Unnamed: 0
int64 0
869k
| 0
stringlengths 36
32.8k
⌀ | 1
stringlengths 8
29.9k
| 2
int64 0
1
|
|---|---|---|---|
867,900 | 62. À cet égard, il résulte d’une jurisprudence constante que la Commission peut, dans l’exercice des compétences dont elle dispose en vertu des articles 87 CE et 88 CE, arrêter des lignes directrices qui ont pour objet d’indiquer la manière dont elle entend exercer, au titre des mêmes articles, son pouvoir d’appréciation à l’égard d’aides nouvelles ou à l’égard de régimes d’aides existants (arrêt du 18 juin 2002, Allemagne/Commission, C‑242/00, Rec. p. I‑5603, point 27). | 35
Moreover, the Court has also held that the fact that a measure of EU law has no binding effect does not preclude the Court from ruling on its interpretation in proceedings for a preliminary ruling under Article 267 TFEU (judgment of 21 January 1993, Deutsche Shell, C‑188/91, EU:C:1993:24, paragraph 18). | 0 |
867,901 | 37
Although the principle of equal treatment and the obligation of transparency must be guaranteed even in regard to specific public contracts, this does not mean that the particular aspects of those contracts cannot be taken into account. That legal imperative and that practical necessity are reconciled, first, through strict compliance with the conditions of a contract as they were laid down in the contract documents up to the end of the implementation phase of that contract, but also, second, through the possibility of making express provision, in those documents, for the option for the contracting authority to adjust certain conditions, even material ones, of that contract after it has been awarded. By expressly providing for that option and setting the rules for the application thereof in those documents, the contracting authority ensures that all economic operators interested in participating in the procurement procedure are aware of that possibility from the outset and are therefore on an equal footing when formulating their respective tenders (see, by analogy, judgment of 29 April 2004, Commission v CAS Succhi di Frutta, C‑496/99 P, EU:C:2004:236, paragraphs 112, 115, 117 and 118). | 55
Secondly, in accordance with the Court’s settled case-law, the objective of Directive 2003/4 is to ensure a general principle of access to environmental information held by or for public authorities and, as is apparent from recital 9 and Article 1 of that directive, to achieve the widest possible systematic availability and dissemination to the public of environmental information (see, inter alia, judgment of 19 December 2013, Fish Legal and Shirley, C‑279/12, EU:C:2013:853, paragraph 66). | 0 |
867,902 | 35. À titre liminaire, il convient de rappeler que, en devenant partie à la convention d’Aarhus, l’Union européenne s’est engagée à assurer, dans le champ d’application du droit de l’Union, un accès de principe aux informations sur l’environnement détenues par les autorités publiques ou pour le compte de celles-ci (voir, en ce sens, arrêts du 22 décembre 2010, Ville de Lyon, C‑524/09, Rec. p. I‑14115, point 36, et du 14 février 2012, Flachglas Torgau, C‑204/09, point 30). | 43 It should be pointed out in this respect that Community legislation must be certain and its application foreseeable by those subject to it (see, to that effect, Case 325/85 Ireland v Commission [1987] ECR 5041, paragraph 18). | 0 |
867,903 | 26. The Court has held that, in order to ensure the neutrality of VAT, it is for the Member States to provide, in their domestic legal systems, for the possibility of adjusting any tax improperly invoiced where the person who issued the invoice shows that he acted in good faith (see Case C‑342/87 Genius [1989] ECR 4227, paragraph 18, and Stadeco , paragraph 36). | 51. In particular, the fact that Nestlé concerned the acquisition of distinctive character by a mark which it was sought to register, whereas the present case concerns establishing whether an earlier mark has a particularly distinctive character in order to ascertain whether there is a likelihood of confusion within the meaning of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 40/94, does not, as the Advocate General pointed out in point 51 of her Opinion, justify any difference of approach. | 0 |
867,904 | 49. Such an interpretation would render Decision No 1/80 meaningless and deprive it of any practical effect, since the wording of Article 6(1) of that decision is general and unconditional in that it does not permit the Member States to restrict the rights which that provision confers directly on Turkish workers ( Unal , paragraphs 43 and 44 and the case‑law cited). | 36
As such, a transaction providing property in lieu of payment, the purpose of which is to discharge a tax debt, cannot be considered to be a transaction effected for consideration within the meaning of Article 2(1)(a) of the VAT Directive, and cannot be subject to VAT. | 0 |
867,905 | 24 Furthermore, where a Member State, when implementing a Commission decision relating to State aid, encounters unforeseen and unforeseeable difficulties or becomes aware of consequences not contemplated by the Commission, it must submit those problems for consideration by the Commission, together with proposals for suitable amendments to the decision in question. In such a case the Commission and the Member State concerned must respect the principle underlying Article 5 of the EC Treaty (now Article 10 EC), which imposes a duty of genuine cooperation on the Member States and the Community institutions, and must work together in good faith with a view to overcoming difficulties whilst fully observing the Treaty provisions, and in particular the provisions on aid (see, in particular, Case 94/87 Commission v Germany [1989] ECR 175, paragraph 9, and Commission v Portugal, cited above, paragraph 40). | 49 Consequently, prostitution is a provision of services for remuneration which, as indicated in paragraph 33 above, falls within the concept of economic activities. | 0 |
867,906 | 65. In that regard, in order to determine which establishments should be ‘recognised’ under that provision, the national authorities should, in accordance with European Union law and subject to review by the national courts, take into consideration a number of factors, which include the public interest of the activities of the taxable person in question, the fact that other taxable persons carrying on the same activities already have similar recognition, and the fact that the costs incurred for the treatment in question may be largely met by health insurance schemes or other social security bodies (see, to that effect, Kügler , paragraphs 57 and 58; Dornier , paragraphs 72 and 73; and L.u.P. , paragraph 53). | 125. À cet égard, il importe de constater que l’application des lignes directrices de 1998 à l’encontre des régimes fiscaux litigieux adoptés en 1993 ne constitue pas une situation acquise antérieurement, mais relève d’une situation en cours qui, bien que née avant l’entrée en vigueur de celles-ci, est régie par lesdites lignes directrices à compter de leur entrée en vigueur, conformément au principe selon lequel les règles nouvelles s’appliquent immédiatement aux situations en cours (voir arrêt du 29 janvier 2002, Pokrzeptowicz-Meyer, C-162/00, Rec. p. I-1049, point 51). | 0 |
867,907 | 18 It follows that the owner of a trade mark protected by the legislation of a Member State cannot rely on that legislation in order to oppose the importation or marketing of a product which was put on the market in another Member State by him or with his consent (see, in particular, Case 16/74 Centrafarm v Winthrop [1974] ECR 1183, paragraphs 7 to 11; HAG II, paragraph 12; and IHT Internationale Heiztechnik, paragraphs 33 and 34). | 11 IN FACT, IF A TRADE MARK OWNER COULD PREVENT THE IMPORT OF PROTECTED PRODUCTS MARKETED BY HIM OR WITH HIS CONSENT IN ANOTHER MEMBER STATE, HE WOULD BE ABLE TO PARTITION OFF NATIONAL MARKETS AND THEREBY RESTRICT TRADE BETWEEN MEMBER STATES, IN A SITUATION WHERE NO SUCH RESTRICTION WAS NECESSARY TO GUARANTEE THE ESSENCE OF THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT FLOWING FROM THE TRADE MARK . | 1 |
867,908 | 69 In accordance with the case-law of the Court (see Case 104/80 Beeck [1981] ECR 503, paragraphs 7 and 8, Case C-78/91 Hughes [1992] ECR I-4839, paragraph 28, and Hoever and Zachow, cited above, paragraph 38), that provision is also applicable to a worker who lives with his family in a Member State other than the one whose legislation is applicable to him. | 22. Il convient toutefois de relever que, en matière d’obligation d’évaluation des incidences sur l’environnement, la directive 85/337 a un champ d’application étendu et un objectif large (voir arrêts du 24 octobre 1996, Kraaijeveld e.a., C‑72/95, Rec. p. I‑5403, points 31 et 39; du 10 décembre 2009, Umweltanwalt von Kärnten, C‑205/08, Rec. p. I‑11525, point 50, et du 24 novembre 2011, Commission/Espagne, C‑404/09, Rec. p. I‑11853, point 79). En particulier, cette directive s’attache à une appréciation globale des incidences des projets sur l’environnement (voir arrêts du 25 juillet 2008, Ecologistas en Acción‑CODA, C‑142/07, Rec. p. I‑6097, point 39, et Umweltanwalt von Kärnten, précité, point 51). | 0 |
867,909 | 152. Where, as in the present case, a decision taken in application of the EU competition law rules relates to several addressees and raises a problem with regard to the imputability of the infringement, it must include an adequate statement of reasons with respect to each of its addressees, in particular those of them who, according to the decision, must bear the liability for the infringement. Accordingly, in respect of a parent company held jointly and severally liable for the infringement committed by its subsidiary, such a decision must in principle contain a detailed statement of reasons for imputing the infringement to that company (see, by analogy, Case C‑196/99 P Aristrain v Commission [2003] ECR I‑11005, paragraphs 93 to 101). | 66IT WAS THEREFORE WITH GOOD REASON THAT , IN ANNEX VI TO THE HAGUE RESOLUTION , AFTER STATING THAT IN PRINCIPLE THE MEMBER STATES WOULD NOT TAKE ANY UNILATERAL MEASURES PENDING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMUNITY MEASURES , THE COUNCIL RECOGNIZED THAT SUCH MEASURES COULD BE ADOPTED , ON AN INTERIM BASIS , IF NO COMMUNITY MEASURES HAD BEEN ADOPTED IN TIME .
| 0 |
867,910 | 41. In that regard, it should be recalled that the preservation of the balanced allocation between Member States of the power to tax is a legitimate objective recognised by the Court (see judgment in C‑371/10, National Grid Indus , EU:C:2011:785, paragraph 45 and the case-law cited), since it may be accepted as a justification for a restriction, in particular, where the system in question is designed to prevent conduct capable of jeopardising the right of a Member State to exercise its fiscal jurisdiction in relation to activities carried out in its territory (see, in particular, judgments in Santander Asset Management SGIIC and Others , EU:C:2012:286, paragraph 47, and C‑350/11 Argenta Spaarbank , EU:C:2013:447, paragraph 53 and the case-law cited). | 18. It follows that the indirect nature of the services, resulting from the fact that they were supplied and invoiced by a first supplier to an undertaking, which was itself commissioned to perform advertising services, before being invoiced by that undertaking to the advertiser, does not constitute an obstacle to the application of Article 9(2)(e) of the Sixth Directive.
