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.  














European - From: 2000 To: 2000

This page lists 826 cases, and was prepared on 27 May 2018.


 
 Oceano Grupo Editorial SA v Quintero; ECJ 2000 - [2000] ECR I-4941
 
Douglas King v T Tunnock Limited [2000] Eur LR 531; [2000] SLT 744; [2000] ScotCS 70; 2000 SC 424
2000
IHCS
Lord Caplan
European, Agency
The pursuer had been employed as a commercial agent by the defendant which carried on business as a baker. The pursuer sold only the defendant's cakes and biscuits. The defendant decided to close its bakery business. The claimant sought compensation under regulation 17(6) to be assessed by reference to the value of the agency at the date of termination rather than on the basis of any future economic loss. He argued that compensation should be assessed without regard to events occurring after the date of termination and that when assessing the amount of compensation to which he was entitled the court should follow the established practice of the French courts in awarding two years' gross commission. Held: The agent was entitled to receive compensation for the loss of his business. Even in France the two years' commission rule is only a benchmark and the court had to examine the particular circumstances of the case. Earning potential was an important factor in valuing an agency and there might be cases in which it would be necessary to adduce evidence of the valuation of agencies in the particular local market. There was no such evidence here and the court commented on the limited evidence before it as to the value of the business. Having regard to the duration and previous profitability of the agency the claimant would have expected to receive a capital sum equal to at least two years' earnings in order to give it up and held that an award of that amount would not be unreasonable.
Commercial Agents (Council Directive) Regulations 1993 - Council Directive 86/653 17
1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ]
 
Pension Benefits T0931/95
2000
EPOBA

European, Intellectual Property
The applicant sought a European patent for a method of calculating and controlling pensions benefits. The claim was "1. A method of controlling a pension benefits program by administering at least one subscriber employer account on behalf of each subscriber employer's enrolled employees each of whom is to receive periodic benefits payments, said method comprising:
providing to a data processing means information from each said subscriber employer defining the number, earnings and ages of all enrolled employees of the said subscriber employer;
determining the average age of all enrolled employees by average age computing means;
determining the periodic cost of life insurance for all enrolled employees of said subscriber employer by life insurance cost computing means; and
estimating all administrative, legal, trustee, and government premium yearly expenses for said subscriber employer by administrative cost computing means; the method producing, in use, information defining each subscriber employer's periodic monetary contribution to a master trust, the face amount of a life insurance policy on each enrolled employee's life to be purchased from a life insurer and assigned to the master trust and to be maintained in full force and effect until the death of the said employee, and periodic benefits to be received by each enrolled employee upon death, disability or retirement." Held: A computer programmed to carry out the unpatentable method was not within the categories of Art.52(2) - the fact that it was a physical thing ("concrete") was enough to take the case out of Art.52(2). It was really a method of doing business. It also rejected the apparatus claim. It acknowledged the 'technical effect' test: "According to the case law of the boards of appeal the use of the term "invention" in Article 52(1) EPC in conjunction with the so-called "exclusion provisions" of Article 52(2) and (3) EPC, which mention subject-matter that "in particular shall not be regarded as inventions within the meaning of paragraph 1", is understood as implying a "requirement of technical character" or "technicality" which is to be fulfilled by an invention as claimed in order to be patentable. Thus an invention may be an invention within the meaning of Article 52(1) if for example a technical effect is achieved by the invention or if technical considerations are required to carry out the invention . . Claim 1 of the main request is, apart from various computing means mentioned in that claim, directed to a "method for controlling a pension benefits program by administering at least one subscriber employer account". All the features of this claim are steps of processing and producing information having purely administrative, actuarial and/or financial character. Processing and producing such information are typical steps of business and economic methods.

Thus the invention as claimed does not go beyond a method of doing business as such and, therefore, is excluded from patentability under Article 52(2)(c) in combination with Article 52(3) EPC; the claim does not define an invention within the meaning of Article 52(1) EPC." and "The feature of using technical means for a purely non-technical purpose and/or for processing purely non-technical information does not necessarily confer technical character to any such individual steps of use or to the method as a whole: in fact, any activity in the non-technical branches of human culture involves physical entities and uses, to a greater or lesser extent, technical means. . . Methods only involving economic concepts and practices of doing business are not inventions within the meaning of Article 52(1) EPC.
A feature of a method which concerns the use of technical means for a purely non-technical purpose and/or for processing purely non-technical information does not necessarily confer a technical character to such a method."
1 Citers


 
Scandlines Svergie AB v Port of Helsingborg Case COMP/A.36.568.D3
2000


European, Commercial
(Year?) The Commission dismissed a complaint by a ferry company of excessive and discriminatory port charges by the port operator. The Commission said that, in calculating the production costs, it was necessary to take account not only of the costs actually incurred by the port in providing its services, but also additional costs and other factors which were not reflected in the audited profits and losses, such as high sunk costs, and the benefits to customers conferred by the particular location of the port.
1 Citers


 
Tanja Kreil v Bundesrepublik Deutschland Times, 22 February 2000; C-285/98; [2000] EUECJ C-285/98
11 Jan 2000
ECJ

Discrimination, European
A provision in national legislation restricting the activities of women in the armed services to medical and military-music service, and restricting them from being involved in any arms bearing capacity, was in breach of the Equal Treatment directive. The Directive allowed exception for specified activities in which by their nature or context the sex of the worker was a determinative factor. That was not the case here. A member had a general discretion as to how it organised its armed forces, but that was still within European Community law. The Directive did not allow exclusion over all the activities in an organisation.
Council Directive 76/207 2(2) 2(3)
[ Bailii ]
 
Netherlands v Commission And Van Der Wal (Law Governing The Institutions) C-189/98; [2000] EUECJ C-189/98P
11 Jan 2000
ECJ

European
Europa Appeal - Access to information - Commission Decision 94/90/ECSC, EC, Euratom - Scope of the exception relating to protection of the public interest - Inadequate statement of reasons - Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms - Principles of equality between the parties and rights of the defence.
[ Bailii ]
 
Netherlands and Van der Wal v Commission C-174/98; [2000] EUECJ C-174/98-P
11 Jan 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Italy v Commission (Rec 2000,p I-111) (Order) C-295/98
11 Jan 2000
ECJ

European


 
DKV v OHMI (COMPANYLINE) (Rec.2000,p.II-1) (Judgment) T-19/99
12 Jan 2000
ECFI

European


 
DKV v OHMI (COMPANYLINE) (Rec 2000,p II-1) T-19/99; T-19/99; [2000] EUECJ T-19/99
12 Jan 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
TK-Heimdienst (Rec.2000,p.I-151) (Judgment) C-254/98
13 Jan 2000
ECJ

European


 
TK-Heimdienst (Rec 2000,p I-151) (Judgment) C-254/98; [2000] EUECJ C-254/98
13 Jan 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Estee Lauder Cosmetics GmbH and Co. OHG v Lancaster Group GmbH C-220/98; [2000] IP&T 380; [2000] EUECJ C-220/98
13 Jan 2000
ECJ

European, Commercial
Europa Approximation of laws - Cosmetic products - Packaging and labelling - Directive 76/768 - Measures to prevent advertising attributing to cosmetic products characteristics which they do not possess - Ban on the importing or marketing of a cosmetic product whose name includes the term `lifting' - Whether permissible - Condition - Whether such a name is misleading - To be assessed by the national courts (EC Treaty, Arts 30 and 36 (now, after amendment, Arts 28 EC and 30 EC); Council Directive 76/768, Art. 6(3))

"It should be borne in mind that when it has fallen to the court, in the context of the interpretation of Directive 84/450, to weigh the risk of misleading consumers against the requirements of the free movement of goods, it has held that, in order to determine whether a particular description, trade mark or promotional description or statement is misleading, it is necessary to take into account the presumed expectations of an average consumer who is reasonably well informed and reasonably observant and circumspect (see, in particular, Gut Springenheide GmbH v Oberkreisdirektor des Kreises Steinfurt-Amt fur Lebensmittel-Uberwachung Case C-210/96 [1998] ECR1-4657 (para. 31))."
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Estee Lauder (Rec.2000,p.I-117) (Judgment) C-220/98
13 Jan 2000
ECJ

European


 
Mehibas Dordtselaan v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-15) T-290/97; [2000] EUECJ T-290/97
18 Jan 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]

 
 Regina v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry and Others, Ex Parte Greenpeace Ltd; QBD 19-Jan-2000 - Times, 19 January 2000
 
Marks and Spencer Plc v Commissioners of Customs and Excise Times, 19 January 2000
19 Jan 2000
CA

European, Administrative, VAT
The doctrine of direct effect which gave rise for a private individual against a member state could only operate where the member failed to comply with the requirements of European Law to give effect to such law, and the requirement to put such rules into effect had to be unconditional and precise. A party could not use the doctrine to claim against a member state under European Law in general.
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Gross Godems (Rec.2000,p.I-177) (Judgment) C-414/98
20 Jan 2000
ECJ

European


 
Gross Godems (Rec 2000,p I-177) (Judgment) C-414/98; [2000] EUECJ C-414/98
20 Jan 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Cuenda Guijarro and others v Council (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-1,II-1) T-179/98; [2000] EUECJ T-179/98
24 Jan 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Cuenda Guijarro and others v Council (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-1,II-1) (Order) T-179/98
24 Jan 2000
ECFI

European


 
Gouloussis v Commission (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-5,II-23) (Judgment) T-86/98
26 Jan 2000
ECFI

European


 
Gouloussis v Commission (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-5,II-23) T-86/98; [2000] EUECJ T-86/98
26 Jan 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Heerma (Rec.2000,p.I-419) (Judgment) C-23/98
27 Jan 2000
ECJ

European


 
Dansommer (Rec 2000,p I-393) (Judgment) C-8/98; [2000] EUECJ C-8/98
27 Jan 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
TAT European Airlines v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-51) T-49/97; [2000] EUECJ T-49/97
27 Jan 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Branco v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-69) T-194/97; [2000] EUECJ T-194/97
27 Jan 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
DIR International Film and others v Commission (Rec 2000,p I-447) (Judgment) C-164/98; [2000] EUECJ C-164/98P
27 Jan 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
DIR International Film and others v Commission (Rec.2000,p.I-447) (Judgment) C-164/98
27 Jan 2000
ECJ

European


 
Staatssecretaris van Financien v Heerma C-23/98; [2001] STC 1437; [2000] EUECJ C-23/98
27 Jan 2000
ECJ

European

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Dansommer (Rec.2000,p.I-393) (Judgment) C-8/98
27 Jan 2000
ECJ

European


 
Graf (Rec 2000,p I-493) (Judgment) C-190/98; [2000] EUECJ C-190/98
27 Jan 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Graf (Rec.2000,p.I-493) (Judgment) C-190/98
27 Jan 2000
ECJ

European


 
BEUC v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-101) T-256/97; [2000] EUECJ T-256/97
27 Jan 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Mulder and others v Council and Commission (Rec 2000,p I-203) (Judgment) C-104/89
27 Jan 2000
ECJ

European


 
Mulder and Others v Council And Commission (Agriculture) C-37/90; [2000] EUECJ C-37/90
27 Jan 2000
ECJ

European
Europa Additional levy on milk - Non-contractual liability - Reparation and assessment of damage.
[ Bailii ]
 
Eugenio Branco v Commission (Social Policy) French Text T-83/98; [2000] EUECJ T-83/98
27 Jan 2000
ECFI

European
Europa European Social Fund - Action for failure to act - Admissibility - Action for annulment - Decision to suspend financial assistance - Certification by the Member State - Error of assessment of facts - Legitimate - Acquired rights - Legal - Proportionality.
[ Bailii ]
 
Transpo Maastricht and Ooms v Commission T-63/98; [2000] EUECJ T-63/98
1 Feb 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Transpo Maastricht and Ooms v Commission (Rec.2000,p.II-135) (Judgment) T-63/98
1 Feb 2000
ECFI

European


 
Amengual Far v Amengual Far C-12/98; [2002] STC 382; [2000] EUECJ C-12/98
3 Feb 2000
ECJ

European, VAT
Europa Article 13B(b) of the Sixth Directive 77/388 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes allows Member States to lay down a general rule making lettings of immovable property subject to VAT and exempting from that rule only lettings of immovable property to be used for dwelling purposes. In EU law exceptions to a general principle are generally interpreted restrictively: "This criterion has been consistently followed in the case law of this court".
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Mahlburg (Rec.2000,p.I-549) (Judgment) C-207/98
3 Feb 2000
ECJ

European


 
CCRE v Commission (Regional Policy) T-151/98; [2000] EUECJ T-151/98
3 Feb 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Action for annulment - European Regional Development Fund - Reduction of financial assistance - Failure to state reasons - Legitimate expectations - Legal certainty.
[ Bailii ]
 
Dounias (Rec.2000,p.I-577) (Judgment) C-228/98
3 Feb 2000
ECJ

European


 
Townsend v Commission (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-11,II-45) T-60/99; [2000] EUECJ T-60/99
3 Feb 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
CCRE v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-167) T-46/98; [2000] EUECJ T-46/98
3 Feb 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Townsend v Commission (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-11,II-45) (Judgment) T-60/99
3 Feb 2000
ECFI

European


 
Amengual Far (Rec.2000,p.I-527) (Judgment) C-12/98
3 Feb 2000
ECJ

European


 
Mahlburg v Land Mecklenberurg-Vorpommern Cas Times, 17 February 2000; C-207/98; [2000] EUECJ C-207/98
3 Feb 2000
ECJ

Discrimination, Employment, European
A refusal to appoint a pregnant woman to a post for an indefinite period because of that pregnancy was in breach of the Directive even though national statutory rules precluded employment of the woman during the period of the pregnancy.
Equal Treatment Directive (76/207/EEC)
[ Bailii ]
 
Entidad de Gestion de Derechos de los Productores Audiovisuales (Egeda) v Hosteleria Asturiana SA (Hoasa). C-293/98; [2000] EUECJ C-293/98
3 Feb 2000
ECJ

European, Media, Intellectual Property
Europa The question whether the reception by a hotel establishment of satellite or terrestrial television signals and their distribution by cable to the various rooms of that hotel is an act of communication to the public or reception by the public is not governed by Directive 93/83 on the coordination of certain rules concerning copyright and rights related to copyright applicable to satellite broadcasting and cable retransmission, and must consequently be decided in accordance with national law.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Dounias (Rec 2000,p I-577) (Judgment) C-228/98; [2000] EUECJ C-228/98
3 Feb 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
CCRE v Commission (Rec.2000,p.II-167) (Judgment) T-46/98
3 Feb 2000
ECFI

European


 
Dieter Rossmeier v Mountbody Transport and Others Times, 07 February 2000
7 Feb 2000
IHCS

Scotland, European
A firm with its business base had begun an action in Scotland. The court ordered the pursuer to nominate somebody within the jurisdiction to have conduct of the proceedings and to bear the possible burden of costs. The order was not valid since it was in breach of European law. A Scottish court order would be enforceable in Germany, and the order discriminated against the citizen of another member state under article 12 of the Treaty.
ECTreaty Art 12

 
Emesa Sugar C-17/98
8 Feb 2000
ECJ

European


 
Valero Jordana and Vade v Commission (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-15,II-61) T-111/97; T-111/97; [2000] EUECJ T-111/97
9 Feb 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Gomez de la Cruz Talegon v Commission T-165/97; [2000] EUECJ T-165/97
9 Feb 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Officials - Request for reclassification in grade - Objection of inadmissibility - Material new fact - Admissibility.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Deutsche Telekom (Social Policy) C-235/96; [2000] EUECJ C-235/96
10 Feb 2000
ECJ

European
Europa Equal pay for men and women - Article 119 of the EC Treaty (Articles 117 to 120 of the EC Treaty have been replaced by Articles 136 EC to 143 EC ) - Protocol concerning Article 119 of the EC Treaty - Occupational social security schemes - Exclusion of part-time workers from a supplementary occupational retirement pension scheme - Retroactive membership - Entitlement to a pension - Relationship between national law and Community law.
[ Bailii ]
 
Andriotis v Commission and CEDEFOP (Rec 2000,p II-235) T-5/99; T-5/99; [2000] EUECJ T-5/99
10 Feb 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Vick (Rec 2000,p I-799) (Judgment) C-234/96
10 Feb 2000
ECJ

European


 
Nederlandse Antillen v Commission (Rec.2000,p.II-201) (Judgment) T-32/98
10 Feb 2000
ECFI

European


 
Nederlandse Antillen v Commission (Commercial Policy) T-41/98; [2000] EUECJ T-41/98
10 Feb 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Association of the overseas countries and territories - Regulation (EC) No 2352/97 - Regulation (EC) No 2494/97 - Application for annulment - Admissibility - OCT Decision - Safeguard measure - Causal link.
[ Bailii ]
 
Andriotis v Commission and CEDEFOP (Rec.2000,p.II-235) (Order) T-5/99
10 Feb 2000
ECFI

European


 
Nederlandse Antillen v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-201) T-32/98; T-32/98; [2000] EUECJ T-32/98
10 Feb 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Omer Nazli, Caglar Nazli and Melike Nazli v Stadt Nurnberg C-340/97; [2000] ICR I-957; [2000] EUECJ C-340/97
10 Feb 2000
ECJ

European
Europa EEC-Turkey Association Agreement - Freedom of movement for workers - Articles 6(1) and 14(1) of Decision No 1/80 of the Association Council - Registration as duly belonging to the labour force of a Member State - Turkish worker detained pending trial and subsequently sentenced to a suspended term of imprisonment - Expulsion on general preventive grounds.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
FTS (Rec 2000,p I-883) (Judgment) C-202/97; [2000] EUECJ C-202/97
10 Feb 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Sievers (Rec 2000,p I-929) (Judgment) C-270/97; [2000] EUECJ C-270/97
10 Feb 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v France (Rec.2000,p.I-1049) (Judgment) C-169/98
15 Feb 2000
ECJ

European


 
Commission v France (Rec.2000,p.I-995) (Judgment) C-34/98
15 Feb 2000
ECJ

European


 
Holzl and others v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-251) T-1/00; T-1/00; [2000] EUECJ T-1/00
15 Feb 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v France (Rec 2000,p I-1049) (Judgment) C-169/98; [2000] EUECJ C-169/98
15 Feb 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v France (Rec 2000,p I-995) (Judgment) C-34/98; [2000] EUECJ C-34/98
15 Feb 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Holzl and others v Commission (Rec.2000,p.II-251) (Order) T-1/00
15 Feb 2000
ECFI

European


 
Procter and Gamble v OHMI (Rec.2000,p.II-265) (Judgment) T-122/99
16 Feb 2000
ECFI

European


 
Juntas Generales de Guipuzcoa and Diputacion Foral de Guipuzcoa (Rec 2000,p I-1073) (Order) C-400/97
16 Feb 2000
ECJ

European


 
Stork Amsterdam v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-309) T-241/97; T-241/97; [2000] EUECJ T-241/97
17 Feb 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Micheli and others v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-287) T-183/97; T-183/97; [2000] EUECJ T-183/97
17 Feb 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Van Balkom Non-Ferro Scheiding (Rec 2000,p I-1095) (Judgment) C-156/97; [2000] EUECJ C-156/97
17 Feb 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]

 
 Regina v Secretary of State For Employment Ex Parte Seymour-Smith and Another (No 2); HL 17-Feb-2000 - Gazette, 02 March 2000; [2000] UKHL 12; [2000] 1 All ER 857; [2000] 1 WLR 435; [2000] ICR 244
 
Rose v Commission (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-27,II-115) (Judgment) T-22/99
22 Feb 2000
ECFI

European


 
Rose v Commission (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-27,II-115) T-22/99; T-22/99; [2000] EUECJ T-22/99
22 Feb 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Van der Wal (supported by Kingdom of the Netherlands, Intervener) v Commission of the European Communities Joined Cases C-174/98P and C-189/98P Times, 22 February 2000
22 Feb 2000
CA

European, Administrative
When a national court sought assistance from the European Commission by way of opinions in deciding proceedings before that national court, the advice given was not to be held confidential from third parties simply on the basis that it was prepared for legal proceedings. Instead it had to ask the requesting court to state whether or not disclosure would breach national law. The public interest exemption from disclosure was not so wide or simple.

 
ACAV and others v Council (Rec 2000,p II-341) T-138/98; T-138/98; [2000] EUECJ T-138/98
22 Feb 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
ACAV and others v Council (Rec.2000,p.II-341) (Judgment) T-138/98
22 Feb 2000
ECFI

European


 
Biasutto v Council (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-23,II-99) T-171/98; T-171/98; [2000] EUECJ T-171/98
22 Feb 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Biasutto v Council (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-23,II-99) (Judgment) T-171/98
22 Feb 2000
ECFI

European


 
Carraro v Commission (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-35,II-157) (Judgment) T-164/98
23 Feb 2000
ECFI

European


 
Kooyman v Parliament (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-31,II-135) T-223/97; T-223/97; [2000] EUECJ T-223/97
23 Feb 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Vehicle Inspectorate v Southern Coaches Ltd and others Times, 23 February 2000
23 Feb 2000
QBD

Transport, European
A coach driver travelled as a passenger in a company coach. He sought to count the time travelling as rest time under his tachograph measurements. The court found however that he would have been available to take over the driving during that period had occasion required. The regulations required the rest to be other than in a moving vehicle, and this interpretation was required properly to give effect to the legislation.
Council Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85

 
Carraro v Commission (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-35,II-157) T-164/98; T-164/98; [2000] EUECJ T-164/98
23 Feb 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
AS Bolderaja and others v Council (Rec.2000,p.II-451) (Order) T-104/99
24 Feb 2000
ECFI

European


 
Frans Jacobs v Commission T-82/98; [2000] EUECJ T-82/98
24 Feb 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Officials - Promotion - Absence of staff report - Irregularity in the promotion procedure.
[ Bailii ]
 
ADT Projekt v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-387) T-145/98; T-145/98; [2000] EUECJ T-145/98
24 Feb 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
FTA and others v Council (Rec 2000,p II-373) T-37/98; T-37/98; [2000] EUECJ T-37/98
24 Feb 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
ADT Projekt v Commission (Rec.2000,p.II-387) (Judgment) T-145/98
24 Feb 2000
ECFI

European


 
Commission v France (Rec 2000,p I-1129) (Judgment) C-434/97; [2000] EUECJ C-434/97
24 Feb 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]

 
 Nabadda and Others v Westminster City Council; Gomilsek v Haringey London Borough Council; CA 24-Feb-2000 - Gazette, 24 February 2000; Times, 15 March 2000
 
Jacobs v Commission (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-39,II-169) (Judgment) T-82/98
24 Feb 2000
ECFI

European


 
FTA and others v Council (Rec.2000,p.II-373) (Order) T-37/98
24 Feb 2000
ECFI

European


 
Glaxo Group Limited and Others v Dowelhurst Limited and Another Times, 14 March 2000; [2000] EWHC Ch 134; [2000] FSR 529
28 Feb 2000
ChD
Laddie J
Intellectual Property, European
Parallel importers could not be prevented from so acting by Trade Mark law unless it could be shown that the activity caused substantial damage to the specific substance of the Mark. If damage was shown, the owner could complain unless it would operate to breach European law. A mark owner could object to the re-application of his mark by such importers only if he had not received notice of such activity. This was irrespective of proof of damage, but knowledge of the importer's activities constituted notice. 'A trade mark is a badge, in the widest sense, used on or in relation to goods so as to indicate source.'
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Emesa Sugar (Free Zone) Nv v Aruba Case C-17/98 Times, 29 February 2000
29 Feb 2000
ECJ

European, Administrative, Human Rights
It was not open to a party to a case before the European Court of Justice to seek opportunity to make written representations on opinions submitted to the Court by the Advocate General. Opinions of the Court of Human Rights that a party should have opportunity to see and comment upon all matters put before a tribunal were not applicable in this case. The role of the Advocates General was not to act in a partisan manner, and their views were given in a quasi-judicial capacity.

