-Gmbh v Bundesanstalt Fuer Landwirtschaftliche Marktordnung R-215/88; [1989] EUECJ R-215/88 13 Jul 1989 ECJ European, Agriculture [ Bailii ] Â Wisselink and Others v Staatssecretaris Van Financien (Rec 1989,P 2671) (Judgment) C-93/88 13 Jul 1989 ECJ European Â Lucazeau and Others v Sacem and Others (Rec 1989,P 2811) (Judgment) C-110/88 13 Jul 1989 ECJ European Â Ingrid Rinner-Kuehn v Fww Spezial-Gebaudereinigung Gmbh and Co. Kg C-171/88; R-171/88; [1989] EUECJ R-171/88; [1989] ECR 2743 13 Jul 1989 ECJ European, Discrimination The Court heard a complaint about a German statute providing that an employer need not pay sick pay to a part-time worker. In at least seven member states part-time workers were predominantly women (the percentages ranging from 89% in the Federal Republic to 62% in Italy; only in Denmark, at 54%, was there anything close to parity). There was such a striking disparity between men and women that the question referred to the Court of Justice assumed that the proportion of women adversely affected was considerably greater than that of men, and the Court of Justice was concerned only with the issue of objective justification. Nine times as many women as men were disadvantaged, and no one was going to waste time in suggesting that the entire national workforce contained nine times as many women as men. Europa Article 119 of the Treaty precludes national legislation which permits employers to exclude employees whose normal working hours do not exceed 10 hours a week or 45 hours a month from the continued payment of wages in the event of illness, if that measure affects a far greater number of women than men, unless the Member State shows that the legislation concerned is justified by objective factors unrelated to any discrimination on grounds of sex, which concern one of the essential aims of its social policy. 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Enichem Base and Others v Comune Di Cinisello Balsamo (Rec 1989,P 2491) (Judgment) C-380/87 13 Jul 1989 ECJ European Â Jaenicke Cendoya v Commission (Rec 1989,P 2711) (Judgment) C-108/88; [1988] EUECJ C-108/88R; [1989] EUECJ C-108/88 13 Jul 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Francois Lucazeau And Others v Societe Des Auteurs, Compositeurs Et Editeurs De Musique (Sacem) And Others. (Competition ) R-110/88; [1989] EUECJ R-110/88 13 Jul 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Â Wachauf v Bundesamt Fur Ernahrung und Forstwirtschaft; ECJ 13-Jul-1989 - C-5/88; [1991] 1 CMLR 328; [1989] ECR 2609; R-5/88; [1989] EUECJ R-5/88 Â Olbrechts v Commission (Rec 1989,P 2643) (Judgment) C-58/88; [1989] EUECJ C-58/88 13 Jul 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â S v Commission (Rec 1989,p 2841) (Order) C-206/89; [1989] EUECJ C-206/89R 31 Jul 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Hoechst v Commission (Rec 1989,P 2859) (Sv89-133 Fi89-133) (Judgment) C-46/87; [1987] EUECJ C-46/87R; [1989] EUECJ C-46/87 21 Sep 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Greece C-68/88; [1989] EUECJ C-68/88; [1989] ECR 2965 21 Sep 1989 ECJ European 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. 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Schafer Shop Bv v Minister Van Economische Zaken. R-12/88; [1989] EUECJ R-12/88 21 Sep 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Van De Bijl v Staatssecretaris Van Economische Zaken. (Free Movement Of Persons ) R-130/88; [1989] EUECJ R-130/88 27 Sep 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Rheinkrone-Kraftfutterwerk Gebr. Huebers Gmbh and Co. Kg v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas. R-1371/81; [1989] EUECJ R-1371/81 27 Sep 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Rheinkrone-Kraftfutterwerk v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas (Rec 1989,P 3013) (Judgment) C-37/88 27 Sep 1989 ECJ European Â Lopes Da Veiga v Staatssecretaris Van Justitie C-9/88; R-9/88; [1989] EUECJ R-9/88; [1989] ECR 2989 27 Sep 1989 ECJ European 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. 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Van De Bijl v Staatssecretaris Van Economische Zaken C-130/88; [1989] ECR 3039[26] 27 Sep 1989 ECJ European, Employment 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. 