The second part of thequestion | 0 |
867,911 | 24
Moreover, as regards proof, it must be emphasised that although, as observed in paragraph 19 of this judgment, Article 4 of Directive 85/374 provides that the victim has the burden of proof, neither Article 4 nor any other provision of that directive addresses the other aspects relating to how that proof is to be made out (see, to that effect, judgment of 20 November 2014, Novo Nordisk Pharma, C‑310/13, EU:C:2014:2385, paragraphs 25 to 29). | 26. As regards the fact that, in accordance with Article 4 of Directive 85/374, it is for the injured person to prove ‘the damage, the defect and the causal relationship between defect and damage’, it must be ascertained whether a statutory right to information, provided for under the legislation of a Member State, is capable of undermining the allocation of the burden of proof as delimited in that provision by the EU legislature. | 1 |
867,912 | 37. In accordance with the Court’s case-law, the purpose of the rule that the addressee of an adverse decision must be placed in a position to submit his observations before that decision is adopted is to enable the competent authority effectively to take into account all relevant information. In order to ensure that the person concerned is in fact protected, the purpose of that rule is, inter alia, to enable that person to correct an error or submit such information relating to his or her personal circumstances as will argue in favour of the adoption or non-adoption of the decision, or in favour of its having a specific content (see the judgments in Sopropé , C‑349/07, EU:C:2008:746, paragraph 49, and Mukarubega , EU:C:2014:2336, paragraph 47). | 41. If the Member States were free to conclude international agreements affecting the common rules, that would compromise the attainment of the objective pursued by those rules as well as the Community’s tasks and the objectives of the Treaty. | 0 |
867,913 | 26. As to those submissions, it is not for the Court of Justice, given the allocation of functions between itself and the national courts, to determine whether the decision to refer has been taken in accordance with the rules of national law governing the organisation of courts and their procedure (see Joined Cases C-332/92, C-333/92 and C-335/92 Eurico Italia and Others [1994] ECR I-711, paragraph 13, Case C‑435/97 WWF and Others [1999] ECR I-5613, paragraph 33, and Case C-371/97 Gozza and Others [2000] ECR I-7881, paragraph 30). The Court must abide by the decision from a court of a Member State requesting a preliminary ruling in so far as it has not been overturned in any appeal procedures provided for by national law (Case 65/81 Reina [1982] ECR 33, paragraph 7). | 22 As regards the question of the commencement of the "period of 24 hours" referred to in Article 8(1) of Regulation No 3820/85, it should be borne in mind that that regulation is intended in particular to ensure road safety and to improve working conditions for drivers. | 0 |
867,914 | 40. As a consequence, Article 8(3) of Decision 2005/387 must be interpreted, in accordance with Article 39(1) EU, as permitting the Council to adopt an act for the purpose of submitting a new psychoactive substance to control measures only after it has consulted the Parliament (judgment in Parliament v Council , C‑317/13 and C‑679/13, EU:C:2015:223, paragraph 50). | 43 The Court went on to hold that the wording of Articles 8 and 9 of Directive 83/189 was clear in that they provide a procedure for Community control of draft national regulations, the date of their entry into force being subject to the Commission's agreement or lack of opposition. | 0 |
867,915 | 48. On that point, it should be borne in mind that, according to settled case‑law, the possibility of imposing a fine on the parent company of a subsidiary which has directly participated in an infringement of EU competition law presupposes that the subsidiary does not decide independently upon its own conduct on the market, but carries out, in all material respects, the instructions given to it by the parent company, regard being had in particular to the economic, organisational and legal links between those two legal entities, and that that is so because, in such a situation, the parent company and its subsidiary form a single economic unit and accordingly form a single undertaking for the purposes of the case-law (see, inter alia, Akzo Nobel and Others v Commission , paragraphs 58 and 59 and the case-law cited). | 63. Or, il est de jurisprudence constante que l’application des règlements de l’Union ne saurait être étendue jusqu’à couvrir des pratiques abusives d’opérateurs économiques (arrêts du 11 octobre 1977, Cremer, 125/76, Rec. p. 1593, point 21, et du 11 janvier 2007, Vonk Dairy Products, C‑279/05, Rec. p. I‑239, point 31). | 0 |
867,916 | 29. Secondly, it must be borne in mind that it is settled case-law that a judgment in which the Court gives a preliminary ruling is binding on the national court, as regards the interpretation or the validity of the acts of the European Union institutions in question, for the purposes of the decision to be given in the main proceedings (see, inter alia, Case 29/68 Milch-, Fett- und Eierkontor [1969] ECR 165, paragraph 3; Case 52/76 Benedetti v Munari [1977] ECR 163, paragraph 26; order in Case 69/85 Wünsche Handelsgesellschaft [1986] ECR 947, paragraph 13; and Case C‑446/98 Fazenda Pública [2000] ECR I‑11435, paragraph 49). | 38 In the light of the foregoing, the answer to the first part of the first question must be that pensions provided under a scheme such as the French retirement scheme for civil servants fall within the scope of Article 119 of the Treaty.
The second part of the question
The existence of a difference in treatment on grounds of sex | 0 |
867,917 | 34 The preliminary stage provided for in Article 93(3) of the Treaty is intended merely to allow the Commission a sufficient period of time for reflection and investigation so that it can form a prima facie opinion on the draft aid plans notified to it, thus enabling it either to conclude, without the need for detailed examination, that the aid is compatible with the common market or, by contrast, to make a finding that the content of those plans raises doubts as to that compatibility (see, to that effect, Case C-99/98 Austria v Commission [2001] ECR I-1101, paragraphs 53 and 54). | 8 DE TELS ACTES NE PRODUISANT D' EFFETS JURIDIQUES QUE DANS LA SPHERE INTERNE DE L' ADMINISTRATION, ILS NE CREENT PAS DE DROITS OU D' OBLIGATIONS DANS LE CHEF DE TIERS . ILS NE CONSTITUENT DONC PAS DES DECISIONS FAISANT GRIEF . LE RECOURS DOIT EN CONSEQUENCE ETRE REJETE COMME IRRECEVABLE . | 0 |
867,918 | 41. On that point, it is common ground that protection of the environment constitutes one of the essential objectives of the Community (see Case 240/83 ADBHU [1985] ECR 531, paragraph 13, Case 302/86 Commission v Denmark [1988] ECR 4607, paragraph 8, Case C‑213/96 Outokumpu [1998] ECR I‑1777, paragraph 32). In that regard, Article 2 EC states that the Community has as its task to promote ‘a high level of protection and improvement of the quality of the environment’ and, to that end, Article 3(1)(l) EC provides for the establishment of a ‘policy in the sphere of the environment’. | 43. Accordingly, the Austrian legislation must be regarded as having existed on 31 December 1993 for the purposes of Article 57(1) EC. | 0 |
867,919 | 30. It is to be remembered that the basic principle of VAT is that it is a consumption tax designed to be borne only by the final consumer. VAT is precisely proportional to the price of the goods and services and it is collected by taxable persons at each stage of the production or distribution process on behalf of the tax authorities, to which they are required to pay it. In accordance with the basic principle of that system and the detailed rules for its operation, the VAT to be levied by the tax authorities must be equal to the tax actually collected from the final consumer (see, to this effect, Case C-317/94 Elida Gibbs [1996] ECR I‑5339, paragraphs 18 to 24). The conditions governing the application of the special scheme established by Article 26 of the Sixth Directive for travel agents and tour operators when the taxable person supplies to the traveller in return for a package price both services bought in from third parties and in-house services should not call into question that basic principle of the VAT system. | 39. For the sake of completeness, it must be noted that, as recitals 3, 21 and 24 in the preamble to Regulation No 1782/2003 make clear, environmental protection forms part of the objectives of the single payment scheme. The Court has also held that environmental protection, one of the essential objectives of the European Union, must be regarded as forming part of the common agricultural policy (Case C-428/07 Horvath [2009] ECR I-6355, paragraph 29). Moreover, Article 2 point (1) of Regulation No 796/2004 expressly provides that arable land, and consequently agricultural areas pursuant to Article 2(a) of Regulation No 795/2004, is land maintained in good agricultural and environmental condition within the meaning of Article 5 of Regulation No 1782/2003. | 0 |
867,920 | 67. It is for the referring court to ascertain in particular whether, in circumstances such as those set out in the preceding paragraph, those with legal standing to bring proceedings might be so reluctant to assert their rights under the national rules transposing Directive 2000/78 that the rules on sanctions adopted in order to transpose that directive are not genuinely dissuasive (see, by analogy, Draehmpaehl , paragraph 40). Regarding the dissuasive effect of the sanction, the referring court may also take account, where appropriate, of any repeat offences of the defendant concerned. | 36 It is only when a worker no longer has any link with the competent Member State and is wholly unemployed that he must apply to the institution of his place of residence for assistance in finding employment. | 0 |
867,921 | 64. As regards whether, as the Commission claims, the General Court ought in any event to have annulled Article 1 of the contested decision in part in respect of the respondents since the undertaking concerned participated in a constituent element of the single, complex and continuous infringement, namely the FNAS meetings, the Court of Justice has previously held that partial annulment of an act of European Union law is possible only if the elements which it is sought to have annulled can be severed from the remainder of the act (see Commission v Verhuizingen Coppens , paragraph 38 and the case-law cited). | 20. By way of derogation from that obligation, the second subparagraph of Article 2(1) provides that certain persons may be excluded from compensation by the insurer, having regard to the situation they have themselves brought about (persons entering a vehicle which they know to have been stolen) ( Ruiz Bernáldez , para graph 21). | 0 |