 
Emesa Sugar (Free Zone) Nv v Aruba (No 2) Case C-17/98) Times, 29 February 2000
29 Feb 2000
ECJ

European, International
A national court had jurisdiction to make an order against a Non-EC body in order to prevent an imminent infringement of community law, provided that the court had proper and serious doubts about the implementation of the community law, the matter was urgent, and the national court made proper allowance for the Community's interests.

 
Castle View Services Limited v Howes and Everett and Fitzpatrick and Dalglish [2000] ScotCS 49; 2000 SLT 696
29 Feb 2000
SCS
Lord Sutherland
Scotland, Employment, European
Though the Council Directive did not apply to sea-going vessels, the Court held that the crews of such vessels were not excluded from the benefit of the regulations.
Employment Tribunals Act 1996
1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ]
 
Industrie des poudres spheriques v Council (Rec 2000,p II-463) T-2/95; T-2/95
7 Mar 2000
ECFI

European


 
Commission v Belgium (Rec 2000,p I-1221) (Judgment) C-355/98; [2000] EUECJ C-355/98
9 Mar 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Italy (Rec 2000,p I-1255) (Judgment) C-358/98; [2000] EUECJ C-358/98
9 Mar 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Italy C-358/98 C-358/98
9 Mar 2000
ECJ

European
(Judgment)

 
Commission v Italy (Rec.2000,p.I-1277) (Judgment) C-386/98
9 Mar 2000
ECJ

European


 
Vicente Nunez v Commission (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-47,II-203) (Judgment) T-10/99
9 Mar 2000
ECFI

European


 
Liberos v Commission (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-43,II-185) T-29/97; T-29/97; [2000] EUECJ T-29/97
9 Mar 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Sarrio v Commission (Rec 2000,p I-1213) (Order) C-291/98
9 Mar 2000
ECJ

European


 
Commission v Belgium (Rec.2000,p.I-1221) (Judgment) C-355/98
9 Mar 2000
ECJ

European


 
Vicente Nunez v Commission T-10/99; [2000] EUECJ T-10/99
9 Mar 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Italy C-386/98 [2000] EUECJ C-386/98
9 Mar 2000
ECJ

European
(Judgment)
[ Bailii ]
 
EKW and Wein and Co (Rec 2000,p I-1157) (Judgment) C-437/97; [2000] EUECJ C-437/97
9 Mar 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Kocak and Ors (Rec 2000,p I-1287) (Judgment) C-102/98; [2000] EUECJ C-102/98
14 Mar 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Eglise de scientologie (Rec.2000,p.I-1335) (Judgment) C-54/99
14 Mar 2000
ECJ

European


 
Eglise de scientologie (Rec 2000,p I-1335) (Judgment) C-54/99; [2000] EUECJ C-54/99
14 Mar 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Kocak and Ors (Rec.2000,p.I-1287) (Judgment) C-102/98
14 Mar 2000
ECJ

European


 
Kocak (External Relations) C-211/98; [2000] EUECJ C-211/98
14 Mar 2000
ECJ

European
Europa EEC-Turkey Association Agreement - Decisions of the Association Council - Social Security - Principle of non-discrimination on grounds of nationality - Direct effect - Scope - Legislation of a Member State on determination of dates of birth for the purposes of allocating a social security number and awarding a retirement pension.
[ Bailii ]
 
Oficemen v Commission (Competition) T-59/95; [2000] EUECJ T-59/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
Aalborg Portland v Commission (Competition) T-44/95; [2000] EUECJ T-44/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
Lafarge Coppee v Commission (Competition) T-43/95; [2000] EUECJ T-43/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
The Rugby Group v Commission (Competition) T-53/95; [2000] EUECJ T-53/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
Scancem (Anciennement Euroc) v Commission (Competition) T-71/95; [2000] EUECJ T-71/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
SECIL v Commission (Competition) T-62/95; [2000] EUECJ T-62/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
Titan Cement v Commission (Competition) T-64/95; [2000] EUECJ T-64/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
Unicem v Commission (Competition) T-50/95; [2000] EUECJ T-50/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
Vereniging Nederlandse Cementindustrie Vcommission (Competition) T-32/95; [2000] EUECJ T-32/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
Vicat v Commission (Competition) T-37/95; [2000] EUECJ T-37/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]

 
 Regina v Durham County Council and Others Ex Parte Huddleston; CA 15-Mar-2000 - Times, 15 March 2000; Gazette, 30 March 2000; [2000] 1 WLR 1484
 
Fitzwilliam Executive Search Ltd v Bestuur Van Het Landelijk Institut Sociale Verzekeringen Case C-202/97 Times, 15 March 2000
15 Mar 2000
ECJ

Employment, Benefits, European
An E101 certificate as to the payment of benefits issued by one member state with respect to the responsibility for social security payments was binding on the member state which received such a certificate. Where however there were proper doubts as to the correctness of the facts asserted as underlying the certificate it was proper to challenge the certificate., and the certificate should be re-examined and if appropriate withdrawn.


 
 Deutsche Post Ag v Gesellschaft Mbh and Another; ECJ 15-Mar-2000 - Times, 15 March 2000; C-148/97; C-147/97; [2000] EUECJ C-147/97; [2000] EUECJ C-148/97
 
Tsimenta Chalkidos v Commission [2000] EUECJ T-104/95; T-104/95
15 Mar 2000
ECJ
P. Lindh, P
European
ECJ Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
SFIC v Commission (Competition) T-36/95; [2000] EUECJ T-36/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
Ciments Francais v Commission (Competition) T-39/95; [2000] EUECJ T-39/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
ENCI v Commission (Competition) T-31/95; [2000] EUECJ T-31/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
Dyckerhoff v Commission (Competition) T-35/95; [2000] EUECJ T-35/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
Corporacion Uniland v Commission (Competition) T-58/95; [2000] EUECJ T-58/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
Italcementi v Commission (Competition) T-65/95; [2000] EUECJ T-65/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
Alsen v Commission (Competition) T-45/95; [2000] EUECJ T-45/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
Alsen v Commission (Competition) T-46/95; [2000] EUECJ T-46/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
Enosi Tsimentoviomichanion v Commission (Competition) T-103/95; [2000] EUECJ T-103/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
Ciments Luxembourgeois v Commission (Competition) T-34/95; [2000] EUECJ T-34/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
Deutsche Zementindustrie v Commission (Competition) T-48/95; [2000] EUECJ T-48/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
Cementir v Commission (Competition) T-87/95; [2000] EUECJ T-87/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
Cembureau Association Europeenne Du Ciment v Commission (Competition) T-26/95; [2000] EUECJ T-26/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
Asland v Commission (Competition) T-55/95; [2000] EUECJ T-55/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
Castle Cement v Commission (Competition) T-56/95; [2000] EUECJ T-56/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
British Cement v Commission (Competition) T-54/95; [2000] EUECJ T-54/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]

 
 Blue Circle Industries v Commission; ECFI 15-Mar-2000 - T-88/95; [2000] EUECJ T-88/95
 
Atic v Commission (Competition) T-63/95; [2000] EUECJ T-63/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
Cimpor v Commission (Competition) T-61/95; [2000] EUECJ T-61/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
Aker Rgi (Anciennement Aker) v Commission (Competition) T-70/95; [2000] EUECJ T-70/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
Federation De Lindustrie Cimentiere Belge Vcommission (Competition) T-30/95; [2000] EUECJ T-30/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
Fratelli Buzzi v Commission (Competition) T-51/95; [2000] EUECJ T-51/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
Enso-Gutzeit v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-479) T-337/94; T-337/94
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European


 
Irish Cement v Commission (Competition) T-60/95; [2000] EUECJ T-60/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
Heidelberger Zement v Commission (Competition) T-42/95; [2000] EUECJ T-42/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
Cimenteries CBR v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-491) T-25/95; T-25/95; [2000] EUECJ T-25/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Heracles General Cement v Commission (Competition) T-57/95; [2000] EUECJ T-57/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
Hisalba v Commission (Competition) T-69/95; [2000] EUECJ T-69/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
Holderbank v Commission (Competition) T-68/95; [2000] EUECJ T-68/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
Compania Valenciana De Cementos v Commission (Competition) T-52/95; [2000] EUECJ T-52/95
15 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Cement market - Rights of the defence - Access to the file - Single and continuous infringement - General agreement and measures of implementation - Liability for an infringement - Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation - Links between the general agreement and the measures of implementation as regards objects and participants - Fine - Determination of the amount.
[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Italy (Rec.2000,p.I-1565) (Judgment) C-439/98
16 Mar 2000
ECJ

European


 
Parliament v Bieber C-284/98; [2000] EUECJ C-284/98P
16 Mar 2000
ECJ
R. Schintgen P
European
ECJ Appeal - Officials - Leave on personal grounds - Reinstatement - Non-contractual liability of the Community - Determination of the period to be taken into account for calculating the damage suffered
[ Bailii ]
 
Ergat (Rec 2000,p I-1487) (Judgment) C-329/97; [2000] EUECJ C-329/97
16 Mar 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Italy (Rec 2000,p I-1565) (Judgment) C-439/98; [2000] EUECJ C-439/98
16 Mar 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Astilleros Zamacona v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-1683) T-72/98; [2000] EUECJ T-72/98
16 Mar 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Compagnie Maritime Belge Transports v Commission (Competition) C-396/96; [2000] EUECJ C-396/96P
16 Mar 2000
ECJ

European
Europa Competition - International maritime transport - Liner conferences - Regulation (EEC) No 4056/86 - Article 86 of the EC Treaty (now Article 82 EC) - Collective dominant position - Exclusivity agreement between national authorities and liner conferences - Liner conference insisting on application ofthe agreement - Fighting ships - Loyalty rebates - Rights of defence - Fines - Assessment criteria.
[ Bailii ]
 
Astilleros Zamacona v Commission (Rec.2000,p.II-1683) (Judgment) T-72/98
16 Mar 2000
ECFI

European


 
Compagnie Maritime Belge Transports and others v Commission C-395/96; [2000] ECR I-1365; [2000] EUECJ C-395/96-P
16 Mar 2000
ECJ

European, Commercial
ECJ It is clear from the very wording of Articles 85(1)(a), (b), (d) and (e) and 86(a) to (d) of the Treaty (now Articles 81(1)(a), (b), (d) and (e) EC and 82(a) to (d) EC) that the same practice may give rise to an infringement of both provisions. Simultaneous application of Articles 85 and 86 of the Treaty cannot therefore be ruled out a priori. However, the objectives pursued by each of those two provisions must be distinguished. Article 85 of the Treaty applies to agreements, decisions and concerted practices which may appreciably affect trade between Member States, regardless of the position on the market of the undertakings concerned. Article 86 of the Treaty, on the other hand, deals with the conduct of one or more economic operators consisting in the abuse of a position of economic strength which enables the operator concerned to hinder the maintenance of effective competition on the relevant market by allowing it to behave to an appreciable extent independently of its competitors, its customers and, ultimately, consumers.
EC Treaty 85
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Gabalfrisa and others (Rec 2000,p I-1577) (Judgment) C-110/98; [2000] EUECJ C-110/98
21 Mar 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Association Greenpeace France and Others v Ministere de l'Agriculture et de la Peche and Others C-6/99; [2000] EUECJ C-6/99
21 Mar 2000
ECJ

European, Agriculture
ECJ 1. Directive 90/220 on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms, as amended by Directive 97/35, is to be interpreted as meaning that, if, after an application for placing a GMO on the market has been forwarded to the Commission, no Member State has raised an objection, in accordance with Article 13(2) of that directive, or if the Commission has taken a favourable decision under paragraph (4) of that provision, the competent authority which forwarded the application, with a favourable opinion, to the Commission must issue the consent in writing, allowing the product to be placed on the market. However, if in the meantime the Member State concerned has new information which leads it to consider that the product for which notification has been received may constitute a risk to human health and the environment, it will not be obliged to give its consent, provided that it immediately informs the Commission and the other Member States about the new information in order that, within the period laid down in Article 16(2) of Directive 90/220, a decision may be taken in the matter in accordance with the procedure provided for in Article 21 of that directive.
2. Where the national court finds that, owing to irregularities in the conduct of the examination of the notification by the competent national authority provided for in Article 12(1) of Directive 90/220 on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms, as amended by Directive 97/35, it was not proper for that authority to forward the dossier with a favourable opinion to the Commission as provided for in paragraph (2) of that provision, that court must refer the matter to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling if it considers that those irregularities are such as to affect the validity of the Commission's favourable decision, if necessary ordering the suspension of application of the measures for implementing that decision until the Court of Justice has ruled on the question of validity.
[ Bailii ]
 
LFZ Nordfleisch (Rec 2000,p I-1619) (Judgment) C-217/98; [2000] EUECJ C-217/98
21 Mar 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
LFZ Nordfleisch (Rec.2000,p.I-1619) (Judgment) C-217/98
21 Mar 2000
ECJ

European


 
Gabalfrisa and others (Rec.2000,p.I-1577) (Judgment) C-110/98
21 Mar 2000
ECJ

European


 
Greenpeace France and others (Rec.2000,p.I-1651) (Judgment) C-6/99
21 Mar 2000
ECJ

European


 
Sinochem v Council T-97/95; T-97/95
22 Mar 2000
ECFI

European


 
Coca-Cola Enterprises v Commission (Competition) T-127/97; [2000] EUECJ T-127/97
22 Mar 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Competition - Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 - Decision declaring a concentration compatible with the common market - Action for annulment - Statement of reasons - Admissibility.
[ Bailii ]
 
Coca-Cola v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-1733) T-125/97; T-125/97; [2000] EUECJ T-125/97
22 Mar 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Berendse-Koenen (Rec 2000,p I-1777) (Judgment) C-246/98; [2000] EUECJ C-246/98
23 Mar 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Rudolph v Commission (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-55,II-241) T-197/98; T-197/98; [2000] EUECJ T-197/98
23 Mar 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Gogos v Commission (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-51,II-219) T-95/98; T-95/98; [2000] EUECJ T-95/98
23 Mar 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v France (Rec 2000,p I-1851) (Judgment) C-327/98; [2000] EUECJ C-327/98
23 Mar 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Met-Trans and Sagpol (Rec.2000,p.I-1797) (Judgment) C-310/98
23 Mar 2000
ECJ

European


 
Met-Trans and Sagpol (Rec 2000,p I-1797) (Judgment) C-310/98; [2000] EUECJ C-310/98
23 Mar 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Gogos v Commission (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-51,II-219) (Judgment) T-95/98
23 Mar 2000
ECFI

European


 
Berliner Kindl Brauerei (Rec 2000,p I-1741) (Judgment) C-208/98; [2000] EUECJ C-208/98
23 Mar 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Met-Trans (Free Movement Of Goods) French Text C-406/98; [2000] EUECJ C-406/98
23 Mar 2000
ECJ

European
Europa Libre circulation des marchandises - Opération de transit externe - Circulation sous le couvert d'un carnet TIR - Infractions ou irrégularités - Preuve du lieu où l'infraction ou l'irrégularité a été commise - Délai pour rapporter la preuve - Moyens de preuve admissibles - Procédure de compensation.
Europa Free movement of goods - external transit operation - Traffic under cover of a TIR carnet - Offences or irregularities - Proof of where the crime or irregularity was committed - limit for producing evidence - admissible evidence - Compensation procedure.
[ Bailii ]
 
Diamantis (Rec 2000,p I-1705) (Judgment) C-373/97; [2000] EUECJ C-373/97
23 Mar 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]

 
 Deutsche Telekom Ag v Vick and Another; Same v Schroder; Deutsche Post Ag v Sievers and Another; ECJ 28-Mar-2000 - Times, 28 March 2000; Case C-50/96; C-271/97; C-270/9; C-234/96; [2000] EUECJ C-271/97; [2000] EUECJ C-234/96
 
Georg Badeck and Others, interveners: Hessische Ministerprasident and Landesanwalt beim Staatsgerichtshof des Landes Hessen Times, 31 March 2000; C-158/97; [2000] EUECJ C-158/97
28 Mar 2000
ECJ

Discrimination, European
Steps taken which amounted to positive discrimination by a national body need not always amount to unlawful discrimination. The steps should be taken to correct a present imbalance, and should not give automatic and unconditional priority where the applicants had equal qualifications, and where all the personal characteristics of the applicants were recognised and allowed for.
Europa Social policy - Men and women - Access to employment and working conditions - Equal treatment - Derogations - Measures to promote equality of opportunity between men and women - National provisions laying down measures for the promotion of women in sectors of the public service - Permissible - Criterion - Article 2(1) and (4) of Directive 76/207 on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women as regards access to employment, vocational training and promotion, and working conditions does not preclude a national rule which - in sectors of the public service where women are under-represented, gives priority, where male and female candidates have equal qualifications, to female candidates where that proves necessary for ensuring compliance with the objectives of the women's advancement plan, if no reasons of greater legal weight are opposed, provided that that rule guarantees that candidatures are the subject of an objective assessment which takes account of the specific personal situations of all candidates, - prescribes that the binding targets of the women's advancement plan for temporary posts in the academic service and for academic assistants must provide for a minimum percentage of women which is at least equal to the percentage of women among graduates, holders of higher degrees and students in each discipline, - in so far as its objective is to eliminate under-representation of women, in trained occupations in which women are under-represented and for which the State does not have a monopoly of training, allocates at least half the training places to women, unless despite appropriate measures for drawing the attention of women to the training places available there are not enough applications from women, - where male and female candidates have equal qualifications, guarantees that qualified women who satisfy all the conditions required or laid down are called to interview, in sectors in which they are under-represented, - relating to the composition of employees' representative bodies and administrative and supervisory bodies, recommends that the legislative provisions adopted for its implementation take into account the objective that at least half the members of those bodies must be women.
Council Directive 76/207/EEC
[ Bailii ]
 
Holz Geenen v Oberfinanzdirektion Munchen C-309/98; [2000] ECR I-1975; [2000] EUECJ C-309/98
28 Mar 2000
ECJ

European, Customs and Excise
Europa Common Customs Tariff - Tariff headings - Classification in the combined nomenclature - Regulation (EC) No 1509/97 - Rectangular wood blocks used in the construction of window frames.
"It is settled case law that, in the interests of legal certainty and for ease of verification, the decisive criteria for the classification of goods for Customs purposes is in general to be sought in their objective characteristics and properties as defined in the wording of the relevant heading of the CN. The [two categories of explanatory notes] may be an important aid to the interpretation of the scope of the various tariff headings but do not have legally binding force."
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
T Port v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-1775) T-251/97; T-251/97; [2000] EUECJ T-251/97
28 Mar 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Holz Geenen (Rec.2000,p.I-1975) (Judgment) C-309/98
28 Mar 2000
ECJ

European


 
Allonby v Accrington and Rossendale College EAT/1080/98; EAT/1300/97; [2000] UKEAT 1300_97_2903
29 Mar 2000
EAT
The Honourable Mr Justice Lindsay (President)
Discrimination, Employment, European, Discrimination
EAT Sex Discrimination - Indirect - European Material - Article 19.
EAT European Material - Article 19
EAT Equal Pay Act - (no sub-topic).
Equal Treatment Directive (Council Directive 76/207/EEC
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ EAT ] - [ EAT ] - [ Bailii ]
 
JamO (Rec.2000,p.I-2189) (Judgment) C-236/98
30 Mar 2000
ECJ

European


 
Jouhki v Commission (Rec.2000,p.I-2229) (Order) C-435/98
30 Mar 2000
ECJ

European


 
Mendez Pinedo v BCE (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-63,II-273) (Order) T-33/99
30 Mar 2000
ECFI

European


 
Miwon v Council (Rec 2000,p II-1841) T-51/96; T-51/96; [2000] EUECJ T-51/96
30 Mar 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]

 
 Krombach v Bamberski; ECFI 30-Mar-2000 - Times, 30 March 2000; Case C-7/98; [2000] EUECJ C-7/98; [2000] ECR I-1935
 
VBA v Florimex and others (Rec 2000,p I-2061) (Judgment) C-265/97; [2000] EUECJ C-265/97P
30 Mar 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Crestaz v Commission (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-67,II-289) T-12/00; T-12/00; [2000] EUECJ T-12/00
30 Mar 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Crestaz v Commission (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-67,II-289) (Order) T-12/00
30 Mar 2000
ECFI

European


 
Mendez Pinedo v BCE (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-63,II-273) T-33/99; T-33/99; [2000] EUECJ T-33/99
30 Mar 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
VBA v VGB and others (Rec 2000,p I-2135) (Judgment) C-266/97; [2000] EUECJ C-266/97P
30 Mar 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Banks and Others v Theate Royal De La Monnaie Times, 05 April 2000; C-178/97; [2000] EUECJ C-178/97
30 Mar 2000
ECJ

Employment, Benefits, European, European
A self employed certificate in Form E101 issued by one member state for a worker who worked temporarily in another member state was to be treated as valid and respected in the absence of circumstances suggesting some invalidity. It made the worker subject to the social security rules of his home state. Such a certificate when issued could have retrospective effect.
[ Bailii ]
 
JamO (Rec 2000,p I-2189) (Judgment) C-236/98; [2000] EUECJ C-236/98
30 Mar 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Consiglio Nazionale degli Spedizionieri Doganali v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-1807) T-513/93; T-513/93; [2000] EUECJ T-513/93
30 Mar 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Ford Motor v OHMI (OPTIONS) (Rec.2000,p.II-1925) (Judgment) T-91/99
30 Mar 2000
ECFI

European


 
Jouhki v Commission (Rec 2000,p I-2229) (Order) C-435/98
30 Mar 2000
ECJ

European


 
Kish Glass v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-1885) T-65/96; [2000] EUECJ T-65/96
30 Mar 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Banks and Others v Theate Royal De La Monnaie Times, 05 April 2000; C-178/97; [2000] EUECJ C-178/97
30 Mar 2000
ECJ

Employment, Benefits, European, European
A self employed certificate in Form E101 issued by one member state for a worker who worked temporarily in another member state was to be treated as valid and respected in the absence of circumstances suggesting some invalidity. It made the worker subject to the social security rules of his home state. Such a certificate when issued could have retrospective effect.
[ Bailii ]
 
Germany v Parliament and Council (Rec 2000,p I-2247) (Order) C-376/98
3 Apr 2000
ECJ

European


 
Darbo (Rec 2000,p I-2297) (Judgment) C-465/98; [2000] EUECJ C-465/98
4 Apr 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Council (Rec 2000,p I-2257) (Judgment) C-269/97; [2000] EUECJ C-269/97
4 Apr 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Darbo (Rec.2000,p.I-2297) (Judgment) C-465/98
4 Apr 2000
ECJ

European


 
Commission v France C-256/98; [2000] EUECJ C-256/98
6 Apr 2000
ECJ

European
ECJ Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Directive 92/43/EEC - Conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora
Directive 92/43/EEC
[ Bailii ]
 
Jorgensen v Foreningen Speciallaeger and another C-226/98; [2000] ECR 1-2447; [2000] IRLR 726; [2000] EUECJ C-226/98
6 Apr 2000
ECJ