1 Citers Â Commission v Belgium (Rec 1989,P 3069) (Judgment) C-383/85; [1989] EUECJ C-383/85 3 Oct 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Netherlands (Rec 1989,P 3083) (Judgment) C-290/87; [1989] EUECJ C-290/87 5 Oct 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v United Kingdom (Rec 1989,p 3125) (Order) C-246/89 10 Oct 1989 ECJ European Â Â Atala Palmerini v Commission; ECJ 10-Oct-1989 - C-201/88; [1989] EUECJ C-201/88 Â Handels Og Kontorfunktionaerernes Forbund I Danmark v Dansk Arbejdsgiverforening, Acting On Behalf Of Danfoss. (Preliminary Questions ) R-109/88; [1989] EUECJ R-109/88; [1989] IRLR 532 17 Oct 1989 ECJ European, Discrimination Europa Where the law provides that an industrial arbitration board has jurisdiction in disputes between parties to collective agreements made between employees' and employers' organizations and either party may bring a case before it, so that the jurisdiction does not depend on the agreement between them, and the composition of the board is not within the parties' discretion but is determined by the law, the industrial arbitration board must be regarded as a court or tribunal of a Member State within the meaning of Article 177 of the Treaty. Directive 75/117 on equal pay for men and women must be interpreted as meaning that where an undertaking applies a system of pay which is totally lacking in transparency, it is for the employer to prove that his practice in the matter of wages is not discriminatory, if a female worker establishes, in relation to a relatively large number of employees, that the average pay for women is less than that for men. Where it appears that the application of criteria for pay supplements such as mobility, training or the length of service of the employee systematically works to the disadvantage of female employees, the employer may justify recourse to the criterion of mobility if it is understood as referring to adaptability to variable hours and varying places of work, by showing that such adaptability is of importance for the performance of the specific tasks which are entrusted to the employee, but not if that criterion is understood as covering the quality of the work done by the employee; he may also justify recourse to the criterion of training by showing that such training is of importance for the performance of the specific tasks which are entrusted to the employee; he does not have to provide special justification for recourse to the criterion of length of service, for it goes hand in hand with experience, which generally enables the employee to perform his duties better. 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Dow Chemical Iberica and Others v Commission (Rec 1989,P 3165) (Sv89-165 Fi89-165) (Judgment) C-97/87; [1989] EUECJ C-97/87 17 Oct 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ufficio Distrettuale Delle Imposte Dirette Di Fiorenzuola D'Arda And Others v Comune Di Carpaneto Piacentino And Others. (Tax Provisions ) R-231/87; [1989] EUECJ R-231/87 17 Oct 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ufficio Distrettuale Delle Imposte Dirette Di Fiorenzuola D'Arda E A v Comune Di Carpaneto Piacentino and Others (Rec 1989,P 3233) (Sv89-201 Fi89-201) (Judgment) C-231/87 17 Oct 1989 ECJ European Â Dow Benelux v Commission (Rec 1989,P 3137) (Judgment) C-85/87; [1987] EUECJ C-85/87R; [1989] EUECJ C-85/87 17 Oct 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Orkem v Commission (Judgment) C-374/87; [1989] ECR 3283; [1989] EUECJ C-374/87 18 Oct 1989 ECJ European The court considered the powers of the Commission to demand information in an investigation of possible offences against the Community competition laws. Article 11 of Regulation 17 of 1962 gave the Commission power, for the purposes of ensuring the application of the principles of Community competition law, to "obtain all necessary information" from undertakings under investigation. The Commission sent Orkem a wide-ranging questionnaire, including requests for factual information about correspondence and meetings with other firms, but also some questions which in effect required Orkem to confess that it had acted unlawfully. Held: The Commission was entitled to ask for factual information, even if it might be incriminating: "Regulation No 17 does not give an undertaking under investigation any right to evade the investigation on the ground that the results thereof might provide evidence of an infringement by it of the competition rules. On the contrary, it imposes on the undertaking an obligation to cooperate actively, which implies that it must make available to the Commission all information relating to the subject-matter of the investigation." It followed that: "the questions…relating to meetings of producers, which are intended only to secure factual information