867,922 | 39. Further, it is also settled case‑law that the meaning and scope of terms for which European Union law provides no definition must be determined by considering their usual meaning in everyday language, while also taking into account the context in which they occur and the purposes of the rules of which they form part (see to that effect, inter alia, Case C‑336/03 easyCar [2005] ECR I‑1947, paragraph 21; Case C‑549/07 Wallentin-Hermann [2008] ECR I‑11061, paragraph 17; and Case C‑556/07 Commission v France [2009] ECR I‑0025 (summary publication), paragraph 50). | 63
However, as the Advocate General also observed at point 107 of his Opinion, while those provisions of the Framework Decision leave no discretion as to the grounds for non-execution other than set out in those provisions, the fact nevertheless remains that those provisions are based on the premiss that the European arrest warrant concerned will satisfy the requirements as to the lawfulness of that warrant laid down in Article 8(1) of the Framework Decision. | 0 |
867,923 | 83. It is also settled case-law that the first paragraph of Article 45 EC is an exception to the fundamental rule of freedom of establishment. As such, the exception must be interpreted in a manner which limits its scope to what is strictly necessary to safeguard the interests it allows the Member States to protect ( Commission v Greece , paragraph 7; Commission v Spain , paragraph 34; Case C‑451/03 Servizi Ausiliari Dottori Commercialisti [2006] ECR I‑2941, paragraph 45; Case C‑393/05 Commission v Austria [2007] ECR I‑10195, paragraph 35; Case C‑404/05 Commission v Germany [2007] ECR I‑10239, paragraphs 37 and 46; and Commission v Portugal , paragraph 34). | 26 Furthermore, the imposition of a penalty on a trader presupposes that he has just been granted a right. Since that right relates to a scheme of Community aid paid out of public funds and based on the notion of solidarity, it must be subject to the condition that the beneficiary offers all guarantees of probity and trustworthiness. From that point of view the contested penalty constitutes a specific administrative instrument forming an integral part of the scheme of aid and intended to ensure the sound financial management of the Community public funds. | 0 |
867,924 | 16. The aim of the provisions of Title II of Regulation No 1408/71, which determine the legislation applicable to workers moving within the Community, is to ensure that the persons concerned shall be subject to the social security scheme of only one Member State in order to prevent more than one system of national legislation from being applicable and to avoid the complications which may result from that situation. That principle is expressed in Article 13(1) of Regulation No 1408/71 which provides that a worker to whom that legislation applies shall be subject to the legislation of a single Member State only (see Case 302/84 Ten Holder [1986] ECR 1821, paragraphs 19 and 20). | 30. La Cour a également précisé que, dès l’acquittement d’une taxe d’immatriculation dans un État membre, le montant de cette taxe s’incorpore dans la valeur du véhicule. Ainsi, lorsqu’un véhicule immatriculé dans l’État membre concerné est, par la suite, vendu en tant que véhicule d’occasion dans ce même État membre, sa valeur marchande comprend le montant résiduel de la taxe d’immatriculation et sera égale à un pourcentage, déterminé par la dépréciation de ce véhicule, de sa valeur initiale (arrêt du 5 octobre 2006, Nádasdi et Németh, C‑290/05 et C‑333/05, Rec. p. I‑10115, point 54). | 0 |
867,925 | 45. As the Court has observed, the Regulation is designed not to establish uniform proceedings on insolvency, but, as is apparent from recital 2 in the preamble thereto, to ensure that cross-border insolvency proceedings operate efficiently and effectively ( Eurofood IFSC , paragraph 48). To that end, it lays down rules on recognition and jurisdiction as well as rules on the applicable law in that area. | 44. The Community legislature has a wide discretion in the domain, corresponding to the political responsibilities given to it by Articles 34 EC to 37 EC. Consequently, judicial review by the Community Court must be limited to verifying that the measure in question is not vitiated by any manifest error or misuse of powers and that the authority concerned has not manifestly exceeded the limits of its discretion (see, to that effect, Case C‑304/01 Spain v Commission [2004] ECR I‑7655, paragraph 23, and Case C‑310/04 Spain v Council [2006] ECR I‑7285, paragraph 96). | 0 |
867,926 | 32. Nevertheless, it emerges from the documents before the Court, which include the decision of the Verfassungsgerichtshof referred to in paragraph 24 above, that the obligation to apply to that court for the general striking down of statutes does not affect the right of the ordinary courts, as expressed by the Verfassungsgerichtshof in wording borrowed from the judgment of the Court of Justice in Melki and Abdeli (C‑188/10 and C‑189/10, EU:C:2010:363, paragraph 57), to refer to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling, at whatever stage of the proceedings they consider appropriate, even at the end of the interlocutory procedure for the review of constitutionality, any question which they consider necessary; to adopt any measure necessary to ensure provisional judicial protection; and to disapply, at the end of such an interlocutory procedure, a national legislative provision contrary to EU law. In that regard, the Verfassungsgerichtshof considers it important, as can be seen from paragraph 42 of its judgment, that the Court should not be deprived of the possibility of reviewing EU secondary legislation in the light of primary law and the Charter. | 33. Par ailleurs, la Cour a itérativement jugé qu’un État membre ne saurait justifier l’inexécution des obligations qui lui incombent en vertu du traité FUE par la circonstance que d’autres États membres auraient manqué et manqueraient également à leurs obligations (voir, notamment, arrêts du 9 juillet 1991, Commission/Royaume-Uni, C‑146/89, Rec. p. I‑3533, point 47, et du 15 juillet 2004, Commission/Allemagne, C‑139/03, point 8). | 0 |
867,927 | 43 Unlike the national courts, the Commission cannot order State aid to be repaid solely on the ground that it has not been notified in accordance with Article 93(3) of the Treaty (see "Boussac", cited above, paragraphs 19 to 22, Case C-142/87 Belgium v Commission [1990] ECR I-959, paragraphs 15 to 20 and Case C-354/90 FNCE, cited above, paragraph 13). First it must, after giving the Member State in question an opportunity to submit its comments on the matter, issue an interim decision requiring it to suspend immediately the payment of aid pending the outcome of the examination of the aid and to provide the Commission, within such period as it may specify, with all such documentation, information and data as are necessary in order that it may examine the compatibility of the aid with the common market. It is only if the Member State, notwithstanding the Commission' s order, fails to provide the information requested that the Commission is empowered to terminate the procedure and make its decision, on the basis of the information available to it, on the question whether or not the aid is compatible with the common market and, if appropriate, call for the recovery of the amount of aid which has already been paid ("Boussac", cited above, paragraphs 19 and 21). | 39 As regards the draft national law, the Court has consistently held that in proceedings under Article 177 of the Treaty it is not for the Court to interpret national law and assess its effects within the framework of proceedings under Article 177 of the Treaty (see, inter alia, Case 52/76 Benedetti v Munari [1977] ECR 163, paragraph 25). That applies a fortiori in the case of a mere draft law. | 0 |
867,928 | 68. According to established case-law, measures which restrict the freedom to provide services may be justified by the aim which they pursue only if they are suitable for securing the attainment of that aim and do not go beyond what is necessary in order to attain it (see, to that effect, Case C-255/04 Commission v France [2006] ECR I-5251, paragraph 44 and the case-law cited). | À cet égard, il importe de rappeler que, selon une jurisprudence constante, les différences conceptuelles entre deux signes en conflit peuvent neutraliser leurs similitudes visuelles et phonétiques, pour autant qu’au moins l’un de ces signes a, pour le public pertinent, une signification claire et déterminée, de telle sorte que ce public est susceptible de la saisir directement (voir, notamment, arrêts du 12 janvier 2006, Ruiz-Picasso e.a./OHMI, C‑361/04 P, EU:C:2006:25, point 20, ainsi que du 23 mars 2006, Mülhens/OHMI, C‑206/04 P, EU:C:2006:194, point 35). | 0 |
867,929 | 29. Consequently, where the questions submitted concern the interpretation of Community law, the Court is in principle bound to give a ruling (see, inter alia, Case C‑326/00 IKA [2003] ECR I‑1703, paragraph 27, and Michaniki [2008] ECR I‑0000, paragraph 33). | 39. Similarly, those services are supplied within the framework of the objectives for which the independent group has been set up and are therefore provided in accordance with the purpose of that group. | 0 |
867,930 | 63. In those circumstances, the Commission is not required to submit, in respect of financial years 1997 and 1998 at issue in the present case, any other evidence of the absence of the register of olive cultivation and the computerised database apart from that which it gathered for that purpose in respect of financial years 1995 and 1996 (see Case C-130/99 Spain v Commission , cited above, paragraphs 137 to 139). It was incumbent upon the Member State concerned to establish that since those financial years it has indeed put in place the register of olive cultivation and the computerised database (see to that effect Case C‑332/01 Greece v Commission [2004] ECR I‑0000, paragraph 61). | 101. S’agissant de l’argument tiré par la République de Pologne de ce que, par la réglementation nationale en cause, elle a procédé à une mise en œuvre correcte de la directive 2009/41, il suffit de rappeler qu’il est de juris prudence constante que les dispositions d’une directive doivent être mises en œuvre avec une force contraignante incontestable, avec la spécificité, la précision et la clarté requises, afin que soit satisfaite l’exigence de sécurité juridique (voir, notamment, arrêts Commission/Irlande, précité, point 46, ainsi que du 27 octobre 2011, Commission/Pologne, C‑362/10, point 46 et jurisprudence citée). | 0 |