European, Discrimination
Mrs Jorgensen, a specialist rheumatologist, complained about a rule which meant that, if she sold her practice, it would, because of its turnover, be treated as a part-time practice and subject to a cap on the fees it could receive from the Danish national health authorities. She argued that this was indirectly discriminatory on grounds of sex, because her lower turnover was the result of her domestic responsibilities, which affected many more women than men. She argued that budgetary considerations could not justify sex discrimination. Held: Budgetary considerations could not in themselves justify discrimination on the grounds of sex. The aim of the scheme which imposed the cap was to limit the exercise of part-time specialist practice, it being considered that many doctors who worked principally in a hospital and part time in their own practices neglected the former for the sake of the latter.
Measures intended to ensure sound management of public expenditure on specialised medical care and to guarantee people's access to such care might be justified if they met a legitimate objective of social policy, were appropriate to obtain that objective and were necessary to that end: "As Community law stands at present, social policy is a matter for the Member States, which enjoy a reasonable margin of discretion as regards the nature of social protection measures and the detailed arrangements for their implementation (Case C-229/89 Commission v Belgium [1991] ECR 1-2205, paragraph 22, and C-226/91 Molenbroek [1992] ECR 1-5943, paragraph 15). If they meet a legitimate aim of social policy, are suitable and requisite for attaining that end and are therefore justified by reasons unrelated to discrimination on grounds of sex, such measures cannot be regarded as being contrary to the principle of equal treatment (Commission v Belgium, cited above, paragraphs 19 and 26, and Molenbroek cited above, paragraphs 13 and 19)."
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Kuijer v Council (Rec 2000,p II-1959) T-188/98; T-188/98; [2000] EUECJ T-188/98
6 Apr 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Spain v Commission C-443/97; [2000] EUECJ C-443/97
6 Apr 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v France (Rec.2000,p.I-2487) (Judgment) C-256/98
6 Apr 2000
ECJ

European


 
Commission v ICI C-286/95; [2000] EUECJ C-286/95P
6 Apr 2000
ECJ

European
ECJ (Judgment) Appeal - Action for annulment - Pleas in law - Infringement of essential procedural requirements - Failure to authenticate a decision adopted by the college of Commissioners - Issue that may be raised of the Court's own motion
[ Bailii ]
 
Emesa Sugar v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-1941) T-44/98; T-44/98
6 Apr 2000
ECFI

European


 
Kuijer v Council (Rec.2000,p.II-1959) (Judgment) T-188/98
6 Apr 2000
ECFI

European


 
Hautem v EIB (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-71,II-301) T-11/00
7 Apr 2000
ECFI

European


 
Olivieri v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-1985) T-326/99; [2003] EUECJ T-326/99
7 Apr 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Meyer v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-2031) T-361/99; T-361/99; [2000] EUECJ T-361/99
10 Apr 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Deliege v Ligue Francophone De Judo et Disciplines Associees Asbl and Others Times, 19 April 2000; C-51/96; C-191/97; [2000] ECR I-2549; [2000] EUECJ C-191/97; [2000] EUECJ C-51/96
11 Apr 2000
ECJ

European, Discrimination
It was not an unlawful discriminatory provision to restrict those who might take part in professional sports activities in another member state to be first authorised or selected by their own national federation where such competition was not on a national representative team level. If it was derived from a proper need inherent in the organisation of such a competition it could be proper. A selection system might favour some athletes over others, but need not constitute a restriction on the provision of services: "a rule requiring professional or semi-professional athletes or persons aspiring to take part in a professional or semi-professional activity to have been authorised or selected by their federation in order to be able to participate in a high-level international sports competition, which does not involve national teams competing against each other, does not in itself, as long as it derives from a need inherent in the organisation of such a competition, constitute a restriction on the freedom to provide services prohibited by Article 49 (ex 59) of the Treaty."
ECTreaty Art 234 49
1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Kaba (Judgment) C-356/98; [2000] EUECJ C-356/98
11 Apr 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Kaba (Rec.2000,p.I-2623) (Judgment) C-356/98
11 Apr 2000
ECJ

European


 
GAL Penisola Sorrentina v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-2041) T-263/97; T-263/97; [2000] EUECJ T-263/97
13 Apr 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Reichert v Parliament (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-73,II-309) T-18/98; T-18/98; [2000] EUECJ T-18/98
13 Apr 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Karlsson and others (Rec 2000,p I-2737) (Judgment) C-292/97; [2000] EUECJ C-292/97
13 Apr 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
W N (Rec 2000,p I-2847) (Judgment) C-420/98; [2000] EUECJ C-420/98
13 Apr 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Giannini (Rec 2000,p I-2891) (Judgment) C-153/99; [2000] EUECJ C-153/99P
13 Apr 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Reichert v Parliament (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-73,II-309) (Judgment) T-18/98
13 Apr 2000
ECFI

European


 
Commission v Luxembourg (Rec.2000,p.I-2917) (Judgment) C-348/99
13 Apr 2000
ECJ

European


 
C. Baars v Inspecteur der Belastingdienst Particulieren/Ondernemingen Gorinchem [2000] ECR I-2787; C-251/98; [2000] EUECJ C-251/98
13 Apr 2000
ECJ

European
Europa Freedom of establishment - Assets invested in shares in companies established in the taxing Member State - Exemption from wealth tax - Assets invested in shares in companies established in another Member State - No exemption.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Spain (Rec 2000,p I-2823) (Judgment) C-274/98; [2000] EUECJ C-274/98
13 Apr 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Jyri Lehtonen and Castors Canada Dry Namur-Braine ASBL v Federation royale belge des societes de basket-ball ASBL (FRBSB) C-176/96; [2000] ECR I-2681; [2000] EUECJ C-176/96
13 Apr 2000
ECJ

European, Contract
Europa The need to provide an interpretation of Community law which will be of use to the national court makes it necessary that the national court define the factual and legal context of the questions it is asking or, at the very least, explain the factual circumstances on which those questions are based. Those requirements are of particular importance in certain areas, such as that of competition, where the factual and legal situations are often complex. The information provided in decisions making references must not only enable the Court to reply usefully but also give the governments of the Member States and other interested parties the opportunity to submit observations pursuant to Article 20 of the Statute of the Court of Justice. It is the Court's duty to ensure that that opportunity is safeguarded, bearing in mind that, by virtue of the abovementioned provision, only the decisions making references are notified to the interested parties. Having regard to the objectives of the Community, sport is subject to Community law in so far as it constitutes an economic activity within the meaning of Article 2 of the Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 2 EC). That is the case with the activities of professional basketball players, where they work as paid employees or provide services for remuneration and those activities are effective and genuine activities and not such as to be regarded as purely marginal and ancillary. The Treaty provisions concerning freedom of movement for persons do not preclude rules or practices in the field of sport excluding foreign players from certain matches for reasons which are not of an economic nature, which relate to the particular nature and context of such matches and are thus of sporting interest only, as in the case of matches between national teams from different countries. That restriction on the scope of those provisions must, however, remain limited to its proper objective, and may not be relied on to exclude all sporting activity from the scope of the Treaty. The Community provisions on freedom of movement for persons and freedom to provide services not only apply to the action of public authorities but extend also to rules of any other nature aimed at regulating gainful employment and the provision of services in a collective manner. The abolition as between Member States of obstacles to freedom of movement for persons and freedom to provide services would be compromised if the abolition of State barriers could be neutralised by obstacles resulting from the exercise of their legal autonomy by associations or organisations not governed by public law. A professional basketball player who is a national of a Member State must be regarded as a worker within the meaning of Article 48 of the Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 39 EC) where, having entered into a contract of employment with a club in another Member State with a view to exercising gainful employment in that State, he thereby accepts an offer of employment actually made, within the meaning of Article 48(3)(a) of the Treaty. Article 48 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 39 EC) precludes the application of rules laid down in a Member State by sporting associations which prohibit a basketball club from fielding players from other Member States in matches in the national championship, where they have been transferred after a specified date, if that date is earlier than the date which applies to transfers of players from certain non-member countries, unless objective reasons concerning only sport as such or relating to differences between the position of players from a federation in the European zone and that of players from a federation not in that zone justify such different treatment.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Spain (Rec.2000,p.I-2823) (Judgment) C-274/98
13 Apr 2000
ECJ

European


 
Commission v Giannini (Rec.2000,p.I-2891) (Judgment) C-153/99
13 Apr 2000
ECJ

European


 
Commission v Greece (Rec 2000,p I-2881) (Judgment) C-123/99; [2000] EUECJ C-123/99
13 Apr 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Greece (Rec.2000,p.I-2881) (Judgment) C-123/99
13 Apr 2000
ECJ

European


 
W.N. (Rec.2000,p.I-2847) (Judgment) C-420/98
13 Apr 2000
ECJ

European


 
Commission v Luxembourg (Rec 2000,p I-2917) (Judgment) C-348/99; [2000] EUECJ C-348/99
13 Apr 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Kuijer v Council of the European Union Case T-188/98 Times, 14 April 2000
14 Apr 2000
ECJ

European, Immigration, Administrative
An applicant sought access to documents of the Council of the European Union relating to asylum. The decision of the Council to refuse access to the documents was on the grounds that the material was politically sensitive, and disclosure would be against the public interest. The council failed however to consider the status of the separate documents separately, and so the decision was invalid. The default position was that Council documents should be made available, and the ability to withhold related to individual documents.
Council Decision 93/731/EC on Public Access to Council documents

 
Institut des mandataires agrees v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-2067) T-144/99; T-144/99
14 Apr 2000
ECFI

European


 
The Polo/Lauren Co LP v PT Dwidua Langgeng Pratama International Freight Forwarders Case Times, 14 April 2000; C-383/98; [2000] EUECJ C-383/98
14 Apr 2000
ECJ

European, Customs and Excise, Intellectual Property
Council regulations empowered customs officers of member states to seize goods suspected of being counterfeit or pirated and in breach of Trade Mark and other laws This applied even to goods which were merely seized in transit through a member state, from a non-EU source to a non-EU destination. The validity of the regulation was not capable of doubt, and no factor had been identified which could challenge its validity. The wording of the regulation expressly envisaged such action.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Kaba v Secretary of State for the Home Department Case C-356/98 Times, 19 April 2000
19 Apr 2000
ECJ

Immigration, European
UK rules required that a wife of a migrant European worker must be resident for four years before applying for indefinite leave to remain, but a spouse of a person settled in the UK need only be resident for one year. There was no discrimination contrary to European Law which prevented rules restricting the free movement of workers. The right sought by the application went beyond the rights protected by the EU Treaty. The residential rights of migrant workers are not unconditional.
Council Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 on freedom of movement for community workers, article 7(2) - ECTreaty Article 234

 
W N Staatssecretaris van Financien Case C-420/98 Times, 19 April 2000
19 Apr 2000
ECJ

European
It was correct for a member state to forward to another member state details about the maintenance payments made by a citizen to a resident of the other country where it was anticipated that a tax loss might arise if such information was not transmitted. It was not necessary either for the anticipated loss to be substantial or actual, or for the nature of the potential tax loss to be covered expressly.
Council Directive 77/799/EEC concerning mutual assistance by member states in the field of direct taxation

 
Rothley and others v Parliament (Rec 2000,p II-2085) T-17/00; T-17/00
2 May 2000
ECFI

European


 
SIC v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-2125) T-46/97; T-46/97; [2000] EUECJ T-46/97
10 May 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Simon v Commission (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-75,II-319) T-177/97; T-177/97; [2000] EUECJ T-177/97
10 May 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Renault (Rec.2000,p.I-2973) (Judgment) C-38/98
11 May 2000
ECJ

European


 
Pipeaux v Parliament T-34/99 T-34/99; [2000] EUECJ T-34/99
11 May 2000
ECFI

European
(Rec 2000,p FP-IA-79,II-337)
[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v France C-296/98 C-296/98; [2000] EUECJ C-296/98
11 May 2000
ECJ

European
(Judgment)
[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v France (Rec.2000,p.I-3025) (Judgment) C-296/98
11 May 2000
ECJ

European


 
Martin de Pablos v Commission (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-83,II-347) T-101/00; T-101/00
15 May 2000
ECFI

European


 
Irving v Commission (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-85,II-357) (Judgment) T-121/99
16 May 2000
ECFI

European


 
Commission v Coal Products (Rec 2000,p I-3175) (Judgment) C-274/97; [2000] EUECJ C-274/97
16 May 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Belgium v Spain (Rec 2000,p I-3123) (Judgment) C-388/95; [2000] EUECJ C-388/95
16 May 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Preston and Others v Wolverhampton Healthcare NHS Trust and Others; Fletcher and Others v Midland Bank plc [2001] 2 AC 415; C-78/98; [2000] IRLR 06; [2000] EUECJ C-78/98
16 May 2000
ECJ

European, Discrimination
ECJ Social policy - Men and women - Equal pay - Membership of an occupational pension scheme - Part-time workers - Exclusion - National procedural rules - Principle of effectiveness - Principle of equivalence.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
France v Ladbroke Racing and Commission (Rec 2000,p I-3271) (Judgment) C-83/98; [2000] EUECJ C-83/98P
16 May 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Zurstrassen (Rec.2000,p.I-3337) (Judgment) C-87/99
16 May 2000
ECJ

European


 
Zurstrassen (Rec 2000,p I-3337) (Judgment) C-87/99; [2000] EUECJ C-87/99
16 May 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Tzikis v Commission (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-91,II-393) T-203/98; T-203/98; [2000] EUECJ T-203/98
17 May 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Tzikis v Commission (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-91,II-393) (Judgment) T-203/98
17 May 2000
ECFI

European


 
Commission v Belgium C-206/98 [2000] EUECJ C-206/98
18 May 2000
ECJ

European, Insurance
ECJ (Judgment) Failure by a State to fulfil its obligations - Directive 92/49/EEC - Direct insurance other than life assurance
Directive 92/49/EEC
[ Bailii ]
 
KVS International (Rec 2000,p I-3583) (Judgment) C-301/98; [2000] EUECJ C-301/98
18 May 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v France (Rec.2000,p.I-3615) (Judgment) C-45/99
18 May 2000
ECJ

European


 
Schiavon (Rec.2000,p.I-3547) (Judgment) C-230/98
18 May 2000
ECJ

European



 
 B v Secretary of State for Home Department; CA 18-May-2000 - [2000] EWCA Civ 158; [2000] Imm AR 478; [2000] INLR 361; [2000] 2 CMLR 1086
 
Rombi and Arkopharma C-107/97; [2000] EUECJ C-107/97; [2000] ECR I-3367
18 May 2000
ECJ
R. Schintgen, P
European
ECJ Food supplements - Directive 89/398/EEC - Transposition - Conditions - Retention of previous national legislation - Additive - 'L-carnitine'
Directive 89/398/EEC
[ Bailii ]
 
KVS International (Rec.2000,p.I-3583) (Judgment) C-301/98
18 May 2000
ECJ

European


 
Commission v France (Judgment) C-45/99; [2000] EUECJ C-45/99
18 May 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Belgium (Rec.2000,p.I-3509) (Judgment) C-206/98
18 May 2000
ECJ

European


 
Schiavon (Rec 2000,p I-3547) (Judgment) C-230/98; [2000] EUECJ C-230/98
18 May 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Belgium v Commission (Rec 2000,p I-3421) (Judgment) C-242/97; [2000] EUECJ C-242/97
18 May 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Costacurta v Commission (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-99,II-425) T-51/00; T-51/00; [2000] EUECJ T-51/00
22 May 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Costacurta v Commission (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-99,II-425) (Order) T-51/00
22 May 2000
ECFI

European


 
Fleurbaay v EIB (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-95,II-415) (Order) T-96/99
22 May 2000
ECFI

European


 
Associazione delle Cantine Sociali Venete v Mediateur europeen and Parliament (Rec.2000,p.II-4165) (Order) T-103/99
22 May 2000
ECFI

European


 
Hepple and others (Rec.2000,p.I-3701) (Judgment) C-196/98
23 May 2000
ECJ

European


 
Commission v Italy (Rec 2000,p I-3811) (Judgment) C-58/99; [2000] EUECJ C-58/99
23 May 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Hepple and Others v Adjudication Officer Times, 30 May 2000; C-196/98; [2000] EUECJ C-196/98
23 May 2000
ECJ

Discrimination, Benefits, European, European
The payment of differing amounts by way of an earnings allowance to men and women was not discriminatory, where the reason for the difference lay in the differing statutory retirement ages for men and women. The regime for equal treatment for statutory benefits must allow for arrangements to come into effect after the legislation came into effect to reflect historically different treatments.
Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992
[ Bailii ]
 
Hepple and Others v Adjudication Officer Times, 30 May 2000; C-196/98; [2000] EUECJ C-196/98
23 May 2000
ECJ

Discrimination, Benefits, European, European
The payment of differing amounts by way of an earnings allowance to men and women was not discriminatory, where the reason for the difference lay in the differing statutory retirement ages for men and women. The regime for equal treatment for statutory benefits must allow for arrangements to come into effect after the legislation came into effect to reflect historically different treatments.
Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992
[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex Parte Savas Times, 23 May 2000; C-37/98; [2000] ECR 1-2927; [2000] EUECJ C-37/98
23 May 2000
ECJ

Immigration, European
A convention between the European Union and Turkey had direct effect under one article, but was not sufficiently detailed in other provisions to give a right to an individual to enforce its provisions. The article required Turkish nationals not to be treated worse than EU nationals, but did not itself confer a right of residence.
Europa EEC-Turkey Association - Restrictions on freedom of establishment and right of residence - Article 13 of the Association Agreement and Article 41 of the Additional Protocol - Direct effect - Scope - Turkish national unlawfully present in the host Member State.
Protocol to the EEC-Turkey Association Agreement
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Italy (Rec.2000,p.I-3811) (Judgment) C-58/99
23 May 2000
ECJ

European


 
Buchner and others (Rec 2000,p I-3625) (Judgment) C-104/98; [2000] EUECJ C-104/98
23 May 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Comite d'entreprise de la Societe francaise de production and others v Commission (Rec 2000,p I-3659) (Judgment) C-106/98; [2000] EUECJ C-106/98P
23 May 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Sydhavnens Sten and Grus (Rec 2000,p I-3743) (Judgment) C-209/98; [2000] EUECJ C-209/98
23 May 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, ex parte Trades Union Congress [2000] EWHC Admin 345
23 May 2000
Admn

European, Litigation Practice

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Sydhavnens Sten and Grus (Rec.2000,p.I-3743) (Judgment) C-209/98
23 May 2000
ECJ

European


 
Regie Nationale Des Usines Renault Sa v Maxicar Spa and Another (Case C-38-98) Times, 23 May 2000
23 May 2000
ECJ

European, Intellectual Property
A French court found a company guilty of forgery by making parts for cars in breach of French laws governing registered designs. Such rights were not reflected in Italian law, and the applicants argued that an Italian court should not enforce such an order, as a breach of the right of free movement of goods. To refuse to recognise a decree of a court of another member state, the court must establish that the law was a misapplication of European law and against public policy. That could not be shown here.

 
Buchner and others (Rec.2000,p.I-3625) (Judgment) C-104/98
23 May 2000
ECJ

European


 
Comite d'entreprise de la Societe francaise de production and others v Commission (Rec.2000,p.I-3659) (Judgment) C-106/98
23 May 2000
ECJ

European


 
Elkaïm and Mazuel v Commission (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-101,II-433) T-173/99; T-173/99; [2000] EUECJ T-173/99
25 May 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Podesta (Rec 2000,p I-4039) (Judgment) C-50/99; [2000] EUECJ C-50/99
25 May 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Schlebusch (Rec.2000,p.I-3889) (Judgment) C-273/98
25 May 2000
ECJ

European


 
Schlebusch (Judgment) C-273/98; [2000] EUECJ C-273/98
25 May 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Belgium (Rec 2000,p I-3933) (Judgment) C-307/98; [2000] EUECJ C-307/98
25 May 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Podesta (Rec.2000,p.I-4039) (Judgment) C-50/99
25 May 2000
ECJ

European


 
Ca'Pasta v Commission C-359/98; [2000] EUECJ C-359/98P
25 May 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Kogler v Court of Justice (Rec 2000,p I-3855) (Judgment) C-82/98; [2000] EUECJ C-82/98P
25 May 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Belgium (Rec.2000,p.I-3933) (Judgment) C-307/98
25 May 2000
ECJ

European


 
Commission v Greece (Rec 2000,p I-3823) (Judgment) C-384/97; [2000] EUECJ C-384/97
25 May 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Italy (Rec.2000,p.I-4001) (Judgment) C-424/98
25 May 2000
ECJ

European


 
Commission v Italy (Rec 2000,p I-4001) (Judgment) C-424/98; [2000] EUECJ C-424/98
25 May 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Ufex and others v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-2167) T-77/95
25 May 2000
ECFI

European


 
Elkaïm and Mazuel v Commission (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-101,II-433) (Judgment) T-173/99
25 May 2000
ECFI

European


 
Staatssecretaris van Financien v Verkooijen C-35/98; [2002] ECR I-4071; [2002] STC 654; [2000] EUECJ C-35/98
6 Jun 2000
ECJ

European, Corporation Tax
A resident of the Netherlands owned shares in a company resident in Belgium and received dividends on those shares. If the dividends had been paid by a company resident in the Netherlands their treatment for income tax in his hands would have been more beneficial, because a limited exemption from income tax applied to dividends paid by Dutch companies. The first question for the court was whether the availability of this exemption only in relation to dividends paid by Dutch companies was inconsistent with Article 1 of the 1988 Directive. The Court held that the acquisition of shares in an undertaking was a capital movement within the scope of the Directive, that the receipt of dividends on such shares presupposed participation in the undertaking, and that therefore the receipt by a resident of one Member State of dividends on shares in a company resident in another Member State was within the Directive. It then held that the refusal of the first Member State to extend to such dividends an exemption from tax which applied in relation to dividends on shares in companies resident in the first Member State had the effect of dissuading nationals of the first Member State from investing their capital in companies established in other Member States and, conversely, presented an obstacle to such companies from raising capital from residents of the first Member State. Accordingly, such a provision constituted a restriction on the movement of capital prohibited by Article 1 of the Directive.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Roman Angonese v Cassa di Risparmio di Bolzano SpA C-281/98; [2000] ECR I-4139; [2000] EUECJ C-281/98
6 Jun 2000
ECJ

European, Commercial
Europa Under the preliminary ruling procedure provided for by Article 177 of the Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 234 EC), it is for the national courts alone, which are seised of a case and which must assume responsibility for the judgment to be given, to determine, having regard to the particular features of each case, both the need for a preliminary ruling in order to enable them to give judgment and the relevance of the questions which they refer to the Court. A request for a preliminary ruling from a national court may be rejected only if it is quite obvious that the interpretation of Community law sought by that court bears no relation to the actual nature of the case or the subject-matter of the main action.
The prohibition of discrimination on grounds of nationality laid down in Article 48 of the Treaty (now, after amendment Article 39 EC), which is drafted in general terms and is not specifically addressed to the Member States, also applies to conditions of employment fixed by private persons.
Article 48 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 39 EC) precludes an employer from requiring persons applying to take part in a recruitment competition to provide evidence of their linguistic knowledge exclusively by means of one particular diploma issued only in one particular province of a Member State. That requirement puts nationals of the other Member States at a disadvantage, since persons not resident in that province have little chance of acquiring the diploma, a certificate of bilingualism, and it will be difficult, or even impossible, for them to gain access to the employment in question. The requirement is not justified by any objective factors unrelated to the nationality of the persons concerned and in proportion to the aim legitimately pursued. In that regard, even though requiring an applicant for a post to have a certain level of linguistic knowledge may be legitimate and possession of a diploma such as the certificate may constitute a criterion for assessing that knowledge, the fact that it is impossible to submit proof of the required linguistic knowledge by any other means, in particular by equivalent qualifications obtained in other Member States, must be considered disproportionate in relation to the aim in view. Therefore, the requirement constitutes discrimination on grounds of nationality contrary to Article 48 of the Treaty.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Camar v Commission (Agriculture) French Text T-117/98; [2000] EUECJ T-117/98
8 Jun 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Common organization of markets - Bananas - Request for additional import licenses - Adaptation of the tariff quota in case of necessity - Transitional.
[ Bailii ]
 