on the circumstances in which such meetings were held and the capacity in which the participants attended them, and also the requirement of disclosure of documents in the applicant's possession relating thereto, are not open to criticism." What was objectionable was questions such as the request for particulars of "every step or concerted measure which may have been envisaged or adopted to support such price initiatives" which were an attempt to force Orkem to admit that it had taken part in price-fixing. These were calculated to undermine the right of the company to defend itself. This infringed the "need to safeguard the rights of the defence which the court has held to be a fundamental principle of the Community legal order." The court concluded: "The Commission may not compel an undertaking to provide it with answers which might involve an admission on its part of the existence of an infringement which it is incumbent upon the Commission to prove." 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Italy v Commission (Rec 1989,P 3359) (Judgment) C-258/87; [1989] EUECJ C-258/87 19 Oct 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Hoesch Ag And Federal Republic Of Germany v Bergrohr Gmbh. (Common Commercial Policy ) R-142/88; [1989] EUECJ R-142/88 19 Oct 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Hoesch and Others v Bergrohr (Rec 1989,P 3413) (Judgment) C-142/88 19 Oct 1989 ECJ European Â Commission v Council (Rec 1989,P 3457) (Sv89-231 Fi89-231) (Judgment) C-16/88; [1989] EUECJ C-16/88 24 Oct 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Brown v Court Of Justice (Rec 1989,P 3489) (Judgment) C-125/87 26 Oct 1989 ECJ European Â Criminal Proceedings Against F. Levy. R-212/88; [1989] EUECJ R-212/88 26 Oct 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Criminal Proceedings Against Levy (Rec 1989,P 3511) (Judgment) C-212/88 26 Oct 1989 ECJ European Â Criminal Proceedings Against Nijman (Rec 1989,P 3533) (Judgment) C-125/88 7 Nov 1989 ECJ European Â Criminal Proceedings Against H. F. M. Nijman. (Approximation Of Legislation ) R-125/88; [1989] EUECJ R-125/88 7 Nov 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Katsoufros v Court Of Justice (Rec 1989,P 3579) (Judgment) C-55/88; [1989] EUECJ C-55/88 9 Nov 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Bonazzi-Bertottilli, and Others v Commission (Rec 1989,P 3599) (Judgment) C-75/88; [1989] EUECJ C-75/88 9 Nov 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Bessin and Salson v Administration Des Douanes and Droits Indirects (Judgment) C-386/87 9 Nov 1989 ECJ European Â Briantex and Di Domenico v Commission C-353/88; [1989] EUECJ C-353/88 9 Nov 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Bessin Et Salson v Administration Des Douanes Et Droits Indirects. R-386/87; [1989] EUECJ R-386/87 9 Nov 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Greece v Commission (Rec 1989,P 3711) (Judgment) C-30/88; [1989] EUECJ C-30/88 14 Nov 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Spain and France v Commission (Rec 1989,P 3639) (Judgment) C-6/88; [1989] EUECJ C-6/88 14 Nov 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Italy v Commission (Rec 1989,P 3677) (Judgment) C-14/88; [1989] EUECJ C-14/88 14 Nov 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Germany v Commission (Rec 1989,P 3773) (Judgment) C-333/87; [1989] EUECJ C-333/87 16 Nov 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Council (Rec 1989,P 3743) (Judgment) C-131/87; [1989] EUECJ C-131/87 16 Nov 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Council (Rec 1989,P 3799,Summ Pub ) (Judgment) C-11/88; [1989] EUECJ C-11/88 16 Nov 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Belgium (Rec 1989,P 3803,Summ Pub ) (Judgment) C-360/88; [1989] EUECJ C-360/88 16 Nov 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Becker and Starquit v Parliament (Rec 1989,P 3807,Summ Pub ) (Judgment) C-41/88; [1989] EUECJ C-41/88 21 Nov 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Usines Cooperatives De Deshydratation Du Vexin and Others v Commission (Rec 1989,P 3811) (Judgment) C-244/88; [1989] EUECJ C-244/88 21 Nov 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Torfaen Borough Council v B and Q Plc. R-145/88; [1989] EUECJ R-145/88 23 Nov 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Kommanditgesellschaft In Firma Eau De Cologne and Parfuemerie-Fabrik, Glockengasse N. 4711 v Provide Srl. (Reference For A Preliminary Ruling ) R-150/88; [1989] EUECJ R-150/88 23 Nov 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Hoogovens