867,931 | 26. Second, it should be noted that under Article 21(1)(c) of the Sixth Directive, any person who mentions VAT on an invoice or other document serving as invoice is liable to pay that tax. In particular, those persons are liable to pay VAT mentioned on an invoice independently of any obligation to pay it on account of its being a transaction subject to VAT (see, to that effect, Case C‑342/87 Genius Holding [1989] ECR 4227, paragraph 19; Case C‑454/98 Schmeink & Cofreth and Strobel [2000] ECR I-6973, paragraph 53; and Case C-35/05 Reemtsma Cigarettenfabriken [2007] ECR I‑2425, paragraph 23). | 23. First of all, it should be recalled that, in paragraph 13 of Genius Holding , the Court found that the right to deduct may be exercised only in respect of taxes actually due, that is to say, the taxes corresponding to a transaction subject to VAT or paid in so far as they were due. It thus found that that right to deduct does not apply to VAT which is due, under Article 21(1)(c) of the Sixth Directive, solely because it is mentioned on the invoice (see, inter alia, Genius Holding , paragraph 19). In that regard, the Court subsequently upheld that case‑law in Case C‑454/98 Schmeink & Cofreth and Strobel [2000] ECR I‑6973, paragraph 53 and Joined Cases C‑78/02 to C‑80/02 Karageorgou and Others [2003] ECR I‑13295, paragraph 50). | 1 |
867,932 | 31 The reason for the adoption of the jurisdictional rule in Article 5(1) of the Brussels Convention was concern for sound administration of justice and efficacious conduct of proceedings (see, to this effect, in particular Tessili, paragraph 13; Shenavai, paragraph 6, and Mulox IBC, paragraph 17, and, by way of analogy, as regards Article 5(3) of the Brussels Convention, Case C-220/88 Dumez France and Tracoba [1990] ECR I-49, paragraph 17; Case C-68/93 Shevill and Others [1995] ECR I-415, paragraph 19; and Case C-364/93 Marinari [1995] ECR I-2719, paragraph 10). The court of the place where the contractual obligation giving rise to the action is to be performed will normally be the most appropriate for deciding the case, in particular on the grounds of proximity and ease of taking evidence. | 6 IT SHOULD BE RECALLED THAT ARTICLE 2 OF THE CONVENTION LAYS DOWN THE GENERAL RULE THAT JURISDICTION IS TO BE BASED ON THE DEFENDANT' S DOMICILE, BUT THAT ARTICLE 5 ( 1 ) THEREOF FURTHER PROVIDES THAT, IN MATTERS RELATING TO A CONTRACT, THE DEFENDANT MAY ALSO BE SUED "IN THE COURTS FOR THE PLACE OF PERFORMANCE OF THE OBLIGATION IN QUESTION ". AS THE COURT OBSERVED IN ITS JUDGMENT OF 6 OCTOBER 1976 ( CASE 12/76 TESSILI V DUNLOP (( 1976 )) ECR 1473 ), THAT FREEDOM OF CHOICE WAS INTRODUCED IN VIEW OF THE EXISTENCE IN CERTAIN CASES OF A PARTICULARLY CLOSE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN A DISPUTE AND THE COURT WHICH MAY BE MOST CONVENIENTLY CALLED UPON TO TAKE COGNIZANCE OF THE MATTER . | 1 |
867,933 | 14 In interpreting Article 14 of Regulation No 17, regard must be had in particular to the rights of the defence, a principle whose fundamental nature has been stressed on numerous occasions in the Court' s decisions ( see, in particular, the judgment of 9 November 1983 in Case 322/81 Michelin v Commission (( 1983 )) ECR 3461, paragraph 7 ). | 19 It follows that the Court has jurisdiction to interpret the provisions of the directive even though they do not directly govern the situation at issue in the main proceedings. The questions submitted by the Vestre Landsret must for that reason be answered.
The first, second and third questions | 0 |
867,934 | 30
Secondly, it is to be pointed out that, in the absence of EU rules governing the matter that are applicable in Ireland, it is for the domestic legal system of that Member State to lay down the detailed procedural rules relating to examination of an application for subsidiary protection, Ireland being responsible for ensuring, in that context, that the rights conferred by the legal order of the European Union are effectively protected and, in particular, for ensuring compliance with the right of the applicant for subsidiary protection to be heard (see, to that effect, judgment of 8 November 2016, Lesoochranárske zoskupenie VLK, C‑243/15, EU:C:2016:838, paragraph 65). | 40 That requirement means, in any event, that wine transported in bulk within the region retains entitlement to the denominación de origen calificada when it is bottled in authorised cellars. | 0 |
867,935 | 28. As regards the material conditions which must be met in order for the right to deduct to arise, it is apparent from the wording of Article 17(2)(a) of the Sixth Directive that, in order to be able to avail of that right, first, the interested party must be a taxable person within the meaning of that directive and, second, the goods or services relied on to give entitlement to that right must be used by the taxable person for the purposes of his own taxed output transactions, and that, as inputs, those goods or services must be supplied by another taxable person (see, to that effect, judgments in Centralan Property , C‑63/04, EU:C:2005:773, paragraph 52; Tóth , C‑324/11, EU:C:2012:549, paragraph 26, and Bonik , C‑285/11, EU:C:2012:774, paragraph 29; and order in Jagiełło , C‑33/13, EU:C:2014:184, paragraph 27). | 36 When the specific features of a contract of employment do not exist, it is neither necessary nor appropriate to identify the obligation which characterises the contract and to centralise at its place of performance all jurisdiction, based on place of performance, over disputes concerning all the obligations under the contract (Shenavai, cited above, paragraph 17). | 0 |
867,936 | 35. Thus, it is for the referring court to ascertain, on that basis, whether it can find such an interpretation, taking into consideration, in particular, firstly, the elements referred to in paragraphs 28 and 29 of the present judgment (see, by analogy, judgment in Dominguez , C‑282/10, EU:C:2012:33, paragraph 31) and, secondly, the case-law of the Court referred to in paragraph 26 of the present judgment, from which it is apparent that, in order to draw all the consequences of a breach of the third sentence of Article 108(3) TFEU, the national courts may, as necessary, order provisional measures. In the present case, accordingly, it is for the referring court to examine the possibility of ordering a measure such as the temporary suspension of the contracts at issue until the adoption of the Commission decision closing the procedure, which would enable that court to satisfy its obligations under the third sentence of Article 108(3) TFEU without actually ruling on the validity of the contracts at issue. | 50. It is for the concession-granting public authority to evaluate, subject to review by the competent courts, the appropriateness of the detailed arrangements of the call for competition to the particularities of the public service concession in question. However, a complete lack of any call for competition in the case of the award of a public service concession such as that at issue in the main proceedings does not comply with the requirements of Articles 43 EC and 49 EC any more than with the principles of equal treatment, non-discrimination and transparency. | 0 |
867,937 | 25. It must be borne in mind that, according to settled case-law, the need for a uniform application of European Union law and the principle of equality require that the terms of a provision of European Union law which makes no express reference to the law of the Member States for the purpose of determining its meaning and scope must normally be given an independent and uniform interpretation throughout the European Union (see, in particular, Case 327/82 Ekro [1984] ECR 107, paragraph 11; Case C-287/98 Linster [2000] ECR I-6917, paragraph 43; Case C‑5/08 Infopaq International [2009] ECR I‑6569, paragraph 27; and Case C-467/08 Padawan [2010] ECR I‑0000, paragraph 32). | 48. En troisième lieu, s’agissant de l’article 13, paragraphe 2, sous a), c), e) et f), de la directive 89/391, il convient de rappeler, ainsi que la Cour l’a déjà jugé, que la directive 89/391, qui tend à la mise en œuvre de mesures visant à promouvoir l’amélioration de la sécurité et de la santé des travailleurs au travail, n’a pas seulement pour objet d’améliorer la protection des travailleurs contre les accidents du travail et la prévention des risques professionnels, mais vise également à mettre en œuvre des mesures spécifiques d’organisation de cette protection et de cette prévention (voir arrêt du 22 mai 2003, Commission/Pays-Bas, C‑441/01, Rec. p. I‑5463, point 38). | 0 |
867,938 | 41. Finally, contrary to the Commission’s submissions, it is clear from the Court’s settled case-law that the tax legislation of the Member States is capable of falling within Article 64(1) TFEU (see, inter alia, judgments in Test Claimants in the FII Group Litigation , C‑446/04, EU:C:2006:774, paragraphs 174 to 196; Holböck , C‑157/05, EU:C:2007:297, paragraphs 37 to 45; and Prunus and Polonium , C‑384/09, EU:C:2011:276, paragraphs 27 to 37). | 25 The Court has consistently held that it is for the national court, which has sole jurisdiction to make findings of fact, to determine whether and to what extent the grounds put forward by an employer to explain the adoption of a pay practice which applies independently of a worker' s sex but in fact affects more women than men may be regarded as objectively justified economic grounds (Case 170/84 Bilka-Kaufhaus, cited above, at paragraph 36 and Case C-184/89 Nimz, cited above, at paragraph 14). Those grounds may include, if they can be attributed to the needs and objectives of the undertaking, different criteria such as the worker' s flexibility or adaptability to hours and places of work, his training or his length of service (Case 109/88 Danfoss, cited above, at paragraphs 22 to 24). | 0 |