Midland Bank (Rec.2000,p.I-4177) (Judgment) C-98/98
8 Jun 2000
ECJ

European



 
 Three Rivers District Council and Others v Governor and Company of The Bank of England; HL 8-Jun-2000 - Gazette, 08 June 2000; [2000] UKHL 331; [2000] 2 WLR 1220; [2000] 3 All ER 1
 
Schlossstrasse (Rec.2000,p.I-4279) (Judgment) C-396/98
8 Jun 2000
ECJ

European


 
Commission v France (Rec 2000,p I-4379) (Judgment) C-46/99; [2000] EUECJ C-46/99
8 Jun 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Portugal C-91/99; [2000] EUECJ C-91/99
8 Jun 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Ireland (Rec 2000,p I-4403) (Judgment) C-190/99; [2000] EUECJ C-190/99
8 Jun 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Italy (Rec 2000,p I-4417) (Judgment) C-264/99; [2000] EUECJ C-264/99
8 Jun 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Finanzamt Goslar v Breitshol (Judgment) [2001] STC 355; C-400/98; [2000] EUECJ C-400/98
8 Jun 2000
ECJ

European, VAT

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Schlossstrasse (Rec 2000,p I-4279) (Judgment) C-396/98; [2000] EUECJ C-396/98
8 Jun 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v France (Rec.2000,p.I-4379) (Judgment) C-46/99
8 Jun 2000
ECJ

European


 
Epson Europe (Rec.2000,p.I-4243) (Judgment) C-375/98
8 Jun 2000
ECJ

European


 
Epson Europe (Rec 2000,p I-4243) (Judgment) C-375/98; [2000] EUECJ C-375/98
8 Jun 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Italy (Rec.2000,p.I-4417) (Judgment) C-264/99
8 Jun 2000
ECJ

European


 
Commission v Portugal (Rec.2000,p.I-4389) (Judgment) C-91/99
8 Jun 2000
ECJ

European


 
Carra and others (Rec 2000,p I-4217) (Judgment) C-258/98; [2000] EUECJ C-258/98
8 Jun 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Camar and Tico v Commission and Council (Rec 2000,p II-2193) T-79/96; [2000] EUECJ T-79/96
8 Jun 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Midland Bank plc v Customs and Excise Commissioners Times, 16 June 2000; C-98/98; [2000] STC 501; [2000] 1 WLR 2080; [2000] EUECJ C-98/98
8 Jun 2000
ECJ

VAT, European
If there is a clear and direct link between the purchase of goods and their use in output transactions on which VAT was payable, input tax was deductible even if VAT was not deductible in respect of all the supplies. Where the link is indirect than the tax may be deductible only in part. Legal services provided to a Bank first in support of financial services and then in an action for damages for negligence were directly connected. It was for the national court to interpret that connection. The deduction system is meant to relieve the trader entirely of the burden of the VAT payable or paid in the course of all his economic activities, provided that such activities are themselves, in principle, subject to VAT.
First Council Directive 67/227/EEC on the harmonization of turnover taxes.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
EPAC v Commission (State Aid) T-270/97; [2000] EUECJ T-270/97
13 Jun 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Action for annulment - State aid - Article 92(1) and (3) of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 87(1) and (3) EC) - Concept of aid - State guarantee for the financing of a public undertaking - Suspension of the aid - No need to give a decision.
[ Bailii ]
 
EPAC v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-2267) T-204/97; T-204/97; [2000] EUECJ T-204/97
13 Jun 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Greece (Rec 2000,p I-4657) (Judgment) C-470/98; [2000] EUECJ C-470/98
15 Jun 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Alzetta and Others v Commission (State Aid) T-601/97; [2000] EUECJ T-601/97
15 Jun 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Carriage of goods by road - State aid - Action for annulment - Effect on trade between Member States and distortion of competition - Conditions for derogation from the prohibition laid down by Article 92(1) of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 87(1) EC) - New aid or existing aid - Principle of protection of legitimate expectations - Principle of proportionality - Statement of reasons.
[ Bailii ]
 
Alzetta and Others v Commission (State Aid) T-602/97; [2000] EUECJ T-602/97
15 Jun 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Carriage of goods by road - State aid - Action for annulment - Effect on trade between Member States and distortion of competition - Conditions for derogation from the prohibition laid down by Article 92(1) of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 87(1) EC) - New aid or existing aid - Principle of protection of legitimate expectations - Principle of proportionality - Statement of reasons.
[ Bailii ]
 
Alzetta and Others v Commission (State Aid) T-603/97; [2000] EUECJ T-603/97
15 Jun 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Carriage of goods by road - State aid - Action for annulment - Effect on trade between Member States and distortion of competition - Conditions for derogation from the prohibition laid down by Article 92(1) of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 87(1) EC) - New aid or existing aid - Principle of protection of legitimate expectations - Principle of proportionality - Statement of reasons.
[ Bailii ]
 
Alzetta and Others v Commission (State Aid) T-604/97; [2000] EUECJ T-604/97
15 Jun 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Carriage of goods by road - State aid - Action for annulment - Effect on trade between Member States and distortion of competition - Conditions for derogation from the prohibition laid down by Article 92(1) of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 87(1) EC) - New aid or existing aid - Principle of protection of legitimate expectations - Principle of proportionality - Statement of reasons.
[ Bailii ]
 
Alzetta and Others v Commission (State Aid) T-605/97; [2000] EUECJ T-605/97
15 Jun 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Carriage of goods by road - State aid - Action for annulment - Effect on trade between Member States and distortion of competition - Conditions for derogation from the prohibition laid down by Article 92(1) of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 87(1) EC) - New aid or existing aid - Principle of protection of legitimate expectations - Principle of proportionality - Statement of reasons.
[ Bailii ]
 
Alzetta and Others v Commission (State Aid) T-606/97; [2000] EUECJ T-606/97
15 Jun 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Carriage of goods by road - State aid - Action for annulment - Effect on trade between Member States and distortion of competition - Conditions for derogation from the prohibition laid down by Article 92(1) of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 87(1) EC) - New aid or existing aid - Principle of protection of legitimate expectations - Principle of proportionality - Statement of reasons.
[ Bailii ]
 
TEAM v Commission (Rec.2000,p.I-4671) (Judgment) C-13/99
15 Jun 2000
ECJ

European


 
Dorsch Consult v Council and Commission (Rec 2000,p I-4549) (Judgment) C-237/98; [2000] EUECJ C-237/98P
15 Jun 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Fantechi v Commission (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-111,II-485) T-51/99; T-51/99; [2000] EUECJ T-51/99
15 Jun 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Brinkmann (Rec 2000,p I-4619) (Judgment) C-365/98; [2000] EUECJ C-365/98
15 Jun 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Arco Chemie Nederland v Minister van Volkshuisvesting, Ruimtelijke Ordening in Milieubeheer [2003] All ER (EC) 237; [2002] 2 WLR 1240; C-418/97; [2000] EUECJ C-418/97; C-419/97; [2000] EUECJ C-419/97; [2002] QB 646
15 Jun 2000
ECJ
DAO Edward P
European
ECJ Environment - Directives 75/442/EEC and 91/156/EEC - Concept of 'waste'.
Advocate General Alber said: "The concept of waste underlying Community law on waste is defined in article 1(a) of Directive 75/442. According to that definition, "waste" means "any substance or object in the categories set out in Annex I which the holder discards or intends or is required to discard"."
1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Dorsch Consult v Council and Commission (Rec.2000,p.I-4549) (Judgment) C-237/98
15 Jun 2000
ECJ

European


 
Alzetta and Others v Commission (State Aid) T-6/98; [2000] EUECJ T-6/98
15 Jun 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Carriage of goods by road - State aid - Action for annulment - Effect on trade between Member States and distortion of competition - Conditions for derogation from the prohibition laid down by Article 92(1) of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 87(1) EC) - New aid or existing aid - Principle of protection of legitimate expectations - Principle of proportionality - Statement of reasons.
[ Bailii ]
 
Sehrer (Rec 2000,p I-4585) (Judgment) C-302/98; [2000] EUECJ C-302/98
15 Jun 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
F v Commission (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-107,II-471) T-211/98; T-211/98; [2000] EUECJ T-211/98
15 Jun 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
F v Commission (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-107,II-471) (Judgment) T-211/98
15 Jun 2000
ECFI

European


 
Fantechi v Commission (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-111,II-485) (Judgment) T-51/99
15 Jun 2000
ECFI

European


 
Alzetta and Others v Commission (State Aid) T-607/97; [2000] EUECJ T-607/97
15 Jun 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Carriage of goods by road - State aid - Action for annulment - Effect on trade between Member States and distortion of competition - Conditions for derogation from the prohibition laid down by Article 92(1) of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 87(1) EC) - New aid or existing aid - Principle of protection of legitimate expectations - Principle of proportionality - Statement of reasons.
[ Bailii ]
 
TEAM v Commission (Rec 2000,p I-4671) (Judgment) C-13/99; [2000] EUECJ C-13/99P
15 Jun 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Alzetta and Others v Commission (State Aid) T-5/98; [2000] EUECJ T-5/98
15 Jun 2000
ECFI

European
ECFI Carriage of goods by road - State aid - Action for annulment - Effect on trade between Member States and distortion of competition - Conditions for derogation from the prohibition laid down by Article 92(1) of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 87(1) EC) - New aid or existing aid - Principle of protection of legitimate expectations - Principle of proportionality - Statement of reasons.
[ Bailii ]
 
Aduanas Pujol Rubio and others v Council and Commission (Rec 2000,p II-2387) T-614/97; [2000] EUECJ T-614/97
15 Jun 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Brinkmann (Rec.2000,p.I-4619) (Judgment) C-365/98
15 Jun 2000
ECJ

European


 
Commission v Germany (Rec 2000,p I-4429) (Judgment) C-348/97; [2000] EUECJ C-348/97
15 Jun 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Alzetta and others v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-2319) T-298/97; T-298/97; [2000] EUECJ T-298/97
15 Jun 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Sehrer (Rec.2000,p.I-4585) (Judgment) C-302/98
15 Jun 2000
ECJ

European


 
Alzetta and Others v Commission (State Aid) T-1/98; [2000] EUECJ T-1/98
15 Jun 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Carriage of goods by road - State aid - Action for annulment - Effect on trade between Member States and distortion of competition - Conditions for derogation from the prohibition laid down by Article 92(1) of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 87(1) EC) - New aid or existing aid - Principle of protection of legitimate expectations - Principle of proportionality - Statement of reasons.
[ Bailii ]
 
Alzetta and Others v Commission (State Aid) T-600/97; [2000] EUECJ T-600/97
15 Jun 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Carriage of goods by road - State aid - Action for annulment - Effect on trade between Member States and distortion of competition - Conditions for derogation from the prohibition laid down by Article 92(1) of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 87(1) EC) - New aid or existing aid - Principle of protection of legitimate expectations - Principle of proportionality - Statement of reasons.
[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Greece (Rec.2000,p.I-4657) (Judgment) C-470/98
15 Jun 2000
ECJ

European


 
Alzetta and Others v Commission (State Aid) T-23/98; [2000] EUECJ T-23/98
15 Jun 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Carriage of goods by road - State aid - Action for annulment - Effect on trade between Member States and distortion of competition - Conditions for derogation from the prohibition laid down by Article 92(1) of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 87(1) EC) - New aid or existing aid - Principle of protection of legitimate expectations - Principle of proportionality - Statement of reasons.
[ Bailii ]
 
Alzetta and Others v Commission (State Aid) T-3/98; [2000] EUECJ T-3/98
15 Jun 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Carriage of goods by road - State aid - Action for annulment - Effect on trade between Member States and distortion of competition - Conditions for derogation from the prohibition laid down by Article 92(1) of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 87(1) EC) - New aid or existing aid - Principle of protection of legitimate expectations - Principle of proportionality - Statement of reasons.
[ Bailii ]
 
Alzetta and Others v Commission (State Aid) T-312/97; [2000] EUECJ T-312/97
15 Jun 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Carriage of goods by road - State aid - Action for annulment - Effect on trade between Member States and distortion of competition - Conditions for derogation from the prohibition laid down by Article 92(1) of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 87(1) EC) - New aid or existing aid - Principle of protection of legitimate expectations - Principle of proportionality - Statement of reasons.
[ Bailii ]
 
Alzetta and Others v Commission (State Aid) T-313/97; [2000] EUECJ T-313/97
15 Jun 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Carriage of goods by road - State aid - Action for annulment - Effect on trade between Member States and distortion of competition - Conditions for derogation from the prohibition laid down by Article 92(1) of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 87(1) EC) - New aid or existing aid - Principle of protection of legitimate expectations - Principle of proportionality - Statement of reasons.
[ Bailii ]
 
Alzetta and Others v Commission (State Aid) T-315/97; [2000] EUECJ T-315/97
15 Jun 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Carriage of goods by road - State aid - Action for annulment - Effect on trade between Member States and distortion of competition - Conditions for derogation from the prohibition laid down by Article 92(1) of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 87(1) EC) - New aid or existing aid - Principle of protection of legitimate expectations - Principle of proportionality - Statement of reasons.
[ Bailii ]
 
Alzetta and Others v Commission (State Aid) T-4/98; [2000] EUECJ T-4/98
15 Jun 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Carriage of goods by road - State aid - Action for annulment - Effect on trade between Member States and distortion of competition - Conditions for derogation from the prohibition laid down by Article 92(1) of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 87(1) EC) - New aid or existing aid - Principle of protection of legitimate expectations - Principle of proportionality - Statement of reasons.
[ Bailii ]
 
Transfluvia and others v Council and Commission (Rec 2000,p II-2405) T-611/97; [2000] EUECJ T-611/97
16 Jun 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
C v Council (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-113,II-497) T-84/98; [2000] EUECJ T-84/98
16 Jun 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
C v Council (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-113,II-497) (Judgment) T-84/98
16 Jun 2000
ECFI

European


 
Euromin v Council (Rec 2000,p II-2419) T-597/97; T-597/97; [2000] EUECJ T-597/97
20 Jun 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
France v Commission (Rec.2000,p.I-4705) (Order) C-514/99
21 Jun 2000
ECJ

European


 
France v Commission (Rec 2000,p I-4705) (Order) C-514/99
21 Jun 2000
ECJ

European


 
Heritiers d'Edmond Ropars v Council (Rec 2000,p II-2439) T-429/93; T-429/93; [2000] EUECJ T-429/93
21 Jun 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Tromeur v Council and Commission (Rec 2000,p II-2457) T-537/93; T-537/93; [2000] EUECJ T-537/93
21 Jun 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Fornasar and others (Rec.2000,p.I-4785) (Judgment) C-318/98
22 Jun 2000
ECJ

European


 
Eyup (Rec 2000,p I-4747) (Judgment) C-65/98; [2000] EUECJ C-65/98
22 Jun 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Netherlands v Commission C-147/96 [2000] EUECJ C-147/96
22 Jun 2000
ECJ

European
ECJ Action for annulment - Commission's refusal to include an overseas country in the provisional list of third countries established by Article 23 of Directive 92/46/EEC - Actionable measure. Only a measure whose legal effects are binding on the applicant and are capable of affecting his interests is an act or decision which may be the subject of an action for annulment. In the case of acts adopted by a procedure involving several stages, and particularly where they are the culmination of an internal procedure, it is in principle only those measures which definitively determine the position of the Commission or the Council that are open to challenge and not intermediate measures whose purpose is to prepare for the final decision. An act which is neither capable of producing nor intended to produce any legal effects cannot form the basis of an action for annulment. In order to ascertain whether or not a measure produces such effects it is necessary to look to its substance.
[ Bailii ]
 
France v Commission (Rec.2000,p.I-4833) (Judgment) C-332/98
22 Jun 2000
ECJ

European


 
Fornasar and others (Rec 2000,p I-4785) (Judgment) C-318/98; [2000] EUECJ C-318/98
22 Jun 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Marca Mode CV v Adidas AG C-425/98; [2000] ETMR 723; [2000] 2 CMLR 1061; [2000] EUECJ C-425/98
22 Jun 2000
ECJ

European, Intellectual Property
The reputation of a trade mark does not give grounds for presuming a likelihood of confusion simply because of a likelihood of association in the strict sense.
Europa Article 5(1)(b) of First Directive 89/104 on trade marks cannot be interpreted as meaning that where
- a trade mark has a particularly distinctive character, either per se or because of the reputation it enjoys with the public, and
- a third party, without the consent of the proprietor of the mark, uses, in the course of trade in goods or services which are identical with, or similar to, those for which the trade mark is registered, a sign which so closely corresponds to the mark as to give rise to the possibility of its being associated with that mark,
the exclusive right enjoyed by the proprietor entitles him to prevent the use of the sign by that third party if the distinctive character of the mark is such that the possibility of such association giving rise to confusion cannot be ruled out.
The reputation of a mark does not give grounds for presuming the existence of a likelihood of confusion simply because of the existence of a likelihood of association in the strict sense. A positive finding of the existence of a likelihood of confusion, which constitutes the matter to be proved, is necessary.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
France v Commission (Rec 2000,p I-4833) (Judgment) C-332/98; [2000] EUECJ C-332/98
22 Jun 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Argon and others v Council and Commission (Rec 2000,p II-2473) T-12/98; T-12/98; [2000] EUECJ T-12/98
26 Jun 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Argon and others v Council and Commission (Rec.2000,p.II-2473) (Order) T-12/98
26 Jun 2000
ECFI

European


 
Plug v Commission (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-125,II-569) T-608/97; [2000] EUECJ T-608/97
27 Jun 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
K v Commission T-67/99; [2000] EUECJ T-67/99
27 Jun 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Salamander and others v Parliament and Council (Rec 2000,p II-2487) T-172/98; T-172/98; [2000] EUECJ T-172/98
27 Jun 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Oceano Grupo Editorial and Salvat Editores (Judgment) C-240/98; [2000] EUECJ C-240/98
27 Jun 2000
ECJ

European, Jurisdiction, Consumer
Europa Where a jurisdiction clause is included, without being individually negotiated, in a contract between a consumer and a seller or supplier and where it confers exclusive jurisdiction on a court in the territorial jurisdiction of which the seller or supplier has his principal place of business, it must be regarded as unfair within the meaning of Article 3 of Directive 93/13 on unfair terms in consumer contracts in so far as it causes, contrary to the requirement of good faith, a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer.
The protection provided for consumers by Directive 93/13 on unfair terms in consumer contracts entails the national court being able to determine of its own motion whether a term of a contract before it is unfair when making its preliminary assessment as to whether a claim should be allowed to proceed before the national courts. The national court is obliged, when it applies national law provisions predating or postdating the said Directive, to interpret those provisions, so far as possible, in the light of the wording and purpose of the Directive. The requirement for an interpretation in conformity with the Directive requires the national court, in particular, to favour the interpretation that would allow it to decline of its own motion the jurisdiction conferred on it by virtue of an unfair term.
Europa Approximation of laws - Unfair terms in consumer contracts - Directive 93/13 - Power of the national court to determine of its own motion whether a term of a contract is unfair when making its assessment of the contract - Obligation to ensure the effectiveness of the directive when national law is applied. Where a jurisdiction clause is included, without being individually negotiated, in a contract between a consumer and a seller or supplier and where it confers exclusive jurisdiction on a court in the territorial jurisdiction of which the seller or supplier has his principal place of business, it must be regarded as unfair within the meaning of Article 3 of Directive 93/13 on unfair terms in consumer contracts in so far as it causes, contrary to the requirement of good faith, a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer.
The protection provided for consumers by Directive 93/13 on unfair terms in consumer contracts entails the national court being able to determine of its own motion whether a term of a contract before it is unfair when making its preliminary assessment as to whether a claim should be allowed to proceed before the national courts. The national court is obliged, when it applies national law provisions predating or postdating the said Directive, to interpret those provisions, so far as possible, in the light of the wording and purpose of the Directive. The requirement for an interpretation in conformity with the Directive requires the national court, in particular, to favour the interpretation that would allow it to decline of its own motion the jurisdiction conferred on it by virtue of an unfair term.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Plug v Commission (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-119,II-527) T-47/97; T-47/97; [2000] EUECJ T-47/97
27 Jun 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Meyer v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-2521) T-72/99; [2000] EUECJ T-72/99
27 Jun 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Portugal C-404/97; [2000] EUECJ C-404/97
27 Jun 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Salamander and others v Parliament and Council (Rec.2000,p.II-2487) (Judgment) T-172/98
27 Jun 2000
ECFI

European


 
Murciano Quintero (Environment And Consumers) C-243/98; [2000] EUECJ C-243/98
27 Jun 2000
ECJ

European
Europa Directive 93/13/EEC - Unfair terms in consumer contracts - Jurisdiction clause - Power of the national court to examine of its own motion whether that clause is unfair.
[ Bailii ]
 
Murciano Quintero (Environment And Consumers) C-242/98; [2000] EUECJ C-242/98
27 Jun 2000
ECJ

European
Europa Directive 93/13/EEC - Unfair terms in consumer contracts - Jurisdiction clause - Power of the national court to examine of its own motion whether that clause is unfair
Directive 93/13/EEC
[ Bailii ]
 
Oceano Grupo Editorial and Salvat Editores (Rec.2000,p.I-4941) (Judgment) C-240/98
27 Jun 2000
ECJ

European


 
Murciano Quintero (Environment And Consumers) C-241/98; [2000] EUECJ C-241/98
27 Jun 2000
ECJ

European
Europa Directive 93/13/EEC - Unfair terms in consumer contracts - Jurisdiction clause - Power of the national court to examine of its own motion whether that clause is unfair.
[ Bailii ]
 
Salamander v Parliament And Council (Environment And Consumers) T-176/98; [2000] EUECJ T-176/98
27 Jun 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Action for annulment - Directive 98/43/EC - Prohibition of advertisements and sponsorship of tobacco products - Admissibility.
[ Bailii ]
 
Salamander v Parliament And Council (Environment And Consumers) T-177/98; [2000] EUECJ T-177/98
27 Jun 2000
ECFI

European
Nichtigkeitsklage - Richtlinie 98/43/EG - Verbot von Werbung und Sponsoring zugunsten von Tabakerzeugnissen - Zulässigkeit.
[ Bailii ]
 
Meyer v Commission (Rec.2000,p.II-2521) (Judgment) T-72/99
27 Jun 2000
ECFI

European


 
Salamander v Parliament And Council (Environment And Consumers) T-175/98; [2000] EUECJ T-175/98
27 Jun 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Action for annulment - Directive 98/43/EC - Prohibition of advertisements and sponsorship of tobacco products - Admissibility.
[ Bailii ]
 