Groep v Commission (Rec 1989,P 3833) (Judgment) C-381/87; [1989] EUECJ C-381/87 23 Nov 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Parfumerie-Fabrik 4711 v Provide (Rec 1989,P 3891) (Sv89-249 Fi89-249) (Judgment) C-150/88 23 Nov 1989 ECJ European Â Torfaen Borough Council v B and Q Plc (Rec 1989,P 3851) (Sv89-241 Fi89-241) (Judgment) C-145/88 23 Nov 1989 ECJ European Â Greece v Council (Rec 1989,P 3963,Summ Pub ) (Judgment) C-129/86; [1986] EUECJ C-129/86R; [1987] EUECJ C-129/86; [1989] EUECJ C-129/86 28 Nov 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Anita Groener v Minister For Education And The City Of Dublin Vocational Educational Committee. R-379/87; [1989] EUECJ R-379/87 28 Nov 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Germany (Rec 1989,P 3997) (Judgment) C-186/88; [1989] EUECJ C-186/88 28 Nov 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Groener v Minister For Education and City Of Dublin Vocational Education Committee (Rec 1989,P 3967) (Sv89-259 Fi89-259) (Judgment) C-379/87 28 Nov 1989 ECJ European Â Epicheiriseon Metalleftikon Viomichanikon Kai Naftiliakon and Others v Commission and Council (Rec 1989,P 3959,Summ Pub ) (Judgment) C-122/86; [1989] EUECJ C-122/86 28 Nov 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Epicheiriseon Metalleftikon Viomichanikon Kai Naftiliakon and Others v Council (Rec 1989,P 3919) (Judgment) C-121/86; [1986] EUECJ C-121/86R; [1987] EUECJ C-121/86R; [1989] EUECJ C-121/86 28 Nov 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Commission v Greece (Rec 1989,P 4015) (Judgment) C-281/87; [1989] EUECJ C-281/87 29 Nov 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Oro Amsterdam Beheer En Concerto v Inspecteur Der Omzetbelasting C-165/88 5 Dec 1989 ECJ European Â Commission v Italy (Rec 1989,P 4035) (Sv89-269 Fi89-269) (Judgment) C-3/88; [1989] EUECJ C-3/88 5 Dec 1989 ECJ European, Company ECJ 1. The principle of equal treatment, of which Articles 52 and 59 of the Treaty embody specific instances, prohibits not only overt discrimination by reason of nationality but also all covert forms of discrimination which, by the application of other criteria of differentiation, lead in fact to the same result. 2. The exception to freedom of establishment and freedom to provide services provided for by the first paragraph of Article 55 and by Article 66 of the EEC Treaty must be restricted to those of the activities referred to in Articles 52 and 59 which in themselves involve a direct and specific connection with the exercise of official authority. That is not the case in respect of activities concerning the design, programming and operation of data-processing systems for the public authorities, since they are of a technical nature and thus unrelated to the exercise of official authority. 3. A Member State which provides that only companies in which all or a majority of the shares are either directly or indirectly in public or State ownership may conclude agreements for the development of data-processing systems for the public authorities thereby fails to fulfil its obligations under Articles 52 and 59 of the Treaty and Directive 77/62 coordinating procedures for the award of public supply contracts . [ Bailii ] Â Oro Amsterdam Beheer Bv And Concerto Bv v Inspecteur Der Omzetbelasting Amsterdam. (Member States ) R-165/88; [1989] EUECJ R-165/88 5 Dec 1989 ECJ European ECJ 1. Although it is true that if the Council fails to adopt measures falling within the exclusive competence of the European Communities, there can be no fundamental objection in certain cases to Member States' maintaining or introducing, pursuant to the duty to cooperate imposed on them by Article 5 of the Treaty, national measures designed to achieve Community objectives, no general principle can be inferred from that fact requiring the Member States to act in the place of the Council whenever it fails to adopt measures falling within its province. 