867,939 | 49. Designations of origin fall within the scope of industrial and commercial property rights. The applicable rules protect those entitled to use them against improper use of those designations by third parties seeking to profit from the reputation which they have acquired. They are intended to guarantee that the product bearing them comes from a specified geographical area and displays certain particular characteristics. They may enjoy a high reputation amongst consumers and constitute for producers who fulfil the conditions for using them an essential means of attracting custom. The reputation of designations of origin depends on their image in the minds of consumers. That image in turn depends essentially on particular characteristics and more generally on the quality of the product. It is on the latter, ultimately, that the product's reputation is based (see Belgium v Spain , paragraphs 54 to 56). For consumers, the link between the reputation of the producers and the quality of the products also depends on his being assured that products sold under the designation are authentic. | 15 In those circumstances, the Commission's decision to refuse Geotronics the benefit of Community funding in itself had binding legal effects as regards the appellant and could therefore be the subject of an action for annulment. | 0 |
867,940 | Il convient de rappeler, en premier lieu, que l’obligation de motiver les arrêts, qui incombe au Tribunal en vertu de l’article 36 du statut de la Cour de justice de l’Union européenne, applicable au Tribunal en vertu de l’article 53, premier alinéa, du même statut, et de l’article 81 du règlement de procédure du Tribunal, dans sa version en vigueur à la date de l’arrêt attaqué, lui impose de faire apparaître de façon claire et non équivoque son raisonnement, de manière à permettre aux intéressés de connaître les justifications de la décision prise et à la Cour d’exercer son contrôle juridictionnel (voir, notamment, arrêts du 26 septembre 2013, Alliance One International/Commission, C‑679/11 P, non publié, EU:C:2013:606, point 98 ; du 28 janvier 2016, Quimitécnica.com et de Mello/Commission, C‑415/14 P, non publié, EU:C:2016:58, point 56, ainsi que du 26 janvier 2017, Aloys F. Dornbracht/Commission, C‑604/13 P, EU:C:2017:45, point 84). | Toutefois, la motivation d’un arrêt du Tribunal doit faire apparaître de façon claire et non équivoque le raisonnement de
celui-ci, de manière à permettre aux intéressés de connaître les justifications de la décision prise et à la Cour d’exercer
son contrôle juridictionnel (arrêt Mitteldeutsche Flughafen et Flughafen Leipzig-Halle/Commission, C‑288/11 P, EU:C:2012:821,
point 83 et jurisprudence citée). | 1 |
867,941 | 29. The right to be heard in all proceedings is now affirmed not only in Articles 47 and 48 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which ensure respect for both the rights of the defence and the right to fair legal process in all judicial proceedings, but also in Article 41 of the Charter, which guarantees the right to good administration. Article 41(2) provides that the right to good administration includes, inter alia, the right of every person to be heard before any individual measure which would affect him adversely is taken ( M , EU:C:2012:744, paragraphs 82 and 83). However, as the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union entered into force on 1 December 2009, it does not apply as such to the proceedings that led to the demands for payment of 2 and 28 April 2005 (see, by analogy, Sabou , C‑276/12, EU:C:2013:678, paragraph 25). | 49. It should be noted, secondly, that a measure which is liable to hinder the freedom of establishment laid down by Article 52 of the Treaty can be allowed only if it pursues a legitimate objective compatible with the Treaty and is justified by imperative reasons in the public interest. It is further necessary, in such a case, that its application must be appropriate to ensuring the attainment of the objective thus pursued and must not go beyond what is necessary to attain it (see Futura Participations and Singer , paragraph 26, and the case-law cited therein, and X and Y , paragraph 49). | 0 |
867,942 | 77. While the Commission’s suggestions are a useful point of reference, they cannot in any event bind the Court. Similarly, while guidelines such as those in the notices of the Commission help to ensure that the Commission acts in a manner which is transparent, foreseeable and consistent with legal certainty, they do not bind the Court (see, to that effect, Case C-109/08 Commission v Greece [2009] ECR I‑4657, paragraph 27 and the case‑law cited). | 24
In addition, under Article 2(c) of that directive, the concept of a ‘product’ covers any goods or service. | 0 |
867,943 | 49. The Court also pointed out that it is legitimate for a Member State to grant assistance covering maintenance costs only to students who have demonstrated a certain degree of integration into the society of that State ( Bidar , paragraph 57). | 67 Leaving aside the specific cases expressly listed in Article 13B(b) of the Sixth Directive, however, the term letting of immovable property must be construed strictly. As pointed out in paragraph 64 of this judgment, it constitutes an exception to the general VAT rules contained in that directive. | 0 |
867,944 | 39. The Court has consistently held that, in the absence of EU rules governing the matter, it is for every Member State to lay down the detailed rules of administrative and judicial procedures for safeguarding rights which individuals derive from EU law. Those detailed procedural rules must, however, be no less favourable than those governing similar domestic actions (principle of equivalence) and must not render impossible in practice or excessively difficult the exercise of rights conferred by EU law (principle of effectiveness) (see judgment in Club Hotel Loutraki and Others , C‑145/08 et C‑149/08, EU:C:2010:247, paragraph 74 and the case-law cited). | 30 It follows from the foregoing that a condition of the type at issue in the main proceedings which stipulates that where a vessel is owned or chartered by natural persons they must be of a particular nationality and where it is owned or chartered by a company the shareholders and directors must be of that nationality is contrary to Article 52 of the Treaty. | 0 |
867,945 | 18. In that regard, it is indeed the case that, as far as concerns the award of public procurement contracts, the Court has held that an action for failure to fulfil obligations is inadmissible if, when the period prescribed in the reasoned opinion expired, the contract in question had already been completely performed (see, to that effect, Case C-362/90 Commission v Italy [1992] ECR I-2353, paragraphs 11 and 13). | 24 For the purpose of any possible exemption from VAT for the act of transmitting medical samples, it is appropriate to have regard to the purpose for which those samples are taken. Thus, where a duly authorised health-care worker orders, for the purpose of making his diagnosis and with a therapeutic aim, that his patient should undergo an analysis, the transmission of the sample, which logically takes place between the taking of the sample and the analysis itself, must be regarded as closely related to the analysis and must therefore be exempt from VAT (see, as regards services which, since they do not have a therapeutic aim, must be subject to VAT, Case C-384/98 D v W [2000] ECR I-6795, paragraph 19). | 0 |
867,946 | 42
It should be noted that it follows from well-established case-law that the application, for the purpose of calculating fines imposed for competition infringements, of new guidelines, such as the 2006 Guidelines, and in particular of a new method of calculating the amount of a fine contained therein, even to infringements committed before the adoption or the amendment of those guidelines, does not breach the principle of non-retroactivity in so far as those new guidelines and that new method were reasonably foreseeable at the time when the infringements in question were committed (see, to that effect, in particular, judgments of 28 June 2005, Dansk Rørindustri and Others v Commission (C‑189/02 P, C‑202/02 P, C‑205/02 P to C‑208/02 P and C‑213/02 P, EU:C:2005:408, paragraphs 217, 218, and 227 to 232; of 18 May 2006, Archer Daniels Midland and Archer Daniels Midland Ingredients v Commission, C‑397/03 P, EU:C:2006:328, paragraph 25; of 18 July 2013, Schindler Holding and Others v Commission, C‑501/11 P, EU:C:2013:522, paragraph 75; and of 14 September 2016, Ori Martin and SLM v Commission, C‑490/15 P and C‑505/15 P, not published, EU:C:2016:678, paragraphs 82 to 94). | 16 It is clear from the wording of Article 2(1) of the Directive that a taxable person must act "as such" for a transaction to be subject to VAT. | 0 |
867,947 | 70
However, by virtue of the Court’s settled case-law, while that guide may be regarded as an explanatory document, capable of being taken into consideration, if appropriate, among other relevant material for the purpose of interpreting the Aarhus Convention, the indications contained therein have no binding force and do not have the normative effect of the provisions of that convention (see, inter alia, judgment of 19 December 2013, Fish Legal and Shirley, C‑279/12, EU:C:2013:853, paragraph 38 and the case-law cited). | 29. None the less, the measures must not go further than is necessary to attain the objectives thereby pursued and may not, therefore, be used in such a way that they would have the effect of undermining the neutrality of VAT, which is a fundamental principle of the common system of VAT established by the relevant European Union law (see Stadeco , paragraph 39, and the case-law cited). | 0 |
867,948 | 54. The provisions of directives must be implemented with unquestionable binding force, and with the necessary specificity, precision and clarity, in order to satisfy the requirements of legal certainty. Mere administrative practices, which by their nature are alterable at will by the authorities and are not given appropriate publicity, cannot be regarded as constituting the proper fulfilment of a Member State ' s obligations flowing from Community law since they maintain, for the persons concerned, a state of uncertainty as regards the extent of their rights and obligations in a field governed by that law (see, to this effect, in particular Case C-80/92 Commission v Belgium [1994] ECR I-1019, paragraph 20, Case C-151/94 Commission v Luxembourg [1995] ECR I-3685, paragraph 18, and Case C-415/01 Commission v Belgium [2003] ECR I-2081, paragraph 21). | 25 The third and fourth paragraphs of Article 15 reproduce, in identical or substantially identical terms, Article 7(2) and (3) of the directive, relating to proof of normal residence.