K v Commission (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-127,II-579) (Judgment) T-67/99
27 Jun 2000
ECFI

European


 
Oceano Grupo Editorial SA v Murciano Quintero (Environment And Consumers) C-244/98; [2000] EUECJ C-244/98
27 Jun 2000
ECJ

European
Europa Directive 93/13/EEC - Unfair terms in consumer contracts - Jurisdiction clause - Power of the national court to examine of its own motion whether that clause is unfair
Directive 93/13/EEC
[ Bailii ]
 
Laguillaumie (Rec 2000,p I-4979) (Order) C-116/00
28 Jun 2000
ECJ

European


 
Laguillaumie (Rec.2000,p.I-4979) (Order) C-116/00
28 Jun 2000
ECJ

European


 
Artegodan v Commission T-74/00
28 Jun 2000
ECFI

European

1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Cho Yang Shipping v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-2551) T-191/98; T-191/98
28 Jun 2000
ECFI

European


 
Politi v Fondation europeenne pour la formation (Rec 2000,p I-5019) (Judgment) C-154/99; [2000] EUECJ C-154/99P
29 Jun 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
DSG v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-2603) T-234/95; T-234/95; [2000] EUECJ T-234/95
29 Jun 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Medici Grimm v Council T-7/99; [2000] EUECJ T-7/99
29 Jun 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Salumets and others (Rec 2000,p I-4993) (Judgment) C-455/98; [2000] EUECJ C-455/98
29 Jun 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Salumets and others (Rec.2000,p.I-4993) (Judgment) C-455/98
29 Jun 2000
ECJ

European


 
Politi v Fondation europeenne pour la formation (Rec.2000,p.I-5019) (Judgment) C-154/99
29 Jun 2000
ECJ

European


 
Medici Grimm v Council (Rec.2000,p.II-2671) (Judgment) T-7/99
29 Jun 2000
ECFI

European


 
Carotti v Court of Auditors (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-133,II-607) (Order) T-163/00
3 Jul 2000
ECFI

European


 
Carotti v Court of Auditors (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-133,II-607) T-163/00; [2000] EUECJ T-163/00
3 Jul 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Haim (Rec 2000,p I-5123) (Judgment) C-424/97; [2000] EUECJ C-424/97
4 Jul 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Anastasiou and others (Rec.2000,p.I-5241) (Judgment) C-219/98
4 Jul 2000
ECJ

European


 
Anastasiou and others (Judgment) C-219/98; [2000] EUECJ C-219/98
4 Jul 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Portugal C-62/98; [2000] EUECJ C-62/98
4 Jul 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Bergaderm and Goupil v Commission (Rec 2000,p I-5291) (Judgment) C-352/98; [2000] EUECJ C-352/98P
4 Jul 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Portugal C-84/98; [2000] EUECJ C-84/98
4 Jul 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Bergaderm and Goupil v Commission (Rec.2000,p.I-5291) (Judgment) C-352/98
4 Jul 2000
ECJ

European


 
Samper v Parliament (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-135,II-611) (Judgment) T-111/99
5 Jul 2000
ECFI

European


 
Commission v Belgium (Rec 2000,p I-5657) (Judgment) C-236/99; [2000] EUECJ C-236/99
6 Jul 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Eridania (Rec 2000,p I-5409) (Judgment) C-289/97; [2000] EUECJ C-289/97
6 Jul 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Belgium (Rec.2000,p.I-5657) (Judgment) C-236/99
6 Jul 2000
ECJ

European


 
Volkswagen v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-2707) T-62/98; [2000] EUECJ T-62/98
6 Jul 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Abrahamsson and Anderson C-407/98
6 Jul 2000
ECJ

European
Judgment

 
ATB and others (Rec.2000,p.I-5501) (Judgment) C-402/98
6 Jul 2000
ECJ

European


 
Molkereigenossenschaft Wiedergeltingen (Rec 2000,p I-5461) (Judgment) C-356/97; [2000] EUECJ C-356/97
6 Jul 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
ATB and others (Rec 2000,p I-5501) (Judgment) C-402/98; [2000] EUECJ C-402/98
6 Jul 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Spain v Commission (Rec 2000,p I-5333) (Judgment) C-45/97; [2000] EUECJ C-45/97
6 Jul 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
AICS v Parliament (Rec.2000,p.II-2849) (Judgment) T-139/99
6 Jul 2000
ECFI

European


 
Volkswagen v Commission (Rec.2000,p.II-2707) (Judgment) T-62/98
6 Jul 2000
ECFI

European


 
Movrin (Rec.2000,p.I-5625) (Judgment) C-73/99
6 Jul 2000
ECJ

European


 
Movrin (Rec 2000,p I-5625) (Judgment) C-73/99; [2000] EUECJ C-73/99
6 Jul 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Abrahamsson and Anderson (Rec 2000,p I-5539) (Judgment) C-407/98; [2000] EUECJ C-407/98
6 Jul 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Dietrich (Rec.2000,p.I-5589) (Judgment) C-11/99
6 Jul 2000
ECJ

European


 
Dietrich (Rec 2000,p I-5589) (Judgment) C-11/99; [2000] EUECJ C-11/99
6 Jul 2000
ECJ

European, Health and Safety
ECJ Directive 90/270/EEC on the minimum safety and health requirements for work with display screen equipment - Scope - Meaning of 'display screen equipment for the purposes of Article 2 - Meaning of 'drivers' cabs or control cabs for vehicles or machinery for the purposes of Article 1.
[ Bailii ]
 
AICS v Parliament (Rec 2000,p II-2849) T-139/99; T-139/99; [2000] EUECJ T-139/99
6 Jul 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]

 
 Commission of the European Communities (Supported by the United Kingdom) v Hellenic Republic; ECJ 7-Jul-2000 - Times, 07 July 2000; C-387/97; [2000] ECR I-5047; [2000] EUECJ C-387/97
 
Federacion de Cofradias de Pescadores de Guipuzcoa and others v Council (Rec 2000,p II-2875) T-54/00; T-54/00; [2000] EUECJ T-54/00
10 Jul 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Federacion de Cofradias de Pescadores de Guipuzcoa and others v Council (Rec.2000,p.II-2875) (Order) T-54/00
10 Jul 2000
ECFI

European


 
Skrzypek v Commission (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-139,II-633) (Judgment) T-134/99
11 Jul 2000
ECFI

European


 
Goldstein v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-2917) T-35/00; T-35/00; [2000] EUECJ T-35/00
11 Jul 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Toolex (Rec.2000,p.I-5681) (Judgment) C-473/98
11 Jul 2000
ECJ

European


 
Toolex (Rec 2000,p I-5681) (Judgment) C-473/98; [2000] EUECJ C-473/98
11 Jul 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Goldstein v Commission (Rec.2000,p.II-2917) (Order) T-35/00
11 Jul 2000
ECFI

European


 
FNAB and others v Council (Rec 2000,p II-2893) T-268/99; T-268/99; [2000] EUECJ T-268/99
11 Jul 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Council national des professions de l'automobile and others v Commission T-45/00; [2000] EUECJ T-45/00
12 Jul 2000
ECFI

European
Action for annulment - Commission Regulation (EC) No 2790/1999 - Inadmissibility.
[ Bailii ]
 
Monte Dei Paschi Di Siena (Rec 2000,p I-6109) (Judgment) C-136/99; [2000] EUECJ C-136/99
13 Jul 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Parliament v Richard (Rec 2000,p I-6189) (Judgment) C-174/99; [2000] EUECJ C-174/99P
13 Jul 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Group Josi (Rec.2000,p.I-5925) (Judgment) C-412/98
13 Jul 2000
ECJ

European


 
d'Aloya v Council (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-143,II-657) T-24/99; T-24/99; [2000] EUECJ T-24/99
13 Jul 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Hendrickx v CEDEFOP (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-147,II-679) (Judgment) T-87/99
13 Jul 2000
ECFI

European


 
Monte Dei Paschi Di Siena (Rec.2000,p.I-6109) (Judgment) C-136/99
13 Jul 2000
ECJ

European


 
Commission v Portugal (Rec.2000,p.I-5905) (Judgment) C-261/98
13 Jul 2000
ECJ

European


 
Commission v Portugal C-261/98; [2000] EUECJ C-261/98
13 Jul 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Unilet and Le Bars (Rec.2000,p.I-6077) (Judgment) C-117/99
13 Jul 2000
ECJ

European


 
Gomez de Enterria y Sanchez v Parliament (Rec 2000,p I-6031) (Order) C-8/99
13 Jul 2000
ECJ

European


 
Commission v France (Rec 2000,p I-6137) (Judgment) C-160/99; [2000] EUECJ C-160/99
13 Jul 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Gomez de Enterria y Sanchez v Parliament (Rec.2000,p.I-6031) (Order) C-8/99
13 Jul 2000
ECJ

European


 
Griesel v Council (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-151,II-699) T-157/99; T-157/99; [2000] EUECJ T-157/99
13 Jul 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Defreyn (Rec 2000,p I-6155) (Judgment) C-166/99; [2000] EUECJ C-166/99
13 Jul 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Salzgitter v Commission (Rec 2000,p I-5843) (Judgment) C-210/98; [2000] EUECJ C-210/98P
13 Jul 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Unilet and Le Bars (Rec 2000,p I-6077) (Judgment) C-117/99; [2000] EUECJ C-117/99
13 Jul 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Greece v Commission (Rec 2000,p I-5813) (Judgment) C-243/97; [2000] EUECJ C-243/97
13 Jul 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Albore (Rec 2000,p I-5965) (Judgment) C-423/98; [2000] EUECJ C-423/98
13 Jul 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Parliament v Richard (Rec.2000,p.I-6189) (Judgment) C-174/99
13 Jul 2000
ECJ

European


 
Centrosteel (Rec.2000,p.I-6007) (Judgment) C-456/98
13 Jul 2000
ECJ

European


 
Defreyn (Rec.2000,p.I-6155) (Judgment) C-166/99
13 Jul 2000
ECJ

European


 
Albore (Rec.2000,p.I-5965) (Judgment) C-423/98
13 Jul 2000
ECJ

European


 
Ideal tourisme (Rec.2000,p.I-6049) (Judgment) C-36/99
13 Jul 2000
ECJ

European


 
d'Aloya v Council (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-143,II-657) (Judgment) T-24/99
13 Jul 2000
ECFI

European


 
Greece v Commission (Rec 2000,p I-5719) (Judgment) C-46/97; [2000] EUECJ C-46/97
13 Jul 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Ideal tourisme SA --v Belgian State C-36/99; [2001] STC 1386; [2000] EUECJ C-36/99
13 Jul 2000
ECJ

European, VAT
Europa In the present state of harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to the common system of value added tax, the Community principle of equal treatment does not preclude legislation of a Member State which on the one hand, in accordance with Article 28(3)(b) of Sixth Directive 77/388 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes, in the version of Directive 96/95 amending, with regard to the level of the standard rate of value added tax, Directive 77/388, continues to exempt international passenger transport by air, and on the other hand taxes international passenger transport by coach.
VAT - Sixth Directive 77/388/EEC - Transitional provisions - Retention of the exemption for international passenger transport by air - No exemption for international passenger transport by coach - Discrimination - State aid.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v France (Rec.2000,p.I-6137) (Judgment) C-160/99
13 Jul 2000
ECJ

European


 
Centrosteel (Rec 2000,p I-6007) (Judgment) C-456/98; [2000] EUECJ C-456/98
13 Jul 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Griesel v Council (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-151,II-699) (Judgment) T-157/99
13 Jul 2000
ECFI

European


 
Salzgitter v Commission (Rec.2000,p.I-5843) (Judgment) C-210/98
13 Jul 2000
ECJ

European


 
Cwik v Commission (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-155,II-713) (Judgment) T-82/99
14 Jul 2000
ECFI

European


 
Teixeira Neves v Court of Justice T-146/99
14 Jul 2000
ECFI

European


 
Teixeira Neves v Court of Justice T-146/99; [2000] EUECJ T-146/99
14 Jul 2000
ECFI

European
Officials - Internal competition - Competition notice - Appointment to the post of legal adviser - Mandatory requirement - Preferential criterion - Statement of reasons - Misuse of powers.
[ Bailii ]
 
Innova v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-2941) T-149/00; [2000] EUECJ T-149/00
20 Jul 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Esedra v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-2951) T-169/00
20 Jul 2000
ECFI

European


 
Innova v Commission (Rec.2000,p.II-2941) (Order) T-149/00
20 Jul 2000
ECFI

European


 
The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds and Another v the Secretary of State for Scotland for Judicial Review Times, 12 September 2000; [2000] ScotCS 216
28 Jul 2000
SCS
Lord Cowie and Lord Dawson and Lord President
Animals, European, Environment, Scotland
When considering what degree of disturbance would be caused to a population of birds by licenses for control, the secretary had to consider not only the effect on the population of the species as a whole, but also the effect licences might have on local populations within special protection areas. The amendments to the Birds Directive referring to 'this directive' were references to populations within that context, ad not that of the Directive from which the amendment was derived.
EC Birds Directive 79/409/EEC art 4 - EC Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC - Conservation (Natural Habitats, etc) Regulations 1994 (1994 No 2716)
[ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ]
 
Regina v Daventry District Council ex parte Thornby Farms Times, 05 October 2000; Gazette, 14 September 2000; [2000] EWHC Admin 382
28 Jul 2000
Admn
Lord Justice Pill, Lord Justice Robert Walker, And Mr Justice Laddie
Animals, Agriculture, Environment, European
The council granted licences for the disposal of waste animal carcasses by incineration. The objectors said the council had failed to take note of art 4 of the directive, and that as clinical waste alternative regimes applied. Held: Animal waste and clinical waste were properly distinguished, and the council had applied the correct guidance. The council was entitled to assume on the evidence that no way of preventing the emissions was available. The requirements of the legislation should have been read to impose a continuing obligation to assess not just the machinery used, but also additional available steps to reduce emissions to a minimum. Nevertheless the decision stood. In the second case, there was no obligation to refuse planning permissions either because there is no immediate need for the land or because the relevant decision makes no positive contribution towards meeting the objective. Appeals refused.
Hazardous Waste Directive 91/689/EEC - Controlled Waste Regulations 1992 - Environmental Protection Act 1990 - Council Directive 75/442/EEC, as amended by 91/156/EEC and 96/350/EEC Waste Framework Directive. Article 4 - Waste Management Licensing Regulations 1994 (1994/1056) - Animal Waste Directive (90/425/EEC) - Air Pollution Directive (84/360/EEC) - Animal By-products Order 1992 (SI 1992 No 3303)
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Martinez Lara and Urban Penon v Council (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-163,II-753) (Order) T-43/00
31 Jul 2000
ECFI

European


 
Martinez Lara and Urban Penon v Council (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-163,II-753) T-43/00; T-43/00; [2000] EUECJ T-43/00
31 Jul 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
'Invest' Import und Export and Invest Commerce v Commission T-189/00; [2000] EUECJ T-189/00
2 Aug 2000
ECFI

European
ECJ Procedure for interim relief - Freeze of funds and ban on investment in relation to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia - Regulation (EC) No 1147/2000 - Prima facie case.
Regulation (EC) No 1147/2000
[ Bailii ]
 
Mayne and Another v Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food Times, 12 October 2000; Gazette, 03 August 2000; [2001] EHLR 5
3 Aug 2000
QBD
Kennedy LJ and Jackson
Administrative, Crime, European, Agriculture
The defendants exported beef without the requisite certificates. The UK rules had been made before a Directive came into effect. On appeal after conviction the defendant argued that the rules purported to take account of future amendments. It was held that for a criminal sanction to be applicable, Regulations could not give effect to directives made by a third party without appropriate and explicit incorporation of those amendments. A regulation imposing sanctions for failure to comply with an EC Directive is not to be read as applying to future amendments to the Directive unless the wording of the regulations is such as clearly to take account of the possibility of future amendments.
1 Citers


 
Bunzl v Martin Bunzl International Ltd and Others Times, 19 September 2000; Gazette, 03 August 2000
3 Aug 2000
ChD

European, Costs, International
Security for costs had been ordered against a Swiss resident claimant. Although Switzerland is not in the EU or in the EEA and therefore rules against discrimination against nationals of member states did not apply, Switzerland was still a signatory to the Brussels and Lugano Conventions for enforcement of judgments. The discretion to require security for costs was slightly wider a regards a Swiss national, but the court should still general follow the rule in Fitzgerald. Orders for security for costs against nationals of other EU member states were discriminatory.

 
Christiansen v Court of Auditors (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-165,II-763) T-159/99; T-159/99; [2000] EUECJ T-159/99
7 Aug 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Christiansen v Court of Auditors (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-165,II-763) (Order) T-159/99
7 Aug 2000
ECFI

European


 
Group Josi Reinsurance Company Sa v Universal General Insurance Company Times, 09 August 2000; C-412/98; [2000] EUECJ C-412/98
9 Aug 2000
ECJ

Jurisdiction, Insurance, European
The Brussels Convention rules allowing jurisdiction apply whenever the proposed defendant is domiciled in a convention country. The plaintiff need not be. The special rules on jurisdiction which apply to insurance cases do not apply to reinsurance contracts.
Brussels Convention on Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters 1968
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina on the Application of Mayer Parry Recycling Ltd v Environment Agency, Secretary of State for Environment [2000] EWHC Admin 388
8 Sep 2000
Admn

Environment, European, Licensing

[ Bailii ]
 
Pavlov (Competition) C-181/98; [2000] EUECJ C-181/98
12 Sep 2000
ECJ

European
Mandatory membership of an occupational pension scheme - Compatibility with competition rules - whether a professional pension fund as a business.
[ Bailii ]
 
Pavlov (Competition) C-184/98; [2000] EUECJ C-184/98
12 Sep 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Pavlov (Competition) C-182/98; [2000] EUECJ C-182/98
12 Sep 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Pavlov (Competition) C-183/98; [2000] EUECJ C-183/98
12 Sep 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Greece (Rec 2000,p I-6537) (Judgment) C-260/98; [2000] EUECJ C-260/98
12 Sep 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v France (Rec 2000,p I-6251) (Judgment) C-276/97; [2000] EUECJ C-276/97
12 Sep 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v United Kingdom (Rec 2000,p I-6355) (Judgment) C-359/97; [2000] EUECJ C-359/97
12 Sep 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Pavel Pavlov and Others v Stichting Pensioenfonds Medische Specialisten [2000] ECR I-6497; C-180/98; C-180/98; [2000] EUECJ C-180/98
12 Sep 2000
ECJ

European
Europa Compulsory membership of an occupational pension scheme - Compatibility with competition rules - Classification of an occupational pension fund as an undertaking.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Ireland (Rec 2000,p I-6301) (Judgment) C-358/97; [2000] EUECJ C-358/97
12 Sep 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Netherlands C-408/97; [2000] EUECJ C-408/97
12 Sep 2000
ECJ

European, VAT
Failure to fulfil obligations - Article 4(5) of the Sixth VAT Directive - Access to roads on payment of a toll - Failure to levy VAT.
[ Bailii ]
 
Geffroy v Casino France SNC C-366/98; [2000] EUECJ C-366/98
12 Sep 2000
ECJ

European
Europa Free movement of goods - National legislation on the marketing of a product - Description and labelling - National legislation requiring use of the official language of the Member State - Directive 79/112/EEC.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Greece (Rec.2000,p.I-6537) (Judgment) C-260/98
12 Sep 2000
ECJ

European


 
Teixeira Neves v Court of Justice T-259/97; [2000] EUECJ T-259/97
12 Sep 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Officials - Duty to act in good faith and maintain the dignity of the office - Principle of the separation of powers - Freedom of association - Disciplinary measures - Sanction.
[ Bailii ]
 
Denkavit Nederland v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-3011) T-20/99; T-20/99; [2000] EUECJ T-20/99
13 Sep 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Denkavit Nederland v Commission (Rec.2000,p.II-3011) (Judgment) T-20/99
13 Sep 2000
ECFI

European


 
Erpelding (Rec.2000,p.I-6821) (Judgment) C-16/99
14 Sep 2000
ECJ

European


 
Erpelding (Rec 2000,p I-6821) (Judgment) C-16/99; [2000] EUECJ C-16/99
14 Sep 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
D (Rec 2000,p I-6795) (Judgment) C-384/98; [2000] EUECJ C-384/98
14 Sep 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Fisher (Rec 2000,p I-6751) (Judgment) C-369/98; [2000] EUECJ C-369/98
14 Sep 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Hocsman (Rec.2000,p.I-6623) (Judgment) C-238/98
14 Sep 2000
ECJ

European


 
Fisher (Rec.2000,p.I-6751) (Judgment) C-369/98
14 Sep 2000
ECJ

European


 
Mendes Ferreira and Delgado Correia Ferreira v Companhia de Seguros Mundial Confianca SA C-348/98; [2000] EUECJ C-348/98; [2000] ECR 1-6711
14 Sep 2000
ECJ

European, Insurance, Road Traffic
Europa Compulsory insurance against civil liability in respect of motor vehicles - Directives 84/5/EEC and 90/232/EEC - Minimum amounts of cover - Type of civil liability - Injury caused to a member of the family of the insured person or driver.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Collino and Chiappero (Rec 2000,p I-6659) (Judgment) C-343/98; [2000] EUECJ C-343/98
14 Sep 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
D. (Rec.2000,p.I-6795) (Judgment) C-384/98
14 Sep 2000
ECJ

European


 
Collino and Chiappero (Rec.2000,p.I-6659) (Judgment) C-343/98
14 Sep 2000
ECJ

European


 
Hocsman C-238/98; [2000] ECR I-6623; [2000] EUECJ C-238/98
14 Sep 2000
ECJ

European, Health Professions
The blanket prohibition in Article 43 will prevent unjustified restrictions such as ‘French doctors cannot practise in the United Kingdom’, but the next step is to harmonise the basis on which the qualification is granted; otherwise it becomes impossible to compare like with like. The obligation to recognise qualifications in other member states extends to all diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications as well as to the relevant experience of the person concerned, irrespective of whether they were acquired in a Member State or in a third country, and it does not cease to exist as a result of the adoption of directives on the mutual recognition of diplomas.
Article 43 EC
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Schmeink and Cofreth and Strobel (Rec 2000,p I-6973) (Judgment) C-454/98; [2000] EUECJ C-454/98
19 Sep 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Schmeink and Cofreth and Strobel (Rec.2000,p.I-6973) (Judgment) C-454/98
19 Sep 2000
ECJ

European


 
Ampafrance SA v Directeur des Services Fiscaux de Maine-et-Loire C-177/99; [2000] ECR I-7013; [2000] EUECJ C-177/99
19 Sep 2000
ECJ