2. Community law and the Community rules governing VAT do not, as they now stand, preclude national legislation which, for the purpose of calculating the VAT payable on the turnover arising from the sale of second-hand goods, does not allow account to be taken of the tax still contained in the price of goods which have been purchased from non-taxable individuals with a view to their resale. Until the Community legislature has taken action and in so far as nowhere in the common system of value-added tax, as it stands at present, are to be found the necessary bases for determining and laying down detailed rules for applying a common system of taxation enabling double taxation to be avoided in trade in second-hand goods, it is necessary to continue to apply Article 32 of the Sixth Directive, which merely authorizes Member States that apply a special system of VAT to second-hand goods to retain that system but does not impose on them any obligation to introduce such a system if none exists. [ Bailii ] Â Patrick Delbar v Caisse D'Allocations Familiales De Roubaix-Tourcoing R-114/88; [1989] EUECJ R-114/88 5 Dec 1989 ECJ European ECJ Since it relates only to employed persons, Article 51 of the Treaty does not require a Member State on whose territory a self-employed person works to pay family allowances within the meaning of Article 1(u)(ii ) of Regulation No 1408/71 if the members of the person' s family reside in another Member State. However, with effect from 15 January 1986, in accordance with Article 73 of Regulation No 1408/71 as amended by Regulation No 3427/89, a self-employed person subject to the legislation of a Member State is entitled, in respect of members of his family who are residing in another Member State, to the family benefits provided for by the legislation of the former State, as if they were residing in that State . [ Bailii ] Â Delbar v Caisse D'Allocations Familiales De Roubaix-Tourcoing (Rec 1989,P 4067) (Judgment) C-114/88 5 Dec 1989 ECJ European Â Mulfinger and Others v Commission C-249/87; [1989] EUECJ C-249/87 6 Dec 1989 ECJ European (Judgment) Officials - Annulment of language teachers' contracts. [ Bailii ] Â Panhellinios Syndesmos Idioktiton Idiotikon Technikon Epangelmatikon Ke Naftikon Scholikon Monadon v Greece and Commission (To3) (Rec 1989,P 4119) (Order) C-147/86; [1988] EUECJ C-147/86; [1989] EUECJ C-147/86T; [1989] EUECJ C-147/86T 6 Dec 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Panhellinios Syndesmos Idioktiton Frontistirion Xenon Glosson and Trechas v Greece and Commission (To2) (Rec 1989,P 4111) (Order) C-147/86 6 Dec 1989 ECJ European Â Â Panhellinia Omospondia Idioktiton Frontistirion Xenon Glosson and Others v Greece and Commission (Order); ECJ 6-Dec-1989 - C-147/86 Â Â Commission v Greece; ECJ 6-Dec-1989 - C-329/88; [1989] EUECJ C-329/88 Â Â Cosimex v Commission; ECFI 6-Dec-1989 - T-131/89; [1989] EUECJ T-131/89 Â France v Commission (Rec 1989,P 4163) (Judgment) C-136/88; [1989] EUECJ C-136/88 7 Dec 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Kontogeorgis v Commission (Rec 1989,P 4189) (Judgment) C-163/88; [1989] EUECJ C-163/88 12 Dec 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Criminal Proceedings Against Messner (Rec 1989,P 4209) (Sv89-281 Fi89-281) (Judgment) C-265/88 12 Dec 1989 ECJ European Â Exarchos v Parliament (Rec 1989,P 4185,Summ Pub ) (Judgment) C-331/87; [1989] EUECJ C-331/87 12 Dec 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Criminal Proceedings Against Lothar Messner. R-265/88; [1989] EUECJ R-265/88 12 Dec 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Raab v Hauptzollamt Berlin-Packhof (Rec 1989,p 4423) (Judgment) C-1/89; [1989] EUECJ C-1/89 13 Dec 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Brother International Gmbh v Hauptzollamt Giessen. (Origin Of Goods ) R-26/88; [1989] EUECJ R-26/88 13 Dec 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ministere Public v Paris R-204/88; [1989] EUECJ R-204/88 13 Dec 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Corsica Ferries France v Direction generale des douanes (Judgment) C-49/89; [1989] EUECJ C-49/89 13 Dec 1989 ECJ European Europa Before the entry into force of Regulation No 4055/86 of 22 December 1986 applying the principle of freedom to provide services to maritime transport between Member States and between Member States and third countries, adopted by the Council on the basis of Article 84(2 ) of the Treaty, the EEC Treaty, in particular Articles 59, 61, 62 and 84, did not prevent a Member State from levying, in connection with the use by a ship of harbour installations situated in its island territory, charges on the embarkation and disembarkation of passengers arriving from or going to a port situated in another Member State, whilst in the case of travel between two ports situated within national territory those charges were levied only on embarkation at the island port. [ Bailii ] Â Jean-Francois Deschamps And Others v Office National Interprofessionnel Des Viandes, De L'Elevage Et De L'Aviculture (Ofival). R-181/88; [1989] EUECJ R-181/88 13 Dec 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Prelle