The dispute in the main proceedings
The circumstances of the applicant in the main proceedings according to the information contained in the file | 0 |
867,949 | 44. However, that requirement cannot be stretched so far as to mean that in every case the formal statement of objections set out in the reasoned opinion and the form of order sought in the application must be exactly the same, provided that the subject-matter of the proceedings as defined in the reasoned opinion has not been extended or altered (see Case C‑433/03 Commission v Germany [2005] ECR I‑6985, paragraph 28; Case C‑484/04 Commission v United Kingdom [2006] ECR I‑7471, paragraph 25; and Case C‑171/08 Commission v Portugal [2010] ECR I‑0000, paragraph 26). | 60. Furthermore, it should be pointed out that, where a Member State is faced with an exceptional situation not allowing it to collect or treat waste water, it remains obliged to adopt appropriate measures to limit pollution under footnote 1 of Annex I to Directive 91/271. | 0 |
867,950 | 13. Article 18 EC, which sets out generally the right of every citizen of the Union to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States, finds specific expression in Article 39 EC in relation to freedom of movement for workers (see Case C-100/01 Oteiza Olazabal [2002] ECR I-10981, paragraph 26). It is therefore necessary to ascertain first whether the main case falls within the scope of Article 39 EC. | 80 THE FOUR COOPERATIVES WHICH WERE MEMBERS OF THE FORMER ASSOCIATION WERE DISSOLVED ON 31 DECEMBER 1970 AND ON 1 JANUARY 1971 THE APPLICANT ASSUMED ALL THEIR RIGHTS AND LIABILITIES . | 0 |
867,951 | 75. In that context, although it is for the national court to define the market for the services at issue, it should nevertheless be recalled that, according to the Court's case-law, in order for a market to be held to be sufficiently homogeneous and distinct from others, the service must be able to be distinguished from other services by virtue of specific characteristics as a result of which it is scarcely interchangeable with those alternatives as far as the consumer is concerned and is affected only to an insignificant degree by competition from them (see, to that effect, Case 27/76 United Brands v Commission [1978] ECR 207, paragraphs 11 and 12, and Case 66/86 Ahmed Saeed Flugreisen and Others v Zentrale zur Bekämpfung unlauteren Wettbewerbs [1989] ECR 803, paragraph 40). In that regard, the examination cannot be limited to the objective characteristics of the relevant services but must include the competitive conditions and the structure of supply and demand on the market (Case 322/81 Michelin v Commission [1983] ECR 3461, paragraph 37). | 44. The Court has, furthermore, held that, in view of the nature and importance of the public interest underlying the protection which the directive confers on consumers, Article 6 thereof must be regarded as a provision of equal standing to national rules which rank, within the domestic legal system, as rules of public policy (see Case C‑40/08 Asturcom Telecomunicaciones [2009] ECR I‑9579, paragraph 52, and order in Case C‑76/10 Pohotovost’ [2010] ECR I‑11557, paragraph 50). It must be held that that classification extends to all the provisions of the directive which are essential for the purpose of attaining the objective pursued by Article 6 thereof. | 0 |
867,952 | 20. Those two places could constitute a significant connecting factor from the point of view of jurisdiction, since each of them could, depending on the circumstances, be particularly helpful in relation to the evidence and the conduct of the proceedings ( eDate Advertising and Others , paragraph 41 and the case‑law cited).
The place where the damage occurred | 26. This does not mean that the Member States are not to protect sites as soon as they propose them, under Article 4(1) of the Directive, as sites eligible for identification as sites of Community importance on the national list transmitted to the Commission. | 0 |
867,953 | 46 So, if the French Republic did adopt or maintain stricter measures than those laid down by Regulation No 3626/82 or No 338/97, it is possible that the referring court may need to consider the compatibility of the prohibition of commercial use of the species at issue as prescribed by the French legislation, in particular the Guyane decree, with Articles 30 and 36 of the Treaty. That would be the case in so far as that legislation applied to situations linked to the importation of goods in intra-Community trade (see, inter alia, Case 298/87 Smanor [1988] ECR 4489, paragraphs 7 and 8, and Case C-448/98 Guimont [2000] ECR I-10663, paragraph 21). | Certes, la Cour a également jugé qu’il n’appartient pas au juge de l’Union, dans le cadre de ce contrôle, de substituer son
appréciation économique à celle de la Commission et que le contrôle que les juridictions de l’Union exercent sur les appréciations
économiques complexes faites par la Commission est un contrôle restreint qui se limite nécessairement à la vérification du
respect des règles de procédure et de motivation, de l’exactitude matérielle des faits ainsi que de l’absence d’erreur manifeste
d’appréciation et de détournement de pouvoir (arrêt du 2 septembre 2010, Commission/Scott, C‑290/07 P, EU:C:2010:480, point
66). | 0 |
867,954 | 61. That submission cannot be accepted. As the Court has already observed, the purpose of Article 10 of Regulation No 1408/71 is to protect the persons concerned against any adverse effects that might arise from the transfer of their residence from one Member State to another. It follows from that principle not only that the person concerned retains the right to receive benefits referred to in that provision acquired under the legislation of one or more Member States even after taking up residence in another Member State, but also that the acquisition of such entitlement may not be refused on the sole ground that he or she does not reside in the Member State in which the institution responsible for payment is situated (see, to that effect, Case 51/73 Smieja [1973] ECR 1213, paragraphs 20 to 22; Case 92/81 Camera [1982] ECR 2213, paragraph 14; and Joined Cases 379/85 to 381/85 and 93/86 Giletti and Others [1987] ECR 955, paragraph 15). | 32. The analysis of the consequences which all those factors which characterise an employment relationship, in particular those set out in paragraph 27 above, may have for the finding as to whether Ms Genc’s employment is real and genuine and, therefore, for her status as a worker is a matter coming within the jurisdiction of the national court. The national court alone has direct knowledge of the facts giving rise to the dispute and is, consequently, best placed to make the necessary determinations. | 0 |
867,955 | 67
The Court has repeatedly held that the concept of public policy as justification for a derogation from a fundamental freedom must be interpreted strictly, so that its scope cannot be determined unilaterally by each Member State without any control by the EU institutions. It follows therefrom that public policy may be relied on only if there is a genuine and sufficiently serious threat to a fundamental interest of society (see judgments of 14 October 2004 in Omega, C‑36/02, EU:C:2004:614, paragraph 30 and the case-law cited, and of 22 December 2010 in Sayn-Wittgenstein, C‑208/09, EU:C:2010:806, paragraph 86). | 20 IT MUST BE ADDED THAT THE MARITAL RELATIONSHIP CANNOT BE REGARDED AS DISSOLVED SO LONG AS IT HAS NOT BEEN TERMINATED BY THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY . IT IS NOT DISSOLVED MERELY BECAUSE THE SPOUSES LIVE SEPARATELY , EVEN WHERE THEY INTEND TO DIVORCE AT A LATER DATE .