European, VAT
Europa 1. Council Decision 89/487, adopted on the basis of Article 27 of Sixth Directive 77/388 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes, which provides that a Member State may be authorised to introduce special measures for derogation from the Sixth Directive in order to simplify the procedure for charging the tax or to prevent certain types of tax evasion or avoidance, and authorising the French Republic to apply a measure derogating from the second subparagraph of Article 17(6) of the Sixth Directive, is invalid under the general principle of proportionality, in so far as it authorises that State to deny traders the right to deduct the value added tax on expenditure which they are able to show to be of a strictly business nature.
Since the measure excludes as a matter of principle all expenditure in respect of accommodation, hospitality, food and entertainment from the right to deduct value added tax, which is a fundamental principle of the value added tax system established by the Sixth Directive, although appropriate means less detrimental to that principle than the exclusion of the right of deduction in the case of certain expenditure can be contemplated or already exist in the national legal order, it is not a means proportionate to that objective and has a disproportionate effect on the objectives and principles of the Sixth Directive.
2. The principle of the protection of legitimate expectations, which is the corollary of the principle of legal certainty and which is generally relied upon by individuals (traders) in a situation where they have legitimate expectations created by the public authorities, cannot be relied on by a Member State in order to avoid the consequences of a decision of the Court declaring a Community provision invalid, since it would jeopardise the possibility for individuals to be protected against conduct of the public authorities based on unlawful rules.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Stodtmeister v Council (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-177,II-807) T-101/98; T-101/98; [2000] EUECJ T-101/98
19 Sep 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Durbeck v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-3031) T-252/97; T-252/97; [2000] EUECJ T-252/97
19 Sep 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Germany v Commission (Rec 2000,p I-6857) (Judgment) C-156/98; [2000] EUECJ C-156/98
19 Sep 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Germany v Commission (Rec.2000,p.I-6857) (Judgment) C-156/98
19 Sep 2000
ECJ

European


 
Ampafrance and Sanofi (Rec.2000,p.I-7013) (Judgment) C-177/99
19 Sep 2000
ECJ

European


 
Stodtmeister v Council (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-177,II-807) (Judgment) T-101/98
19 Sep 2000
ECFI

European


 
Ampafrance (Taxation) C-181/99; [2000] EUECJ C-181/99
19 Sep 2000
ECJ

European, VAT
Value added tax - net of tax - exclusion of deduction - the cost of representation - Proportionality.
[ Bailii ]
 
De Palma and others v Commission (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-185,II-839) (Judgment) T-203/99
20 Sep 2000
ECFI

European


 
Orthmann v Commission (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-181,II-829) T-261/97; T-261/97; [2000] EUECJ T-261/97
20 Sep 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Behmer v Parliament (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-187,II-851) (Judgment) T-220/99
20 Sep 2000
ECFI

European


 
De Palma and others v Commission T-203/99; [2000] EUECJ T-203/99
20 Sep 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Behmer v Parliament (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-187,II-851) T-220/99; T-220/99; [2000] EUECJ T-220/99
20 Sep 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Mediocurso v Commission (Rec.2000,p.I-7183) (Judgment) C-462/98
21 Sep 2000
ECJ

European


 
Modelo (Rec 2000,p I-7213) (Judgment) C-19/99; [2000] EUECJ C-19/99
21 Sep 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Borawitz (Rec 2000,p I-7293) (Judgment) C-124/99; [2000] EUECJ C-124/99
21 Sep 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Kapniki Mikhailidis AE v Idryma Kinonikon Asphaliseon (Free Movement Of Goods) (Danish) C-442/98; [2000] EUECJ C-442/98; [2000] ECR I-7145
21 Sep 2000
ECJ

European
Europa Charges having equivalent effect - the export of tobacco - duty in favour of a social fund. Action to obtain a preliminary ruling on the interpretation of Articles 9 and 12 (now Article 23 EC and 25 EC) and Article 16 (repealed by the Amsterdam Treaty) relating to charges having equivalent effect to customs and conditions for reimbursement of a tax which was levied in breach of Community law
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
EFMA v Council (Rec.2000,p.I-7079) (Judgment) C-46/98
21 Sep 2000
ECJ

European


 
Michailidis (Rec 2000,p I-7145) (Judgment) C-441/98; [2000] EUECJ C-441/98
21 Sep 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Michailidis (Rec.2000,p.I-7145) (Judgment) C-441/98
21 Sep 2000
ECJ

European


 
ABBOI (Rec 2000,p I-7247) (Judgment) C-109/99; [2000] EUECJ C-109/99
21 Sep 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
EFMA v Council (Rec 2000,p I-7079) (Judgment) C-46/98; [2000] EUECJ C-46/98P
21 Sep 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Modelo (Rec.2000,p.I-7213) (Judgment) C-19/99
21 Sep 2000
ECJ

European


 
Borawitz (Rec.2000,p.I-7293) (Judgment) C-124/99
21 Sep 2000
ECJ

European


 
ABBOI (Rec.2000,p.I-7247) (Judgment) C-109/99
21 Sep 2000
ECJ

European


 
Hendrik van der Woude v Stichting Beatrixoord C-222/98; [2000] ECR I-7129; [2000] EUECJ C-222/98
21 Sep 2000
ECJ

European
Competition - Community rules - Matters covered - Collective agreements in pursuit of social policy objectives - Collective agreement concerning sickness insurance and requiring an employer to pay employer contributions only to the insurers selected under that agreement - Sickness insurance business subcontracted to insurers - Not covered.
The court recognised the primacy of the social rights over the prohibition concerning competition rules under Title VI.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Mediocurso v Commission (Rec 2000,p I-7183) (Judgment) C-462/98; [2000] EUECJ C-462/98P
21 Sep 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Belgium (Rec 2000,p I-7587) (Judgment) C-478/98; [2000] EUECJ C-478/98
26 Sep 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Ireland C-408/99; [2000] EUECJ C-408/99
26 Sep 2000
ECJ

European
ECJ Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Directives 94/55/EC and 96/86/EC - Failure to transpose into national law within the period prescribed
Directive 94/55/EC - Directive 96/86/EC
[ Bailii ]
 
Buechel Fahrzeugteilefabrik v Council (Commercial Policy) T-75/97; [2000] EUECJ T-75/97
26 Sep 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Extension of an anti-dumping duty - Exemption - Bicycle parts - Action for annulment - Inadmissibility.
[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v France (Rec 2000,p I-7445) (Judgment) C-225/98; [2000] EUECJ C-225/98
26 Sep 2000
ECJ

European
Europa Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Public works contracts - Directives 71/305/EEC, as amended by Directive 89/440/EEC, and 93/37/EEC - Construction and maintenance of school buildings by the Nord-Pas-de-Calais Region and the Département du Nord.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Kachelmann v Bankhaus Hermann Lampe KG C-322/98; [2000] EUECJ C-322/98
26 Sep 2000
ECJ

European, Employment
ECJ Social policy - Male and female workers - Access to employment and working conditions - Equal treatment - Conditions governing dismissal
[ Bailii ]
 
Bertinetto (Rec 2000,p I-7629) (Judgment) C-22/99; [2000] EUECJ C-22/99
26 Sep 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v France C-23/99; [2000] EUECJ C-23/99
26 Sep 2000
ECJ

European, Customs and Excise
ECJ Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Free movement of goods - Procedures for detention under customs control - Goods in transit - Industrial property right - Spare parts for the repair of motor vehicles
[ Bailii ]
 
Eru Portuguesa (Rec 2000,p I-7691) (Judgment) C-42/99; [2000] EUECJ C-42/99
26 Sep 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Mayeur v Association Promotion de l'Information Messine C-175/99; [2000] EUECJ C-175/99
26 Sep 2000
ECJ

European, Employment
ECJ Maintenance of workers' rights in the event of transfer of an undertaking - Transfer to a municipality of an activity previously carried out, in the interests of that municipality, by a legal person established under private law
[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Autriche C-205/98 C-205/98; [2000] EUECJ C-205/98
26 Sep 2000
ECJ

European, Transport
(Judgment) Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 93/89/EEC - Tolls - Brenner motorway - Prohibition of discrimination - Obligation to set toll rates by reference to the costs of the infrastructure network concerned
Directive 93/89/EEC
[ Bailii ]
 
Buchel v Council and Commission T-74/97; [2000] EUECJ T-74/97
26 Sep 2000
ECFI

European
1. A declaration of annulment limited solely to the provision of a regulation concerning the extension of an anti-dumping duty would make the regulation extending the definitive anti-dumping duty to importers of similar products or parts of those products a dead letter. The remainder of the operative part of that regulation concerns only the implementation of that provision, particularly as regards the possibility of obtaining exemption from the extended duty, and cannot therefore be detached from it. Therefore, an action for annulment is not inadmissible in so far as it is aimed at the annulment of the regulation in its entirety. (see para 35)
2. An economic operator is directly concerned, within the meaning of the fourth paragraph of Article 173 of the Treaty (now, after amendment, the fourth paragraph of Article 230 EC), by a regulation extending a definitive anti-dumping duty to imports of similar products or parts of those products where the customs authorities of Member States are obliged to levy the anti-dumping duty extended by that regulation to imports of those products, having no discretion in the matter.
As for the condition of being individually concerned, in so far as the effect of a regulation extending an anti-dumping duty is only to enlarge the scope of the initial regulation to include imports of similar products or parts of those products, that regulation therefore has the same legal effects on undertakings subject to the duty thus extended as a regulation establishing a definitive duty has on undertakings subject to such a duty. It follows that the mere fact that an economic operator must pay a duty by reason of a regulation extending an anti-dumping duty does not, as regards the admissibility of its action for annulment, place it in a different legal position from that of importers subject to a regulation establishing a definitive anti-dumping duty. (see paras 49-53)
3. An intermediary importer who, although invited to participate in an investigation into the circumvention of anti-dumping measures, does not take part in that investigation until after the expiry of the time-limit laid down by the regulation opening the investigation, cannot rely on the principles in the judgment in Case T-161/94 Sinochem Heilongjiang v Council [1996] ECR II-695 in order to maintain that, by reason of its participation in the investigation, it is individually concerned by the extension regulation adopted by the Council following the investigation procedure. (see paras 57-62 )
4. Like the provisions of a regulation extending an anti-dumping duty to imports of certain parts of the products concerned and establishing a system of exemption from the extended duty, the exemption regulation concerns an intermediary importer of those products not by reason of certain attributes which are peculiar to it or by reason of circumstances which differentiate it from any other person, but by reason only of its objective capacity as an intermediary importer, in the same way as any other operator finding itself, currently or potentially, in an identical situation. In relation to that intermediary importer, therefore, such a regulation constitutes a measure of general scope and not a decision within the meaning of the fourth paragraph of Article 173 of the Treaty (now, after amendment, the fourth paragraph of Article 230 EC). (see paras 67, 69, 78)
[ Bailii ]
 
Starway v Council (Rec 2000,p II-3099) T-80/97; [2000] EUECJ T-80/97
26 Sep 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Engelbrecht (Judgment) C-262/97; [2000] EUECJ C-262/97
26 Sep 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
IGI (Rec 2000,p I-7717) (Judgment) C-134/99; [2000] EUECJ C-134/99
26 Sep 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Lemaitre v Commission (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-191,II-867) T-317/99; [2000] EUECJ T-317/99
27 Sep 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
BP Chemicals v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-3145) T-184/97; [2000] EUECJ T-184/97
27 Sep 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Hume (Rec 2000,p I-7809) (Judgment) C-193/99; [2000] EUECJ C-193/99
28 Sep 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Autriche (Rec 2000,p I-7835) (Order) C-290/98
29 Sep 2000
ECJ

European


 
International Potash Company v Council (Rec 2000,p II-3179) T-87/98; [2000] EUECJ T-87/98
29 Sep 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
International Potash Company v Council (Rec.2000,p.II-3179) (Judgment) T-87/98
29 Sep 2000
ECFI

European


 
Commission v Autriche (Rec.2000,p.I-7835) (Order) C-290/98
29 Sep 2000
ECJ

European


 
CETM v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-3207) T-55/99; [2000] EUECJ T-55/99
29 Sep 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
CETM v Commission (Rec.2000,p.II-3207) (Judgment) T-55/99
29 Sep 2000
ECFI

European


 
Echirolles Distribution v Association du Dauphine and Others [2000] ECR I-8207; C-9/99; [2000] EUECJ C-9/99
3 Oct 2000
ECJ

European, Consumer
National legislation on book prices
[ Bailii ]
 
Sindicato de Medicos de Asistancia Publica (SIMAP) v Colsilieria de Sanidad y Consumo de la Generalidad Valenciana Times, 18 October 2000; [2000] ICR 1116; C-303/98; [2000] IRLR 845; [2000] EUECJ C-303/98
3 Oct 2000
ECJ

European, Employment, Health Professions, European, European
Doctors working in primary health care teams are subject to the Working Time Directive. They are not to be assimilated as public service workers alongside emergency services. All time on call was working time and overtime if present at a health centre, but if merely contactable then the rules applied to the time actually spent. Merely being on call at night regularly did not make them night workers, but they could be classed as shift workers where appropriate. Consents given collectively by a trade union are not to be equated with consent given by the doctor himself.
ECJ Social policy - Protection of the safety and health of workers - Directives 89/391/EEC and 93/104/EC - Scope - Doctors in primary health care teams - Average period of work - Inclusion of time on call - Night workers and shift workers
Council Directive 89/391/EEC of 12 June 1989 on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work - Council Directive 93/104/EC of 23 November 1993 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Sindicato de Medicos de Asistancia Publica (SIMAP) v Colsilieria de Sanidad y Consumo de la Generalidad Valenciana Times, 18 October 2000; [2000] ICR 1116; C-303/98; [2000] IRLR 845; [2000] EUECJ C-303/98
3 Oct 2000
ECJ

European, Employment, Health Professions, European, European
Doctors working in primary health care teams are subject to the Working Time Directive. They are not to be assimilated as public service workers alongside emergency services. All time on call was working time and overtime if present at a health centre, but if merely contactable then the rules applied to the time actually spent. Merely being on call at night regularly did not make them night workers, but they could be classed as shift workers where appropriate. Consents given collectively by a trade union are not to be equated with consent given by the doctor himself.
ECJ Social policy - Protection of the safety and health of workers - Directives 89/391/EEC and 93/104/EC - Scope - Doctors in primary health care teams - Average period of work - Inclusion of time on call - Night workers and shift workers
Council Directive 89/391/EEC of 12 June 1989 on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work - Council Directive 93/104/EC of 23 November 1993 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Corsten C-58/98; [2000] EUECJ C-58/98
3 Oct 2000
ECJ

European
ECJ Freedom to provide services - Directive 64/427/EEC - Skilled services in the building trade - National rules requiring foreign skilled trade undertakings to be entered on the trades register - Proportionality
Directive 64/427/EEC
[ Bailii ]
 
Cubero Vermurie v Commission T-187/98; [2000] EUECJ T-187/98
3 Oct 2000
ECFI

European
ECFI Officials - Promotion - Mobility - Admissibility.
[ Bailii ]
 
Gozza and others v Universita degli Studi di Padova and Others C-371/97; [2000] EUECJ C-371/97
3 Oct 2000
ECJ

European
ECJ Right of establishment - Freedom to provide services - Doctors - Medical specialties - Training periods - Remuneration - Direct effect
[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v HM Treasury, Ex Parte University of Cambridge Times, 17 October 2000; C-380/98; [2000] All ER (EC) 920; [2000] 1 WLR 2514; [2000] EUECJ C-380/98
3 Oct 2000
ECJ

Education, European
When considering public law governed the procedural requirements for procurement contracts, the court had to consider whether body was financed 'for the most part' by public funds. The words referred to the majority of income, and the calculations of what was publicly financed was to include those sums received from government otherwise than for consideration by way of services or supplies. For an educational institution this would include funds by way of grants, but would not include payments for research and similar.
Council Directive 92/50 relating to the co-ordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Industrie des poudres spheriques v Council C-458/98; [2000] EUECJ C-458/98P
3 Oct 2000
ECJ

European
ECJ Appeal - Anti-dumping - Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88 - Calcium metal - Admissibility - Re-opening of an anti-dumping procedure after annulment of the regulation adopting an anti-dumping duty - Right to a fair hearing
Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88
[ Bailii ]
 
Sindicato de Medicos de Asistancia Publica (SIMAP) v Colsilieria de Sanidad y Consumo de la Generalidad Valenciana Times, 18 October 2000; [2000] ICR 1116; C-303/98; [2000] IRLR 845; [2000] EUECJ C-303/98
3 Oct 2000
ECJ

European, Employment, Health Professions, European, European
Doctors working in primary health care teams are subject to the Working Time Directive. They are not to be assimilated as public service workers alongside emergency services. All time on call was working time and overtime if present at a health centre, but if merely contactable then the rules applied to the time actually spent. Merely being on call at night regularly did not make them night workers, but they could be classed as shift workers where appropriate. Consents given collectively by a trade union are not to be equated with consent given by the doctor himself.
ECJ Social policy - Protection of the safety and health of workers - Directives 89/391/EEC and 93/104/EC - Scope - Doctors in primary health care teams - Average period of work - Inclusion of time on call - Night workers and shift workers
Council Directive 89/391/EEC of 12 June 1989 on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work - Council Directive 93/104/EC of 23 November 1993 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Council v Chvatal and Others (Staff Regulations) C-433/98; [2000] EUECJ C-433/98P
5 Oct 2000
ECJ

European
Europa Appeal - Officials - Termination of service as a result of the accession of new Member States - Objection that Regulation (EC, Euratom, ECSC) No 2688/95 is unlawful - Objection inadmissible.
[ Bailii ]
 
Criminal Proceedings Against Hume Case C-193/99 Times, 05 October 2000
5 Oct 2000
ECJ

Road Traffic, European
When a driver subject to the tachograph requirements did not take his rest period in one week, the regulation permitting him to aggregate it with that in the week following did not permit him to take two separate rest periods in that week, but rather two periods together. The wording of the directive as expressed in languages other than English was clear, and the English was not very doubtful.

 
Imperial Tobacco and others (Rec.2000,p.I-8599) (Judgment) C-74/99; [2000] EUECJ C-74/99
5 Oct 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Germany v Parliament and Council (Judgment) C-376/98; [2000] EUECJ C-376/98
5 Oct 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Germany v Commission (Judgment) C-288/96; [2000] EUECJ C-288/96
5 Oct 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Council v Chvatal and others (Judgment) C-432/98; [2000] EUECJ C-432/98
5 Oct 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Council /Busacca and others (Judgment) C-434/98; [2000] EUECJ C-434/98P
5 Oct 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Rappe v Commission (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-201,II-911) (Judgment) T-202/99
5 Oct 2000
ECFI

European


 
Commission v France (Judgment) C-337/98; [2000] EUECJ C-337/98
5 Oct 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Schacht and others (Unpublished) (Order) C-3/98
5 Oct 2000
ECJ

European


 
Council /Busacca and others (Rec.2000,p.I-8577) (Judgment) C-434/98
5 Oct 2000
ECJ

European


 
Council v Chvatal and others (Rec.2000,p.I-8535) (Judgment) C-432/98
5 Oct 2000
ECJ

European


 
Rappe v Commission (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-201,II-911) T-202/99; T-202/99; [2000] EUECJ T-202/99
5 Oct 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v France (Rec.2000,p.I-8377) (Judgment) C-337/98
5 Oct 2000
ECJ

European


 
Germany v Parliament and Council (Rec.2000,p.I-8419) (Judgment) C-376/98
5 Oct 2000
ECJ

European


 
Commission v Greece (Rec.2000,p.I-8609) (Order) C-197/98
6 Oct 2000
ECJ

European


 
Commission v Greece (Order) C-197/98
6 Oct 2000
ECJ

European


 
Commission of the European Communities v United Kingdom Case C-359/97 Times, 10 October 2000
10 Oct 2000
ECJ

VAT, Transport, European
The UK had not complied with its obligations to the commission with regard to VAT in that it had failed to apply VAT to the collection of tolls on the use of roads and bridges where operated privately. The fact that similar operations were carried out by public bodies which would be exempt was insufficient to cause private operators to be exempt. Because the UK had failed to collect these sums, its accounting with the Commission was also in error.


 
 Regina v Secretary of State for Health and Others, Ex Parte Imperial Tobacco Ltd and Others etc; ECJ 10-Oct-2000 - Times, 10 October 2000; C-376/99; C-74/99
 
Ruwet (Rec.2000,p.I-8749) (Judgment) C-3/99
12 Oct 2000
ECJ

European


 
JT's Corporation v Commission (Rec.2000,p.II-3269) (Judgment) T-123/99
12 Oct 2000
ECFI

European


 
Regina v Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food , Ex Parte J H Cooke and Sons Times, 18 October 2000; C-372/98; [2000] EUECJ C-372/98
12 Oct 2000
ECJ

Agriculture, European
Land which in the prior year had been used temporarily for the growth of grass for silage purposes did not lose its eligibility for set-aside payments. The legislation imposed no definition which could justify the interpretation sought by the Ministry. The only land excluded was land set aside permanently for such purposes as pasture or other non-agricultural uses. The test was whether the cultivated with a view to harvest. The United Kingdom could not be excused repayment of fines already levied, since nothing the Commission has done had added to the Ministry's mistake.
Council Regulation (EEC) No 1762/92 with regard to the set-aside scheme
[ Bailii ]
 
Costacurta v Commission (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-205,II-931) (Order) T-202/00
12 Oct 2000
ECFI

European


 
Snellers (Judgment) C-314/98; [2000] EUECJ C-314/98
12 Oct 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Costacurta v Commission (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-205,II-931) T-202/00; [2000] EUECJ T-202/00
12 Oct 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Snellers (Rec.2000,p.I-8633) (Judgment) C-314/98
12 Oct 2000
ECJ

European


 
Greece v Commission (Order) [2004] EUECJ C-278/00; C-278/00
12 Oct 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Barleycorn Mongolue and Boixader Rivas v Parliament and Council T-208/00; [2000] EUECJ T-208/00
12 Oct 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Cooke (Rec.2000,p.I-8683) (Judgment) C-372/98
12 Oct 2000
ECJ

European


 
Spain v Commission (Rec.2000,p.I-8717) (Judgment) C-480/98
12 Oct 2000
ECJ

European


 
Spain v Commission (Judgment) C-480/98; [2000] EUECJ C-480/98
12 Oct 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Federacion de Cofradias de Pescadores de Guipuzcoa and others v Council (Order) C-300/00
12 Oct 2000
ECJ

European


 
Federacion de Cofradias de Pescadores de Guipuzcoa and others v Council (Rec.2000,p.I-8797) (Order) C-300/00
12 Oct 2000
ECJ

European


 
Ruwet (Judgment) C-3/99; [2000] EUECJ C-3/99
12 Oct 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Barleycorn Mongolue and Boixader Rivas v Parliament and Council (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-209,II-941) (Order) T-208/00
12 Oct 2000
ECFI

European


 
Regina v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry Ex Parte Trades Union Congress Times, 17 October 2000; (2000) IRLR 565
17 Oct 2000
CA
Lord Justice Buxton
Litigation Practice, European
Where a court referred an issue to the European Court, it was for that court in its discretion to decide whether interim relief might be granted, and an appellate court should not normally interfere in that exercise. The considerations for such a grant of interim relief pending a reference had been fully set out by the House of Lords in Factortame, being the threshold condition, the existence of a serious case to be tried, the balance of convenience, the strength of the case on the reference, and the potential losses incurred according to the grant or refusal of interim relief. Referring to a speech from Lord Goff in Factortame (2): "I venture to draw from that latter passage that Lord Goff was recognising that there may be an unusual – I infer in Lord Goff's view it would be a very unusual case - where there was no strong prima facie case that the law was invalid, but where, nevertheless, it would be appropriate because of the weight of other factors to grant interim relief. But that case apart, Lord Goff in my judgment appears to regard the importance of not restraining a public authority by interim injunction except in a case such as that he refers to at the end of the passages I have cited as being, not a paramount factor, but an important threshold principle to which the court that is being asked to consider interim relief must direct its attention in the first instance."
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Drabbe v Commission (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-213,II-955) (Judgment) T-27/99
17 Oct 2000
ECFI

European


 
Roquette Freres (Judgment) C-114/99; [2000] EUECJ C-114/99
17 Oct 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Drabbe v Commission (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-213,II-955) T-27/99; T-27/99; [2000] EUECJ T-27/99
17 Oct 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Roquette Freres (Rec.2000,p.I-8823) (Judgment) C-114/99
17 Oct 2000
ECJ

European


 
Tt's Corporation Law Ltd v Commission of the European Communities Case Times, 18 October 2000; T-123/99
18 Oct 2000
ECJ

European, Administrative
The Community's general policy of openness must override a Community regulation which imposed severe secrecy restrictions. A regulation was used as a basis to refuse to give to a litigant in England information about relevant mission reports of the EU concerning trade. The general principle was set down with certain exceptions, and could not be set aside for this purpose. In any event the regulation under which access had been refused did not apply to this situation.