v Commission (Rec 1989,P 4335) (Judgment) C-169/88; [1989] EUECJ C-169/88 13 Dec 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Deschamps and Others v Ofival C-181/88 13 Dec 1989 ECJ European Â Oyowe and Traore v Commission (Rec 1989,P 4285) (Judgment) C-100/88; [1989] EUECJ C-100/88 13 Dec 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Ruzius-Wilbrink v Bedrijfsvereniging Voor Overheidsdiensten (Rec 1989,P 4311) (Judgment) C-102/88 13 Dec 1989 ECJ European Â Patrinos v Esc (Rec 1989,P 4249,Summ Pub ) (Judgment) C-17/88; [1989] EUECJ C-17/88 13 Dec 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Genius Holding v Staatssecretaris Van Financien (Rec 1989,P 4227) (Judgment) C-342/87 13 Dec 1989 ECJ European Â Grimaldi v Fonds Des Maladies Professionnelles (Rec 1989,P 4407) (Sv89-287 Fi89-287) (Judgment) C-322/88 13 Dec 1989 ECJ European Â Criminal Proceedings Against Paris (Rec 1989,P 4361) (Judgment) C-204/88 13 Dec 1989 ECJ European Â Teissonniere v Commission T-119/89; [1989] EUECJ T-119/89 14 Dec 1989 ECFI European 1. Although it is true that before retirement, an uncertain future event, pension rights are contingent rights accruing from day to day, it is none the less clear that an administrative act deciding that a period of employment cannot be taken into account for the calculation of years of pensionable service, or a decision refusing a request for application of the increase provided for under Article 5 of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations, immediately and directly affects the legal situation of the person concerned, even if that act is to be implemented only subsequently. In principle, therefore, the official has a legitimate, present and vested interest in taking proceedings against such an act. 2. Within the framework of a continuing discussion between an institution and an official, the latter is entitled not to regard an exchange of views as a formal decision on the part of the administration until he receives the first letter from the administration stating the grounds on which that decision is based. Only at that time does he become bound to lodge a complaint within the period laid down by the Staff Regulations. 3. An application is inadmissible if it is directed against an act preparatory to a decision, in particular against an act coming within the category of administrative information, on the ground that it refers to the subsequent adoption of a decision or does not emanate from an appointing authority. A letter addressed to an official is not in the nature of a decision where, in particular, the author of that letter took care expressly to draw the applicant' s attention to the fact that the pension calculations communicated to him were for guidance and had to be subject to subsequent confirmation. 4. The time-limits prescribed in Articles 90 and 91 of the Staff Regulations for the lodging of complaints and appeals are a matter of public policy and are not subject to the discretion of the parties or the court, since they were laid down with a view to ensuring clarity and legal certainty. [ Bailii ] Â Â Theo Dammer v Vzw Securex Kinderbijslagfonds And Rijksdienst Voor Kinderbijslag Der Werknemers; ECJ 14-Dec-1989 - R-168/88; [1989] EUECJ R-168/88 Â Schweizerische Lactina Panchaud Ag v Bundesamt Fuer Ernahrung Und Forstwirtschaft. R-346/88; [1989] EUECJ R-346/88 14 Dec 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â The Queen v Ministry Of Agriculture, Fisheries And Food, Ex Parte Agegate Ltd. (Fishing ) R-3/87; [1989] EUECJ R-3/87 14 Dec 1989 ECJ European [ Bailii ] Â Dammer v Securex and Rkw (Rec 1989,P 4553) (Judgment) C-168/88 14 Dec 1989 ECJ European Â The Queen v Ministry Of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Ex Parte Agegate C-3/87; [1989] ECR 4459 14 Dec 1989 ECJ European, Agriculture The court considered the legality of licensing conditions imposed by the United Kingdom upon licences to fish issued under the Sea Fish Conservation Act 1967. One of those conditions required 75% of the crew to reside ashore in the United Kingdom. Held: The condition was unlawful under the Treaty. 1 Citers Â Lactina Panchaud v Bundesamt Fur Ernahrung Und Forstwirtschaft (Rec 1989,P 4579) (Judgment) C-346/88 14 Dec 1989 ECJ European Â Â Regina v Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, ex parte Jaderow Ltd; ECJ 14-Dec-1989 - C-216/87; R-216/87; [1989] EUECJ R-216/87 Â
		Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.

swarb.co.uk - law index

European - From: 1985 To: 1989