| 0 |
867,956 | 23. The Commission, relying on a purposive interpretation of Directive 89/105, submits that the obligation to state reasons provided for in Article 6 thereof must be interpreted broadly (see judgments in Commission v Austria , C‑424/99, EU:C:2001:642, paragraphs 24 to 32; Commission v Finland , C‑229/00, EU:C:2003:334, paragraphs 37 to 40; Pohl-Boskamp , C‑317/05, EU:C:2006:684, and Commission v Austria , C‑311/07, EU:C:2008:431, paragraph 29). It submits that Article 6(3) to (5) of that directive is accordingly applicable to a decision such as the Decree of 21 February 2012. | 34 That is the case where the measures chosen reflect a legitimate social policy aim of the Member State whose legislation is at issue, are appropriate to achieve that aim and are necessary in order to do so (see Case C-226/91 Molenbroek v Sociale Verzekeringsbank [1992] ECR I-5943, paragraph 13). | 0 |
867,957 | 73. Thus, the Court has held that not only investment management involving the selection and disposal of the assets under management, but also administration and accounting tasks, in particular services such as computing the amount of income and the price of units or shares, the valuation of assets, accounting, the preparation of statements for the distribution of income, the provision of information and documentation for periodic accounts and for tax, statistical and VAT returns, and the preparation of income forecasts are covered by the concept of ‘management’ of a special investment fund for the purposes of Article 13B(d)(6) of the Sixth Directive (see judgments in Abbey National , C‑169/04, EU:C:2006:289, paragraphs 26, 63 and 64, and ATP PensionService , C‑464/12, EU:C:2014:139, paragraph 68). | 45 That argument must be rejected. It must be observed that Member States may not plead their late implementation of a directive as justification for failure to fulfil, or late fulfilment of, other obligations imposed by the directive (see Case C-274/98 Commission v Spain [2000] ECR I-2823, paragraph 22). | 0 |
867,958 | 42. The first point to be noted here is that in the procedure laid down by Article 234 EC providing for cooperation between national courts and the Court of Justice, it is for the latter to provide the national court with an answer which will be of use to it and enable it to determine the case before it. To that end, the Court may have to reformulate the questions referred to it. In addition, it is to be borne in mind that the Court has a duty to interpret all provisions of Community law necessary to national courts in order to decide the actions pending before them, even if those provisions are not expressly indicated in the questions referred to the Court of Justice by those courts (Case C-280/91 Viessmann [1993] ECR I-971, paragraph 17; Case C‑42/96 Immobiliare SIF [1997] ECR I‑7089, paragraph 28; and Case C‑45/06 Campina [2007] ECR I‑2089, paragraphs 30 and 31). | 11. The Kingdom of Spain provided the Commission with additional information by letter of 23 July 2010. | 0 |
867,959 | 41 In paragraphs 47 to 53 of Gloszczuk and paragraphs 50 to 56 of Barkoci and Malik, the Court addressed the question of the compatibility of the restrictions which the immigration legislation of the host Member State imposes on the right of establishment, and not the question of the interpretation of the expression economic activities as self-employed persons used in those Association Agreements. The Court there rejected the argument that, since the right of establishment provided for by those Agreements is equivalent to the right of establishment governed by Article 52 of the Treaty, application by the competent authorities of the host Member State of the national immigration rules requiring Polish and Czech nationals to obtain leave to enter or reside is in itself liable to render ineffective the rights granted to such persons by Article 44(3) of the Association Agreement between the Communities and Poland or Article 45(3) of the Association Agreement between the Communities and the Czech Republic. | 50 It must be pointed out that, according to the case-law established in the context of the interpretation of both the provisions of the Treaty and those of the agreement establishing an association between the European Economic Community and Turkey (OJ 1973 C 133, p. 1), the right to the same treatment as nationals in regard to establishment, as defined by Article 45(3) of the Association Agreement, in wording similar or identical to that of Article 52 of the Treaty, does indeed mean that a right of entry and residence are conferred, as corollaries of the right of establishment, on Czech nationals wishing to pursue activities of an industrial or commercial character, activities of craftsmen, or activities of the professions in a Member State (see Royer, cited above, paragraphs 31 and 32, and Case C-37/98 Savas [2000] ECR I-2927, paragraphs 60 and 63). | 1 |
867,960 | 181
Next, the scope of the annulment which the EU judicature pronounces in such an action, where appropriate, may not go further than that sought by the applicant (judgments in Commission v AssiDomän Kraft Products and Others, C‑310/97 P, EU:C:1999:407, paragraph 52, and Nachi Europe, C‑239/99, EU:C:2001:101, paragraph 24). | 52 First, since it would be ultra vires for the Community judicature to rule ultra petita (see the judgments in Joined Cases 46/59 and 47/59 Meroni v High Authority [1962] ECR 411, at page 419, and the judgment in Case 37/71 Jamet v Commission [1972] ECR 483, paragraph 12), the scope of the annulment which it pronounces may not go further than that sought by the applicant. | 1 |
867,961 | 39 According to the established case-law of the Court, in interpreting a provision of Community law, it is necessary to consider not only its wording but also the context in which it occurs and the objectives of the rules of which it forms part (see Case 337/82 St Nikolaus Brennerei und Likörfabrik [1984] ECR 1051, paragraph 10, and Case C-156/98 Germany v Commission [2000] ECR I-6857, paragraph 50). | 60 It is apparent from settled-case law that, for natural and legal persons to be regarded as individually concerned by a measure, it must affect their legal position by reason of certain attributes peculiar to them, or by reason of a factual situation which differentiates them from all other persons and distinguishes them individually in the same way as the addressee (see, in particular, the judgments in Case 25/62 Plaumann v Commission [1963] ECR 95, 107, and Case C-321/95 P Greenpeace Council and Others v Commission [1998] ECR I-1651, paragraph 7). | 0 |
867,962 | 23. The Commission, relying on a purposive interpretation of Directive 89/105, submits that the obligation to state reasons provided for in Article 6 thereof must be interpreted broadly (see judgments in Commission v Austria , C‑424/99, EU:C:2001:642, paragraphs 24 to 32; Commission v Finland , C‑229/00, EU:C:2003:334, paragraphs 37 to 40; Pohl-Boskamp , C‑317/05, EU:C:2006:684, and Commission v Austria , C‑311/07, EU:C:2008:431, paragraph 29). It submits that Article 6(3) to (5) of that directive is accordingly applicable to a decision such as the Decree of 21 February 2012. | 59
Thus, where a person falls within the scope ratione personae of Regulation No 1408/71, as defined in Article 2 thereof, the rule in Article 13(1) of the regulation that the legislation of a single Member State is to apply is in principle applicable and the national legislation applicable is determined in accordance with the provisions of Title II of the regulation (judgment of 19 March 2015, Kik, C‑266/13, EU:C:2015:188, paragraph 47). | 0 |
867,963 | 65
The Court has however stated in this connection that, in order for judgments to be regarded as at risk of being irreconcilable within the meaning of Article 6(1) of Regulation No 44/2001, it is not sufficient that there be a divergence in the outcome of the dispute, but that divergence must also arise in the same situation of fact and law (see, inter alia, judgments of 13 July 2006 in Roche Nederland and Others, C‑539/03, EU:C:2006:458, paragraph 26; of 11 October 2007 in Freeport, C‑98/06, EU:C:2007:595, paragraph 40; of 1 December 2011 in Painer, C‑145/10, EU:C:2011:798, paragraph 79, and of 12 July 2012 in Solvay, C‑616/10, EU:C:2012:445, paragraph 24). | 36
Thus although State intervention in the fixing of the price of supply of natural gas to the final consumer constitutes an obstacle to the achievement of a competitive natural gas market, that intervention may none the less be accepted within the framework of Directive 2009/73 if three conditions are satisfied. First, the intervention must pursue an objective of general economic interest, secondly, it must comply with the principle of proportionality, and, thirdly, it must lay down public service obligations that are clearly defined, transparent, non-discriminatory and verifiable, and guarantee equal access of EU gas undertakings to consumers (see, to that effect, judgments of20 April 2010, Federutility and Others, C‑265/08, EU:C:2010:205, paragraphs 20 to 22 and 47, and 10 September 2015, Commission v Poland, C‑36/14, not published, EU:C:2015:570, paragraphs 51 to 53). | 0 |
867,964 | 53
In that respect, it must be recalled that the Member States must, when exercising their powers to determine the conditions referred to in the preceding paragraph, respect the basic freedoms guaranteed by the TFEU (see, by analogy, judgment of 27 June 2013, Nasiopoulos, C‑575/11, EU:C:2013:430, paragraph 20 and the case-law cited). | 43. Accordingly, the Austrian legislation must be regarded as having existed on 31 December 1993 for the purposes of Article 57(1) EC. | 0 |
867,965 | 50. In order to determine whether such is the case in the main proceedings, it must be observed that it is clear from the case-law, first, that although Article 5(1) of the Brussels Convention does not require the conclusion of a contract, the identification of an obligation is none the less essential for the application of that provision, since the jurisdiction of the national court is determined in matters relating to a contract by the place of performance of the obligation in question (see judgment in Tacconi , paragraph 22). Second, the Court has held on several occasions that the definition of matters relating to contract within the meaning of Article 5(1) of the Brussels Convention is not to be understood as covering a situation in which there is no obligation freely assumed by one party towards another (Case C-26/91 Handte [1992] ECR I-3967, paragraph 15; Réunion européenne and Others , paragraph 17; Tacconi , paragraph 23; and Case C-265/02 Frahuil [2004] ECR I-0000, paragraph 24). | En effet, ainsi qu’il a déjà été évoqué au point 50 du présent arrêt, en dépit de leur objectif, à savoir exercer une pression
sur la République islamique d’Iran afin que cette dernière mette fin aux activités nucléaires présentant un risque de prolifération
et à la mise au point de vecteurs d’armes nucléaires, ces désignations, entraînant le gel des fonds de personnes ou d’entités,
ont, sur les libertés et les droits fondamentaux de ces personnes et de ces entités, une incidence négative importante liée,
d’une part, s’agissant des personnes, au bouleversement considérable de la vie tant professionnelle que familiale de celles-ci
du fait des restrictions à l’usage de leur droit de propriété et, d’autre part, s’agissant des entités, aux perturbations
qui portent atteinte à leurs activités, notamment économiques (voir, en ce sens, arrêts du 3 septembre 2008, Kadi et Al Barakaat
International Foundation/Conseil et Commission, C‑402/05 P et C‑415/05 P, EU:C:2008:461, point 358 ; du 18 juillet 2013, Commission
e.a./Kadi, C‑584/10 P, C‑593/10 P et C‑595/10 P, EU:C:2013:518, point 132, ainsi que du 1er mars 2016, National Iranian Oil Company/Conseil, C‑440/14 P, EU:C:2016:128, point 53). | 0 |