 
Bond van de Fegarbel-Beroepsverenigingen and others v Commission (Rec.2000,p.II-3301) (Order) T-58/00
19 Oct 2000
ECFI

European


 
Busolin and others (Judgment) C-155/99; [2000] EUECJ C-155/99
19 Oct 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Bond van de Fegarbel-Beroepsverenigingen and others v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-3301) T-58/00; T-58/00; [2000] EUECJ T-58/00
19 Oct 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Trenker v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-3313) T-141/00; [2002] EUECJ T-141/00; [2000] EUECJ T-141/00
19 Oct 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Trenker v Commission (Rec.2000,p.II-3313) (Order) T-141/00
19 Oct 2000
ECFI

European


 
Commission v Greece (Rec.2000,p.I-8921) (Judgment) C-216/98
19 Oct 2000
ECJ

European


 
Italy and Sardegna Lines v Commission (Rec.2000,p.I-8855) (Judgment) C-15/98
19 Oct 2000
ECJ

European


 
Busolin and others (Rec.2000,p.I-9037) (Judgment) C-155/99
19 Oct 2000
ECJ

European


 
Peacock AG v Hauptzollamt Paderborn C-339/98; C-339/98; [2000] EUECJ C-339/98
19 Oct 2000
ECJ

European

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Sommer (Judgment) C-15/99; [2000] EUECJ C-15/99
19 Oct 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Italy and Sardegna Lines v Commission (Judgment) C-15/98; [2000] EUECJ C-15/98
19 Oct 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Sommer (Rec.2000,p.I-8989) (Judgment) C-15/99
19 Oct 2000
ECJ

European


 
Commission v Greece (Judgment) C-216/98; [2000] EUECJ C-216/98
19 Oct 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Vogler (Rec.2000,p.I-9083) (Order) C-242/99
20 Oct 2000
ECJ

European


 
Fresh Marine v Commission (Rec.2000,p.II-3331) (Judgment) T-178/98
24 Oct 2000
ECFI

European


 
Fresh Marine v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-3331) T-178/98; T-178/98; [2000] EUECJ T-178/98
24 Oct 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
D v W Times, 24 October 2000; C-384/98
24 Oct 2000
ECJ

VAT, European
The fact that a service was provided by a doctor did not mean of itself that it came within Art 13 of the Directive. The test was whether the service was part a provision of care by diagnosing and treating some diseases or disorder. The carrying out of investigations to establish genetic differences, which was to provide evidence in paternity proceedings in a court was not part of such a process, and so did not attract exemption from VAT.
Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EC on the harmonisation of laws of the member states relating to turnover taxes; common system of value added tax Art 13

 
Comite du personnel de la Banque centrale europeenne and others v Banque (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-217,II-987) (Order) T-27/00
24 Oct 2000
ECFI

European


 
Comite du personnel de la Banque centrale europeenne and others v Banque centrale europeenne (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-217,II-987) T-27/00; T-27/00; [2000] EUECJ T-27/00
24 Oct 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]

 
 Regina on Application of Dinev and Others v Westminster City Council; Admn 24-Oct-2000 - [2000] EWHC Admin 407
 
Regina v Independent Television Commission, Ex Parte TVDanmark 1 Ltd Gazette, 26 October 2000; Times, 25 October 2000; [2001] 1 WLR 74
25 Oct 2000
CA

Media, Administrative, European
The ITC did not have power to refuse to consider a renewed application for permission by a British broadcasting company to exercise its exclusive rights to televise matches of the Danish National football team in a forthcoming tournament as against a Danish public service broadcaster who would reach a greater proportion of the Danish population. Attempts to bring such events to a wider audience were properly exercised at the time of the grant of the rights, but not later after they had been granted.
Television Broadasting transmitted across Frontiers Directive 1989/55/EEC - Broadcasting Act 1996

 
Harbinger v OHMI (Rec.2000,p.II-3525) (Judgment) T-345/99
26 Oct 2000
ECFI

European


 
Ripa di Meana and others v Parliament (Rec.2000,p.II-3493) (Judgment) T-83/99
26 Oct 2000
ECFI

European


 
Molkerei Grossbraunshain and Bene Nahrungsmittel v Commission (Rec.2000,p.I-9097) (Order) C-447/98
26 Oct 2000
ECJ

European


 
Bayer AG v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-3383) Times, 09 February 2001; T-41/96; [2000] ECR II-3383; [2000] EUECJ T-41/96
26 Oct 2000
ECFI

European, Commercial
The Commission had found that Bayer's policy of restricting parallel imports of its pharmaceutical drug, ADALAT, constituted part of its dealership agreements, and had annuled them. Held: Although Bayer clearly intended to restrict parallel imports by limiting the deliveries of ADALAT to its wholesalers in France and Spain to the quantities that they required for their domestic markets, the CFI found on analysis of the facts that the wholesalers had not acquiesced in a policy of restricting their exports, which was indeed against their interests, and "in order for there to be an agreement within the meaning of Article [101(1)] of the Treaty it is sufficient that the undertakings in question should have expressed their joint intention to conduct themselves on the market in a specific way . . As regards the form in which that common intention is expressed, it is sufficient for a stipulation to be the expression of the parties' intention to behave on the market in accordance with its terms . . without its having to constitute a valid and binding contract under national law.
It follows that the concept of an agreement within the meaning of Article [101(1)] of the Treaty, as interpreted by the case-law, centres around the existence of a concurrence of wills between at least two parties, the form in which it is manifested being unimportant so long as it constitutes the faithful expression of the parties' intention.
In certain circumstances, measures adopted or imposed in an apparently unilateral manner by a manufacturer in the context of his continuing relations with his distributors have been regarded as constituting an agreement within the meaning of Article [101(1)] of the Treaty . . That case-law shows that a distinction should be drawn between cases in which an undertaking has adopted a genuinely unilateral measure, and thus without the express or implied participation of another undertaking, and those in which the unilateral character of the measure is merely apparent. Whilst the former do not fall within Article [101(1)] of the Treaty, the latter must be regarded as revealing an agreement between undertakings and may therefore fall within the scope of that article. That is the case, in particular, with practices and measures in restraint of competition which, though apparently adopted unilaterally by the manufacturer in the context of its contractual relations with its dealers, nevertheless receive at least the tacit acquiescence of those dealers.
It is also clear from that case-law that the Commission cannot hold that apparently unilateral conduct on the part of a manufacturer, adopted in the context of the contractual relations which he maintains with his dealers, in reality forms the basis of an agreement between undertakings within the meaning of Article [101(1)] of the Treaty if it does not establish the existence of an acquiescence by the other partners, express or implied, in the attitude adopted by the manufacturer."
The concept of 'agreement' for the purposes of consideration of agreements to act in restraint of trade went only beyond a genuinely unilateral decision to act in a certain way. In cases where the action went beyond that and where the unilateral character was merely apparent, and a tacit agreement of others was shown then that could amount to an agreement. Some concurrence of wills was necessary, but the way in which that was shown was unnecessary.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Asia Motor France and others v Commission (Rec.2000,p.II-3453) (Judgment) T-154/98
26 Oct 2000
ECFI

European


 
Community Concepts v OHMI (Investorworld) (Rec 2000,p II-3545) T-360/99; T-360/99; [2000] EUECJ T-360/99
26 Oct 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Verheyden v Commission (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-219,II-1001) T-138/99; T-138/99; [2000] EUECJ T-138/99
26 Oct 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Harbinger v OHMI (Rec 2000,p II-3525) T-345/99; [2000] EUECJ T-345/99
26 Oct 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Asia Motor France and others v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-3453) T-154/98; T-154/98; [2000] EUECJ T-154/98
26 Oct 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Molkerei Grossbraunshain and Bene Nahrungsmittel v Commission (Order) C-447/98
26 Oct 2000
ECJ

European


 
Community Concepts v OHMI (Investorworld) (Rec.2000,p.II-3545) (Judgment) T-360/99
26 Oct 2000
ECFI

European


 
Verheyden v Commission (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-219,II-1001) (Judgment) T-138/99
26 Oct 2000
ECFI

European


 
Gerot Pharmazeutika v Commission (Rec.2000,p.II-3635) (Order) T-132/00
31 Oct 2000
ECFI

European


 
Bruno Farmaceutici and others v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-3557,Summ pub ) T-76/00; [2002] EUECJ T-76/00; [2000] EUECJ T-76/00
31 Oct 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Roussel and Roussel Iberica v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-3613) T-85/00; [2002] EUECJ T-85/00; [2000] EUECJ T-85/00
31 Oct 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Cambridge Healthcare Supplies v Commission (Rec.2000,p.II-3653,Summ.pub.) (Order) T-137/00
31 Oct 2000
ECFI

European


 
Roussel and Roussel Iberica v Commission (Rec.2000,p.II-3613) (Order) T-85/00
31 Oct 2000
ECFI

European


 
Roussel and Roussel Diamant v Commission (Rec.2000,p.II-3591) (Order) T-84/00
31 Oct 2000
ECFI

European


 
Hanseler v Commission (Rec.2000,p.II-3563) (Order) T-83/00
31 Oct 2000
ECFI

European


 
Bruno Farmaceutici and others v Commission (Rec.2000,p.II-3557,Summ.pub.) (Order) T-76/00
31 Oct 2000
ECFI

European


 
Hanseler v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-3563) T-83/00; [2002] EUECJ T-83/00; [2000] EUECJ T-83/00
31 Oct 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Schuck v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-3585,Summ pub ) T-83/00
31 Oct 2000
ECFI

European


 
Roussel and Roussel Diamant v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-3591) T-84/00; [2002] EUECJ T-84/00; [2000] EUECJ T-84/00
31 Oct 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Cambridge Healthcare Supplies v Commission T-137/00; [2002] EUECJ T-137/00; [2000] EUECJ T-137/00
31 Oct 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Gerot Pharmazeutica v Commision (Rec 2000,p II-3635) T-132/00; [2002] EUECJ T-132/00; T-132/00; [2000] EUECJ T-132/00
31 Oct 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Luxembourg v Parliament and Council (Judgment) C-168/98; [2000] EUECJ C-168/98
7 Nov 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
First Corporate Shipping (Rec.2000,p.I-9235) (Judgment) C-371/98
7 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
Luxembourg v Parliament and Council C-168/98
7 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
Haus Cramer (Rec.2000,p.I-9187) (Judgment) C-312/98
7 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
Haus Cramer (Judgment) C-312/98; [2000] EUECJ C-312/98
7 Nov 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
First Corporate Shipping (Judgment) Times, 16 November 2000; C-371/98; [2000] EUECJ C-371/98
7 Nov 2000
ECJ

Environment, European
When deciding the extent of natural sites to be proposed for designation as special areas of conservation under the Directive, a member state should take account only of environmental factors, and was not entitled to take heed of economic, social or cultural ones. The article which did include such criteria could only be for the Commission to consider in the light of the entire list of such possible area within the community.
Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild flora and fauna
[ Bailii ]
 
Dreyfus and others v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-3659) T-485/93; T-485/93
8 Nov 2000
ECFI

European


 
Ghignone and others v Council (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-223,II-1023) T-44/97; T-44/97; [2000] EUECJ T-44/97
8 Nov 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Bareyt and others v Commission (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-235,II-1085) (Judgment) T-158/98
8 Nov 2000
ECFI

European


 
Bareyt and others v Commission (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-229,II-1053) T-175/97; T-175/97; [2000] EUECJ T-175/97
8 Nov 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Bareyt and others v Commission (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-235,II-1085) T-158/98; T-158/98; [2000] EUECJ T-158/98
8 Nov 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Glencore Grain v Commission T-509/93
8 Nov 2000
ECFI

European


 
E v Commission (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-241,II-1113) (Judgment) T-210/98
8 Nov 2000
ECFI

European


 
Dreyfus v Commission (External Relations) T-61/98; [2000] EUECJ T-61/98
8 Nov 2000
ECFI

European
ECJ Emergency aid provided by the Community to the States of the former Soviet Union - Invitation to tender - Action for annulment - Action for damages.
[ Bailii ]
 
E v Commission T-210/98; [2000] EUECJ T-210/98
8 Nov 2000
ECFI

European
ECJ Officials - Dependent child allowance - Double allowance for child affected by mental or physical handicap - Suspension - Recovery of undue payment.
[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Hamptaux (Rec.2000,p.I-9485) (Judgment) C-207/99
9 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
Commission v Hamptaux (Judgment) C-207/99; [2000] EUECJ C-207/99P
9 Nov 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Yiadom (Judgment) C-357/98; [2000] EUECJ C-357/98
9 Nov 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Thelen (Rec.2000,p.I-9399) (Judgment) C-75/99
9 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
Vitari (Rec.2000,p.I-9425) (Judgment) C-126/99
9 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
United Kingdom v Commission (Rec.2000,p.I-9453) (Judgment) C-148/99
9 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
United Kingdom v Commission C-148/99 C-148/99; [2000] EUECJ C-148/99
9 Nov 2000
ECJ

European
(Judgment) EAGGF - Clearance of accounts - 1995 financial year - Regulation (EEC) No 1164/89 - Aid for fibre flax and hemp)
[ Bailii ]
 
Plum (Rec.2000,p.I-9379) (Judgment) C-404/98
9 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
Commission v Hitesys (Rec.2000,p.I-9517) (Judgment) C-356/99
9 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
'Invest' Import und Export and Invest Commerce v Commission (Rec.2000,p.I-9541) (Order) C-317/00
13 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
'Invest' Import und Export and Invest Commerce v Commission (Order) C-317/00
13 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
Floridienne and Berginvest (Rec.2000,p.I-9567) (Judgment) C-142/99
14 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
Floridienne and Berginvest (Judgment) C-142/99; [2000] EUECJ C-142/99
14 Nov 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Dehon v Parliament (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-245,II-1133) T-261/99; T-261/99; [2000] EUECJ T-261/99
15 Nov 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Camacho-Fernandes v Commission T-20/00; [2000] EUECJ T-20/00
15 Nov 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Camacho-Fernandes v Commission (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-249,II-1149) (Judgment) T-20/00
15 Nov 2000
ECFI

European


 
Moritz J. Weig v Commission (Rec.2000,p.I-9757) (Judgment) C-280/98
16 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
Donkersteeg (Judgment) C-37/99; [2000] EUECJ C-37/99
16 Nov 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Greece (Rec.2000,p.I-9601) (Judgment) C-214/98
16 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
Enso Espanola v Commission (Rec.2000,p.I-9817) (Judgment) C-282/98
16 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
Stora Kopparbergs Bergslags v Commission (Rec.2000,p.I-9925) (Judgment) C-286/98
16 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
KNP BT v Commission (Rec.2000,p.I-9641) (Judgment) C-248/98
16 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
Sarrio v Commission (Rec.2000,p.I-9991) (Judgment) C-291/98
16 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
Metsa-Serla Oyj and others v Commission (Rec.2000,p.I-10065) (Judgment) C-294/98
16 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
SCA Holding v Commission (Rec.2000,p.I-10101) (Judgment) C-297/98
16 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
Cascades v Commission (Rec.2000,p.I-9693) (Judgment) C-279/98
16 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
Schiocchet v Commission (Order) C-289/99
16 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
Commission v Belgium (Judgment) C-217/99; [2000] EUECJ C-217/99
16 Nov 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Greece (Judgment) C-214/98; [2000] EUECJ C-214/98
16 Nov 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Belgium (Rec.2000,p.I-10251) (Judgment) C-217/99
16 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
Cascades v Commission (Judgment) C-279/98; [2000] EUECJ C-279/98P
16 Nov 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Schiocchet v Commission (Rec.2000,p.I-10279) (Order) C-289/99
16 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
Donkersteeg (Rec.2000,p.I-10223) (Judgment) C-37/99
16 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
KNP BT v Commission (Judgment) C-248/98; [2000] EUECJ C-248/98P
16 Nov 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Moritz J Weig v Commission (Judgment) C-280/98; [2000] EUECJ C-280/98P
16 Nov 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Enso Espanola v Commission (Judgment) C-282/98; [2000] EUECJ C-282/98P
16 Nov 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Metsa-Serla Sales v Commission (Rec.2000,p.I-10157) (Judgment) C-298/98
16 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
Mo och Domsjo v Commission (Judgment) C-283/98; [2000] EUECJ C-283/98P
16 Nov 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Sarrio v Commission (Judgment) C-291/98; [2000] EUECJ C-291/98P
16 Nov 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Metsa-Serla Sales v Commission (Judgment) C-298/98; [2000] EUECJ C-298/98P
16 Nov 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Yiadom Case C-357/98 Times, 16 November 2000
16 Nov 2000
ECJ

Immigration, European
Where a citizen of a member state had been granted temporary admission, pending a final decision on whether she should be admitted or expelled, that decision was not one which could be classified as a 'decision concerning entry,' for the purposes of the directive, and by legal fiction the person was deemed to be out of the country, and accordingly was entitled to the procedural safeguards given by Article 9.
ECTreaty Article 234 - Council Directive 64/221/EEC on the co-ordination of special measures concerning the movement and residence of foreign nationals - Immigration Act 1971 11(1)

 
SCA Holding v Commission (Judgment) C-297/98; [2000] EUECJ C-297/98P
16 Nov 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Metsa-Serla Oyj and others v Commission (Judgment) C-294/98; [2000] EUECJ C-294/98P
16 Nov 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]

 
 Ingmar Gb Ltd v Eaton Leonard Technologies Inc; ECJ 16-Nov-2000 - Times, 16 November 2000; C-381/98; [2000] ECR I-9305; [2000] EUECJ C-381/98; [2001] 1 CMLR 9; [2000] EUECJ C-381/98_O
 
Stora Kopparbergs Bergslags v Commission (Judgment) C-286/98; [2000] EUECJ C-286/98P
16 Nov 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Martinelli v Commission (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-253,II-1161) (Order) T-200/99
17 Nov 2000
ECFI

European


 
Martinelli v Commission (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-253,II-1161) T-200/99; T-200/99; [2000] EUECJ T-200/99
17 Nov 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Carrasco Benitez v Commission (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-257,II-1169) T-214/99; T-214/99; [2000] EUECJ T-214/99
21 Nov 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
A v Commission (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-263,II-1211) (Judgment) T-23/00
21 Nov 2000
ECFI

European


 
Inland Revenue Commissioners v Oce Van Der Bgrinton Nv Times, 21 November 2000
21 Nov 2000
ChD

European, Taxes Management
The question of how to balance double taxation provisions when considering deduction of tax at source under such an agreement with a member from dividends paid by a UK company to its Dutch parent is one to be settled by the European court. This was a question of whether this constituted a 'withholding tax' forbidden by the Directive.
UK/Netherlands Double Taxation Agreement

 
A v Commission (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-263,II-1211) T-23/00; T-23/00; [2000] EUECJ T-23/00
21 Nov 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Carrasco Benitez v Commission (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-257,II-1169) (Judgment) T-214/99
21 Nov 2000
ECFI

European


 
Elsen (Judgment) C-135/99; [2000] EUECJ C-135/99
23 Nov 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Elsen (Rec.2000,p.I-10409) (Judgment) C-135/99
23 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
Corus UK v Commission (Rec.2000,p.I-10349) (Judgment) C-1/98
23 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
Commission v Spain (Judgment) C-421/98; [2000] EUECJ C-421/98
23 Nov 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
British Steel plc (Corus UK) v Commission of the European Communities and Others (Judgment) C-1/98; [2000] EUECJ C-1/98P
23 Nov 2000
ECJ

European
Appeal - ECSC - Commission Decision No 3855/91/ECSC (Fifth Aid Code) - Individual Commission decisions authorising State aid for steel undertakings - Competence of the Commission - Legitimate expectations.
[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v France (Rec.2000,p.I-10439) (Judgment) C-319/99
23 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
Commission v France (Rec.2000,p.I-10453) (Judgment) C-320/99
23 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
Commission v France (Judgment) C-319/99; [2000] EUECJ C-319/99
23 Nov 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Wirtschaftsvereinigung Stahl and others v Commission (Judgment) C-441/97; [2000] EUECJ C-441/97P
23 Nov 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Spain (Rec.2000,p.I-10375) (Judgment) C-421/98
23 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
Commission v France (Judgment) C-320/99; [2000] EUECJ C-320/99
23 Nov 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Elder v Commission (Rec.2000,p.II-3717) (Order) T-78/99
27 Nov 2000
ECFI

European


 
Regina v Secretary of State for Transport, ex parte Factortame (No 7) Gazette, 22 March 2001; Times, 10 January 2001; [2001] 1 WLR 942
27 Nov 2000
TCC
His Honour Judge John Toulmin Cmg Qc
Limitation, European
Breaches of articles in the European Treaty by the UK government were tortious in nature, and the appropriate limitation period for claiming was governed by section 2 (six years). The government had failed to allow European fishing vessels into its waters, and had made itself liable for damages. Once this became clear, applicants sought to add new heads of losses, and other parties sought to add their claims. They were however to be prevented from doing so, being out of time.
Limitation Act 1980 2
1 Citers


 
Regina v Secretary of State for Transport ex parte Factortame Ltd (No. 7) [2000] EWHC Technology 179; [2001] Eu LR 207; [2001] 1 WLR 942; [2001] 1 CMLR 47
27 Nov 2000
TCC
Toulmin QC J
European

[ Bailii ]
 
Roquette Freres SA v Direction des services fiscaux du Pas-de-Calais C-88/99; [2000] ECR I-10465; [2000] EUECJ C-88/99
28 Nov 2000
ECJ

European
Europa In the absence of Community rules on reimbursement of national charges levied though not due, it is for the domestic legal system of each Member State to designate the courts and tribunals having jurisdiction and to determine the procedural conditions governing legal proceedings for safeguarding rights which individuals derive from the direct effect of Community law, it being understood that such rules cannot be less favourable than those governing similar actions of a domestic nature (principle of equivalence), and may not make it impossible or excessively difficult in practice to exercise rights which national courts have a duty to protect (principle of effectiveness).
First, as regards the principle of effectiveness, the establishment of reasonable limitation periods for bringing proceedings satisfies that requirement in principle inasmuch as it constitutes an application of the fundamental principle of legal certainty. Such limitation periods cannot be regarded as rendering virtually impossible or excessively difficult the exercise of rights conferred by Community law, even if the expiry of those periods necessarily entails the dismissal, in whole or in part, of the action brought. In that respect, a national limitation period of up to a minimum of 4 years and a maximum of 5 years preceding the year of the judicial decision finding the rule of national law establishing the tax to be incompatible with a superior rule of law must be considered reasonable.
Secondly, observance of the principle of equivalence implies that the national procedure applies without distinction to actions alleging infringements of Community law and to those alleging infringements of national law, with respect to the same kind of charges or dues That principle cannot, however, be interpreted as obliging a Member State to extend its most favourable rules of limitation to all actions for repayment of charges or dues levied in breach of Community law. Thus, Community law does not in principle preclude the legislation of a Member State from laying down, alongside a limitation period applicable under the ordinary law to actions between private individuals for the recovery of sums paid but not due, special detailed rules, which are less favourable, governing claims and legal proceedings to challenge the imposition of charges and other levies. The position would be different only if those detailed rules applied solely to actions based on Community law for the repayment of such charges or levies.
It follows that Community law does not preclude legislation of a Member State laying down that, in tax matters, an action for recovery of a sum paid but not due based on a finding by a national or Community court that a national rule is not compatible with a superior rule of national law or with a Community rule of law may only relate to the period following 1 January of the fourth year preceding that of the judgment establishing such incompatibility.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Roquette Freres (Rec.2000,p.I-10465) (Judgment) C-88/99
28 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
Eurocoton and others v Council (Rec 2000,p II-3727) T-213/97; T-213/97; [2000] EUECJ T-213/97
29 Nov 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Osterreichischer Gewerkschaftsbund C-195/98; [2000] EUECJ C-195/98
30 Nov 2000
ECJ

European
ECJ Article 177 of the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) - Definition of 'court or tribunal of a Member State - Freedom of movement for persons - Equal treatment - Seniority - Part of career spent abroad
[ Bailii ]
 
HMIL (Judgment) C-436/98; [2000] EUECJ C-436/98
30 Nov 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Italy (Rec.2000,p.I-10651) (Judgment) C-422/99
30 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
HMIL (Rec.2000,p.I-10555) (Judgment) C-436/98
30 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
Commission v Belgium (Rec.2000,p.I-10633) (Judgment) C-384/99
30 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
Commission v Italy C-422/99 [2000] EUECJ C-422/99
30 Nov 2000
ECJ

European
ECJ Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Failure to implement Directive 97/51/EC
Directive 97/51/EC
[ Bailii ]

 
 Regina v The Department of Trade and Industry, ex parte Alba Radio Limited, Pifco Limted; Admn 30-Nov-2000 - [2000] EWHC Admin 423
 
Osterreichischer Gewerkschaftsbund (Rec.2000,p.I-10497) (Judgment) C-195/98
30 Nov 2000
ECJ

European


 
Commission v Belgium C-384/99; [2000] EUECJ C-384/99
30 Nov 2000
ECJ

European, Media
ECJ Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Telecommunications - Interconnection of networks - Interoperability of services - Provision of universal service
[ Bailii ]
 
Industrie des poudres spheriques v Commission T-5/97; [2000] EUECJ T-5/97
30 Nov 2000
ECFI

European
ECJ Competition - Action for annulment - Rejection of a complaint - Article 86 of the EC Treaty (now Article 82 EC)- Misuse of the anti-dumping procedure - Statement of reasons - Rights of the defence.
[ Bailii ]
 
Handelsveem Bv and Others v Coreck Maritime GmbH Times, 01 December 2000; C-387/98; [2000] ECR I-9337; [2000] EUECJ C-387/98
1 Dec 2000
ECJ

Jurisdiction, Transport, European
When a court looked at a choice of the jurisdiction clause, it was not necessary that the clause should withoutmore establish the jurisdiction. A clause could be effective where the forum will be ascertainable at the time by reference to a the circumstances. In this case of the clause required a dispute under a bill of lading to be decided in the country where the carrier had his principal place of business. The requirement under the convention, that the parties should have should of "agreed" the jurisdiction was satisfied where they had agreed a method of establishing it. The Brussels convention applied only if, first, at least one of the parties to the original contract was domiciled in the contracting state and, second, the parties agreed to submit any dispute before the Court of a contracting state.
"The Court has held that, by making the validity of a jurisdiction clause subject to the existence of an 'agreement' between the parties, article 17 of the Convention imposes on the court before which the matter is brought the duty of examining first whether the clause conferring jurisdiction upon it was in fact the subject of consensus between the parties, which must be clearly and precisely demonstrated, and that the purpose of the requirements as to form imposed by article 17 is to ensure that consensus between the parties is in fact established . . "
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Guimont (Judgment) C-448/98; [2000] EUECJ C-448/98
5 Dec 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Guimont (Rec.2000,p.I-10663) (Judgment) C-448/98
5 Dec 2000
ECJ

European


 
Gooch v Commission (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-271,II-1247) (Judgment) T-197/99
5 Dec 2000
ECFI

European


 
Eurostock (Judgment) C-477/98; [2000] EUECJ C-477/98
5 Dec 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Eurostock (Rec.2000,p.I-10695) (Judgment) C-477/98
5 Dec 2000
ECJ

European


 
Campogrande v Commission (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-267,II-1225) (Judgment) T-136/98
5 Dec 2000
ECFI

European


 
Messe Munchen v OHMI (Rec.2000,p.II-3829) (Judgment) T-32/00
5 Dec 2000
ECFI

European


 
Campogrande v Commission (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-267,II-1225) T-136/98; T-136/98; [2000] EUECJ T-136/98
5 Dec 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Gooch v Commission T-197/99; [2000] EUECJ T-197/99
5 Dec 2000
ECFI

European
Europa Officials - Action for annulment - Non-contractual liability of the Community - Place of recruitment - Withdrawal of an administrative act - Presumption of legality of an administrative act.
[ Bailii ]
 
Messe Munchen v OHMI (Rec 2000,p II-3829) T-32/00; T-32/00; [2000] EUECJ T-32/00
5 Dec 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
de Andrade (Judgment) C-213/99; [2000] EUECJ C-213/99
7 Dec 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v France (Judgment) C-38/99; [2000] EUECJ C-38/99
7 Dec 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Italy v Commission (Judgment) C-482/98; [2000] EUECJ C-482/98
7 Dec 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission of the European Communities v United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland Case C-69/99 Times, 19 December 2000; Case C-69/99; C-69/99; [2000] EUECJ C-69/99
7 Dec 2000
ECJ

European, Environment
The United Kingdom had failed to comply with the clean water directive. Its had identified surface freshwaters only where abstraction was intended for drinking water purposes. No such restriction was justified. A similar limitation had been incorrectly applied to ground-waters. The directive required identification of sources of excess nitrates, whether or not the source was intended for drinking water. The United Kingdom had also failed to designate vulnerable zones in Northern Ireland which even though they had been identified.
Europa Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Directive 91/676/EEC -Protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources - Identification of waters affected by pollution - Specifying of surface freshwaters.
Council Directive 91/676/EEC concerning the protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources (OJ 1991 I.375 pl)
[ Bailii ]

 
 Schnorbus v Land Hessen; ECJ 7-Dec-2000 - [2000] ECR I-10997; C-79/99; [2001] 1 CMLR 40; [2000] EUECJ C-79/99
 
Commission v France (Rec.2000,p.I-10941) (Judgment) C-38/99
7 Dec 2000
ECJ

European


 
Dohler (Judgment) C-2/99; [2000] EUECJ C-2/99
7 Dec 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
ARGE (Rec.2000,p.I-11037) (Judgment) C-94/99
7 Dec 2000
ECJ

European


 
Commission v Italy (Judgment) C-423/99; [2000] EUECJ C-423/99
7 Dec 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Telaustria and Telefonadress (Judgment) C-324/98; [2000] ECR I-10745; [2000] EUECJ C-324/98
7 Dec 2000
ECJ

European

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Italy (Judgment) C-395/99; [2000] EUECJ C-395/99
7 Dec 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v United Kingdom (Rec.2000,p.I-10979) (Judgment) C-69/99
7 Dec 2000
ECJ

European


 
Neste Markkinointi Oy v Yotuuli Ky and Others C-214/99; [2001] 4 CMLR 993; [2000] EUECJ C-214/99
7 Dec 2000
ECJ
Advocate-General Fennelly
European, Commercial
The court considered a petrol station agreement under which the operator of the station agreed to take fuel from a single supplier. The agreement was for 10 years and thereafter the operator could terminate the agreement by giving a year's notice. Neste acquired the supplier and after the 10-year period had expired the operator stopped purchasing fuel from Neste without giving the one-year notice. Neste recovered possession of the station and sought compensation. The operator contended that the exclusive purchasing obligation was void. Held: An exclusive purchasing agreement for fuel differs from one for other products such as beer or ice cream in that only one brand of fuel is sold in a petrol station and duration rather than the exclusivity clause was the decisive factor in the market-sealing affect. Another feature supporting a notice period of a year as reasonably protecting the interests of both parties and limiting the restrictive effect of the contract on competition in the relevant market. In those circumstances, when the contracts which might be terminated on one year's notice represented only a very small proportion of all the exclusive purchasing agreements entered into by a supplier, they made no significant contribution to the cumulative effect and so were not within Art. 81 (1). "A relatively short notice period in certain retail markets, like those for ice cream and beer where there is far greater product differentiation than in the retail petroleum-fuels supply market, could still contribute to a not insignificant degree to an overall tying-in effect flowing from a major supplier's network of agreements. However, if, at the time a dispute arises, the agreements in question give resellers a virtually unrestricted opportunity, without being subject to penalties on existing loans or any other disguised termination disincentives, to switch suppliers, it is difficult to conceive of any adverse effect on competition on the relevant market flowing from them."
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Neste (Rec.2000,p.I-11121) (Judgment) C-214/99
7 Dec 2000
ECJ

European


 
Commission v France (Judgment) C-374/98; [2000] ECR I-10799; [2000] EUECJ C-374/98
7 Dec 2000
ECJ

European, Environment, Animals
Europa The inventory of areas which are of great importance for the conservation of wild birds, more commonly known under the acronym IBA (Inventory of Important Bird Areas in the European Community), although not legally binding on the Member States concerned, contains scientific evidence making it possible to assess whether a Member State has complied with its obligation to classify as special protection areas the most suitable territories in number and size for conservation of the protected species. It follows from the general scheme of Article 4 of Directive 79/409 on the conservation of wild birds that, where a given area fulfils the criteria for classification as a special protection area, it must be made the subject of special conservation measures capable of ensuring, in particular, the survival and reproduction of the bird species mentioned in Annex I to that directive. The text of Article 7 of Directive 92/43 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora expressly states that Article 6(2) to (4) of that directive apply, in substitution for the first sentence of Article 4(4) of Directive 79/409 on the conservation of wild birds, to the areas classified under Article 4(1) or (2) of the latter directive. It follows that, on a literal interpretation of that passage of Article 7 of Directive 92/43, only areas classified as special protection areas fall under the influence of Article 6(2) to (4) of that directive. The fact that the protection regime under the first sentence of Article 4(4) of Directive 79/409 applies to areas that have not been classified as special protection areas but should have been so classified does not in itself imply that the protection regime referred to in Article 6(2) to (4) of Directive 92/43 replaces the first regime referred to in relation to those areas.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Italy (Rec.2000,p.I-11155) (Judgment) C-395/99
7 Dec 2000
ECJ

European



 
 Regina v Secretary of State for Health and Others, ex parte Imperial Tobacco Limited and others; HL 7-Dec-2000 - Times, 20 December 2000; [2000] UKHL 60; [2001] 1 All ER 850; [2001] 1 WLR 127
 
Arge Gewasserschutz v Bundesministerium Fur Land- Und Forstwirtschaft (Judgment) Times, 09 January 2001; C-94/99; [2000] EUECJ C-94/99
7 Dec 2000
ECJ

European
The receipt of a state subsidy does not operate to disqualify an organisation from tendering for contracts in the public sector. The requirement was that tendering bodies should receive equal treatment, and detailed criteria were provided to ensure this. None of those criteria would exclude a body from tendering for this reason. Complications might arise however where the body would in effect receive state aid through guarantees which might affect the tender in question.
Europa Public service contracts - Directive 92/50/EEC - Procedure for the award of public procurement contracts - Equal treatment of tenderers - Discrimination on grounds of nationality - Freedom to provide services
[ Bailii ]
 
BP Nederland and others v Commission (Rec.2000,p.II-3849) (Order) T-237/99
8 Dec 2000
ECFI

European


 
BP Nederland and others v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-3849) T-237/99; T-237/99; [2000] EUECJ T-237/99
8 Dec 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Sissen Times, 09 January 2001; Gazette, 01 February 2001; [2000] EWCA Crim 67
8 Dec 2000
CACD

European, Animals, Crime
The fact that some parrots, the breed of which was subject to import controls as endangered species, had been imported into Austria first, did not prevent a defendant in England committing the offence of being involved in their importation by eventually receiving them in England. The offence was a continuing one. Council regulations had direct effect in member states without the need for enacting legislation. The English Act referred to such regulations directly.
Council Regulation (EEC) No 3626/82 (OJ) - Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 170(2)(b)
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Hautem v EIB T-11/00; T-11/00; [2000] EUECJ T-11/00
12 Dec 2000
ECFI

European
ECJ Officials - Removal from post - Failure to comply with a judgment annulling a decision - Article 233 EC - Non-contractual liability of the Community - Non-material damage - Compensation.
[ Bailii ]
 
Aeroports de Paris v Commission T-128/98; [2000] ECR II-3929; [2000] EUECJ T-128/98
12 Dec 2000
ECFI

European
ECJ Competition - Air transport - Airport management - Applicable regulation - Regulation No 17 and Regulation (EEC) No 3975/87 - Abuse of dominant position - Discriminatory fees.
The burden on Aéroports de Paris to justify the reasons for and correctness of the differences in the rates of fees applied to different ground handlers operating at Orly and Roissy-CDG airports.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Royal Olympic Cruises and others v Council and Commission T-201/99; [2000] EUECJ T-201/99
12 Dec 2000
ECFI

European
ECJ Non-contractual liability of the Community - Damage caused by the military intervention in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia - Action manifestly unfounded in law.
[ Bailii ]
 
Alitalia v Commission T-296/97; [2000] EUECJ T-296/97
12 Dec 2000
ECFI

European
ECJ According to the actual wording of the fifth paragraph of Article 173 of the Treaty (now, after amendment, the fifth paragraph of Article 230 EC), the criterion of the day on which a measure came to the knowledge of an applicant, as the starting point for the period prescribed for instituting proceedings, is subsidiary to the criteria of publication or notification of the measure.
Since the contested decision, which was not notified to the applicant, was published, it is the date of publication that started the period running.
A capital contribution from public funds satisfies the test of a private investor operating in the normal conditions of a market economy and does not imply the grant of State aid if, inter alia, it was made at the same time as a significant capital contribution on the part of a private investor made in comparable circumstances.
The employees' participation in an undertaking's capital, in the form of consent to a change in salary in return for shares in the undertaking corresponding to the annual saving in labour costs, does not in itself show that the capital contribution in the form of public funds satisfies the private investor test. The conduct of a private investor in a market economy is guided by prospects of profitability, whereas such participation on the part of employees is motivated by the desire to keep their jobs and therefore, above all, by considerations pertaining to the undertaking's viability and survival rather than by prospects of profitability.
In the context of an action for annulment under Article 173 of the Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 230 EC), the legality of a Community measure must be assessed on the basis of the elements of fact and of law existing at the time when the measure was adopted. In particular, the complex assessments made by the Commission must be examined solely on the basis of the information available to the Commission at the time when those assessments were made.

The assessment by the Commission of the question whether an investment satisfies the private investor test involves a complex economic appraisal. When the Commission adopts a measure involving such a complex economic appraisal, it enjoys a wide discretion and judicial review of that measure, even though it is in principle a comprehensive review as to whether a measure falls within the scope of Article 92(1) of the Treaty (now Article 87(1) EC), is limited to verifying whether the Commission complied with the relevant rules governing procedure and the statement of reasons, whether the facts on which the contested finding was based have been accurately stated and whether there has been any manifest error of assessment or a misuse of powers. In particular, the Court is not entitled to substitute its own economic assessment for that of the author of the decision.
Even though the Commission is not required to answer all the arguments put forward during the administrative procedure by a company which, as a beneficiary of the contested aid measure, is an interested party for the purposes of Article 93(2) of the Treaty (now Article 88(2) EC), it is none the less required to provide in its decision an adequate statement of the reasons why the essential arguments of such a party cannot be upheld.
Therefore, having regard to the fact that a decision was the only precedent for the Commission's practice when taking decisions on the calculation of the minimum rate for an investment by the public authorities in an airline, it must be held that the interested party's argument that its situation must be distinguished from that of the company in respect of which the previous decision was taken formed an essential part of its case that the investment from public funds satisfied the private investor test. In those circumstances, the Commission was required to answer that argument in the contested decision, failing which it failed to fulfil its obligation to state reasons.
[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Portugal C-435/99; [2000] EUECJ C-435/99
12 Dec 2000
ECJ

European
ECJ Failure of Member State to fulfil its obligations - Failure to transpose Directives 76/464/EEC, 78/176/EEC, 78/659/EEC, 80/68/EEC, 82/176/EEC, 83/513/EEC, 84/156/EEC, 84/491/EEC and 86/280/EEC
[ Bailii ]
 
Dejaiffe v OHMI T-223/99; [2000] EUECJ T-223/99
12 Dec 2000
ECFI

European
Members of the temporary staff - Early termination of a fixed-term contract of employment of a member of the temporary staff - Interests of the service - Manifest error of assessment - Misuse of powers - Non-contractual liability of the Community.
[ Bailii ]
 
F v Parliament T-110/99
13 Dec 2000
ECFI

European


 
DSTV v Commission T-69/99; [2000] EUECJ T-69/99
13 Dec 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Panichelli v Parliament T-130/98; [2000] EUECJ T-130/98
13 Dec 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Verheyden v Commission (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-297,II-1355) T-213/99; T-213/99; [2000] EUECJ T-213/99
14 Dec 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Ireland (Judgment) C-347/99; [2000] EUECJ C-347/99
14 Dec 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Dior and others (Judgment) C-300/98; [2000] EUECJ C-300/98
14 Dec 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Greece (Judgment) C-457/98; [2000] EUECJ C-457/98
14 Dec 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
CCRE v Commission (Rec.2000,p.II-4099) (Judgment) T-105/99
14 Dec 2000
ECFI

European


 
Fazenda Publica (Judgment) C-446/98; [2000] EUECJ C-446/98
14 Dec 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Ufex and others v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-4055) T-613/97; [2006] EUECJ T-613/97; [2000] EUECJ T-613/97
14 Dec 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Nederlandse Federatieve Vereniging voor de Groothandel op Elektrotechnisch Gebied v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-4121) T-5/00; [2003] EUECJ T-5/00; T-5/00
14 Dec 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Verheyden v Commission (Rec.2000,p.FP-IA-297,II-1355) (Judgment) T-213/99
14 Dec 2000
ECFI

European


 
Commission v France (Judgment) C-55/99; [2000] EUECJ C-55/99
14 Dec 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Germany v Commission (Judgment) C-245/97; [2000] EUECJ C-245/97
14 Dec 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
AMID (Judgment) C-141/99; [2000] EUECJ C-141/99
14 Dec 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Emsland-Starke GmbH v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas C-110/99; [2000] ECR I-11569; [2000] EUECJ C-110/99
14 Dec 2000
ECJ
G.C. Rodriguez Iglesias, P
European, VAT, Agriculture
ECJ Articles 9(1), 10(1) and 20(2) to (6) of Regulation No 2730/79 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of export refunds on agricultural products, in the version resulting from Regulation No 568/85, must be interpreted as meaning that a Community exporter can forfeit his right to payment of a non-differentiated export refund if (a) the product in respect of which the export refund was paid, and which is sold to a purchaser established in a non-member country, is, immediately after its release for home use in that non-member country, transported back to the Community under the external Community transit procedure and is there released for home use on payment of import duties, without any infringement being established and (b) that operation constitutes an abuse on the part of that Community exporter. A finding that there is an abuse presupposes an intention on the part of the Community exporter to benefit from an advantage as a result of the application of the Community rules by artificially creating the conditions for obtaining it. Evidence of this must be placed before the national court in accordance with the rules of national law, for instance by establishing that there was collusion between that exporter and the importer of the goods into the non-member country. The fact that, before being re-imported into the Community, the product was sold by the purchaser established in the non-member country concerned to an undertaking also established in that country with which he has personal and commercial links is one of the facts which can be taken into account by the national court when ascertaining whether the conditions giving rise to an obligation to repay refunds are fulfilled.
The exporter was refused a rebate of duty to which he was entitled on the face of the relevant Commission Regulation upon the export of his goods, because he had abused the law by claiming it in respect of goods which had been exported to a third country only to be at once re-imported into the country of origin. The court held at para 59 that:
"a finding that there has been an abuse presupposes an intention on the part of the Community exporter to benefit from an advantage as a result of the application of the Community rules by artificially creating the conditions for obtaining it."
The essential reason why the trading scheme failed was that the choice of a circular supply route did not involve a choice between different methods of achieving the trader's commercial purpose. It had no commercial purpose other than the avoidance of tax.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Italy v Commission (Judgment) C-99/99; [2000] EUECJ C-99/99
14 Dec 2000
ECJ

European

[ Bailii ]
 
M v Commission (Rec 2000,p FP-IA-301,II-1367) T-352/99; T-352/99; [2000] EUECJ T-352/99
14 Dec 2000
ECFI

European

[ Bailii ]
 
Galileo and Galileo International v Council (Rec.2000,p.II-4141) (Order) T-113/99
15 Dec 2000
ECFI

European


 
Cho Yang Shipping Co Ltd v Commission of the European Communities C-361/00
15 Dec 2000
ECJ

European
ECJ Order - Proceedings for interim relief - Competition - Payment of fine - Bank guarantee.

 
Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Century Life Plc [2000] EWCA Civ 336; [2001] STC 38
19 Dec 2000
CA
The President Lord Justice Kennedy And Mr Justice Jacob
VAT, European
The Directive required member states to exempt from VAT, services involving the provision of insurance, and for intermediaries. Following the Regulator's involvement, the principal company had to arrange for the checking of existing policies, and the implementation of compensation arrangements, and sub-contracted it to the taxpayer. Had the principal privided the services itself, it would have had exemption. They claimed exemption. The Act did not reflect, it was claimed, the Directive it implemented. Held: The Act did implement the Directive correctly, albeit in more complicated language. The activity was exempt. Appeal dismissed.
VAT Act 1994 S9 G2 P4 - Sixth Directive (77/388/EEC) 13B
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Iman Abouzaid v Mothercare (Uk) Ltd Times, 20 February 2001; [2000] EWCA Civ 348
21 Dec 2000
CA
Lord Justice Pill Lord Justice Chadwick And Mr Justice Wright
Consumer, Negligence, Personal Injury, European
The defendant appealed a finding of liability under the Act. The plaintiff had hurt his eye assisting with a pushchair sold by the defendant. An elastic strap had rebounded into his eye. It was argued that the English Act went wider than the Directive in implementing it. Was the strap a defect within the Act? Held: The statute must be interpreted "in the light of the wording and the purpose of the Directive so as to achieve the result which it has in view. The design permitted the risk to arise, and the product was defective: "though the case is close to the borderline, the product was defective within the meaning of the Act. The risk is in losing control of an elastic strap at a time when it is stretched and eyes are in the line of recoil. The product was defective because it was supplied with a design which permitted the risk to arise and without giving a warning that the user should not so position himself that the risk arose. Members of the public were entitled to expect better from the appellants. A factor in that expectation is the vulnerability of the eye and the serious consequences which may follow from a blunt injury to the eye. "
Consumer Protection Act 1987 2(1) - Council Directive 85/374/EEC Art 6
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.