867,966 | 37. Intra-Community supplies of goods are exempt by virtue of the first subparagraph of Article 28c(A)(a) of the Sixth Directive, which forms part of the transitional arrangements for the taxation of trade between Member States as laid down in Title XVIa of that directive, the purpose of which is to transfer the tax revenue to the Member State in which final consumption of the goods supplied takes place (see Case C‑409/04 Teleos and Others [2007] ECR I‑7797, paragraph 36; Case C‑146/05 Collée [2007] ECR I‑7861, paragraph 22; Case C‑184/05 Twoh International [2007] ECR I‑7897, paragraph 22; and Joined Cases C‑536/08 and C‑539/08 X and fiscale eenheid Facet-Facet Trading [2010] ECR I‑0000, paragraph 30). | 32 It need merely be pointed out, as the Commission has done without being contradicted, that the appellant was entitled to put forward at the hearing any observations on those documents which it considered necessary or to request an adjournment of the hearing to enable it to analyse the Commission's reply, but did not do so. In those circumstances, the appellant cannot, in an appeal, rely on a procedural safeguard which it had already waived. | 0 |
867,967 | 27 As for the fact that the Italian authorities approved the Consortium as a purchaser within the meaning of Article 7(1)(a) of Regulation No 536/93, it is established case-law that it is for the national court to ascertain the facts which have given rise to the dispute and to establish the consequences which they have for the judgment which it is required to deliver on the basis of the facts which this Court puts before it concerning the meaning of purchaser (Case C-181/96 Wilkens [1999] ECR I-399, paragraphs 33 and 34). | 56
Furthermore, with regard to the objective of establishing a method for the swift determination of the Member State responsible without compromising the objective of processing asylum applications rapidly, referred to in recital 5 of Regulation No 604/2013, it is true that the bringing of an action may possibly postpone the definitive conclusion of the process for determining the Member State responsible. | 0 |
867,968 | 84
An applicant’s interest in bringing proceedings must be vested and current, and may not concern a future and hypothetical situation. That interest must, in the light of the purpose of the action, exist at the stage of lodging the action, failing which the action will be inadmissible, and continue until the final decision, failing which there will be no need to adjudicate (judgment of 17 September 2015, Mory and Others v Commission, C‑33/14 P, EU:C:2015:609, paragraphs 56 and 57 and the case-law cited). | 36
Essentially, the risk of favouring national economic operators which that directive seeks to preclude is closely connected to the selection which the contracting authority intends to make from the admissible tenders and to the exclusivity which will result from the award of the contract concerned to the operator whose tender has been accepted or to the economic operators whose tenders have been accepted, in the case of a framework agreement, that constituting the objective of a public procurement procedure. | 0 |
867,969 | 37. It is true that the Court has consistently held that a directive cannot of itself impose obligations on an individual and cannot therefore be relied on as such against an individual (see, inter alia, Case C‑91/92 Faccini Dori [1994] ECR I‑3325, paragraph 20; Case C‑192/94 El Corte Inglés [1996] ECR I‑1281, paragraph 15; Pfeiffer and Others , paragraph 108; and Kücükdeveci , paragraph 46). | 36 It follows that the worker cannot claim more favourable treatment, particularly in financial terms, than he would have had if he had been duly accepted as a member. | 0 |
867,970 | 22. In that regard, it should be noted that the Court has consistently held that Article 34(2) EC, which prohibits all discrimination under the CAP, is merely a specific expression of the general principle of equal treatment, which requires that comparable situations shoul d not be treated differently and different situations not treated alike unless such treatment is objectively justified (Case C‑33/08 Agrana Zucker [2009] ECR I‑5035, paragraph 46). | 54. As regards the aid itself, it must be added that a measure which consisted only in an obligation of recovery without interest would not be appropriate, as a rule, to remedy the consequences of the unlawfulness if the Member State were to re‑implement that aid after the Commission’s final positive decision. Since the period between the recovery and the reimplementation would be shorter than that between the initial implementation and the final decision, the aid recipient, would bear, if it had to borrow the amount repaid, less interest than it would have paid if, from the outset, it had to borrow the equivalent of the unlawfully granted aid. | 0 |
867,971 | 48
The fact that, in marketing or advertising, the possibility to use the term ‘milk’ and the designations reserved exclusively for milk products is available only to products which meet the requirements laid down by Annex VII, Part III, to Regulation No 1308/2013 is a guarantee, in particular, to the producers of those products of undistorted conditions for competition, and to consumers of those products, that the products designated by those designations meet all the same standards of quality, both protecting them against any confusion as to the composition of the products they intend to purchase. The provisions at issue are thus appropriate to achieve those objectives. Furthermore, they do not go beyond what is necessary to achieve them, since, as the Court has already held, the addition of descriptions or explanations to those designations to designate products which do not satisfy those requirements cannot prevent with certainty any likelihood of confusion in the mind of the consumer. Therefore, the provisions at issue, do not breach the principle of proportionality (see, to that effect, judgment of 16 December 1999, UDL, C‑101/98, EU:C:1999:615, paragraphs 32 to 34). | 35. Finally, where there are several places of delivery of the goods in a single Member State, the Court took the view that the place with the closest linking factor between the contract and the court having jurisdiction is that of the principal delivery, which must be determined on the basis of economic criteria, and that, if it is not possible to determine the place of the principal delivery, each of the places of delivery has a sufficiently close link of proximity to the material elements of the dispute, in which case the applicant may sue the defendant in the court for the place of delivery of his choice ( Color Drack , paragraphs 40 and 42). | 0 |
867,972 | 30. In the judgment in EU-Wood-Trading , the Court held that the provisions of the first indent of Article 7(4)(a) of Regulation No 259/93 imply that the competent authorities, in assessing the risks which recovery of waste carried out in the State of destination would entail for human health and the environment, may take account of all relevant criteria in that regard, including those which are in force in the State of dispatch, even if they are stricter than those of the State of destination, and provided they are intended to avoid those risks. The competent authorities of dispatch cannot, however, be bound by the criteria of their State if such criteria are no more apt to avoid those risks than those of the State of destination ( EU-Wood-Trading , paragraph 46). | 60. In any event, the checks which the successful tenderer may then carry out to ascertain whether those obligations have been complied with are in his interests alone and do not affect his liability towards the selling agency (see, by analogy, Case C‑124/83 Corman , paragraph 20). | 0 |
867,973 | 58. In addition, it must be pointed out that the residence requirement at issue in the main proceedings seems disproportionate since it is imposed in respect of a social security benefit which, like the benefit at issue in the main proceedings, is intended to be paid to applicants for an invalidity pension for a limited period which, according to the Austrian Government, does not exceed, on average, three to four months during which, while waiting for a definitive decision on the grant of such a pension, they are not required to be capable of working, willing to work and available for work (see, to that effect, Collins , cited above, paragraphs 68 and 69). | 17 It follows from the foregoing that in order to be a "judgment" for the purposes of the Convention the decision must emanate from a judicial body of a Contracting State deciding on its own authority on the issues between the parties. | 0 |
867,974 | 46. However, it does not follow that a Member State can introduce a difference in treatment, in respect of the deduction for tax purposes of gifts, between national bodies recognised as being charitable and those established in another Member State on the grounds that gifts made for the benefit of the latter, even if their activities are among the purposes of the legislation of the former Member State, cannot lead to such budgetary compensation. It is settled case-law that the need to prevent the reduction of tax revenues is neither among the objectives stated in Article 58 EC nor an overriding reason in the public interest capable of justifying a restriction on a freedom instituted by the Treaty (see, to that effect, Case C‑319/02 Manninen [2004] ECR I-7477, paragraph 49, and Centro di Musicologia Walter Stauffer , paragraph 59; see, by analogy, as regards the freedom to supply services, Case C‑136/00 Danner [2002] ECR I-8147, paragraph 56, and Case C‑76/05 Schwarz and Gootjes-Schwarz [2007] ECR I‑6849, paragraph 77). | 59. Whilst, for the Federal Republic of Germany, recognition of the right to exemption from corporation tax for non-resident charitable foundations would entail a reduction in its corporation tax receipts, it has been consistently held in the case-law that reduction in tax revenue cannot be regarded as an overriding reason in the public interest which may be relied on to justify a measure which is, in principle, contrary to a fundamental freedom (see, to that effect, Verkooijen , paragraph 59; Case C-136/00 Danner [2002] ECR I-8147, paragraph 56; X and Y , paragraph 50; and Manninen , paragraph 49). | 1 |
867,975 | 39 According to the settled case-law of the Court, Article 48 of the Treaty prohibits not only overt discrimination by reason of nationality but also all covert forms of discrimination which, by the application of other distinguishing criteria, lead in fact to the same result (see inter alia Case C-419/92 Scholz [1994] ECR I-505, paragraph 7, and Case C-237/94 O'Flynn [1996] ECR I-2617, paragraph 17). | 55. It is thus clear that measures for the recovery of the costs for water services are one of the instruments available to the Member States for qualitative management of water in order to achieve rational water use. | 0 |
867,976 | 47. A difference in treatment is justified if it is based on an objective and reasonable criterion, that is, if the difference relates to a legally permitted aim pursued by the legislation in question, and it is proportionate to the aim pursued by the treatment (see, to that effect, Case 114/76 Bela-Mühle Bergmann [1977] ECR 1211, paragraph 7; Case 245/81 Edeka Zentrale [1982] ECR 2745, paragraphs 11 and 13; Case C‑122/95 Germany v Council [1998] ECR I‑973, paragraphs 68 and 71; and Case C‑535/03 Unitymark and North Sea Fishermen’s Organisation [2006] ECR I‑2689, paragraphs 53, 63, 68 and 71). | 11 AS THE COURT HELD IN ITS JUDGMENTS OF 19 OCTOBER 1977 IN JOINED CASES 117/76 AND 16/77 RUCKDESCHEL V HAUPTZOLLAMT HAMBURG-ST . ANNEN ( 1977 ) ECR 1753 AND IN JOINED CASES 124/76 AND 20/77 MOULINS ET HUILERIES DE PONT-A-MOUSSON ( 1977 ) ECR 1795 , THE PROHIBITION OF DISCRIMINATION CONTAINED IN THE SECOND SUBPARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 40 ( 3 ) OF THE TREATY IS MERELY A SPECIFIC ENUNCIATION OF THE GENERAL PRINCIPLE OF EQUALITY WHICH IS ONE OF THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF COMMUNITY LAW . THAT PRINCIPLE MEANS THAT LIKE SITUATIONS SHOULD NOT BE TREATED DIFFERENTLY UNLESS SUCH DIFFERENT TREATMENT IS OBJECTIVELY JUSTIFIED .
| 1 |
867,977 | 23. In the absence of a definition of ‘movement of capital’ in the FEU Treaty, the Court has recognised the nomenclature that constitutes Annex I to Directive 88/361 as having indicative value, it being understood that, as pointed out in the introduction to that annex, the list which it contains is not exhaustive (see inter alia, to this effect, judgments in van Hilten-van der Heijden , C‑513/03, EU:C:2006:131, paragraph 39; Missionswerk Werner Heukelbach , C‑25/10, EU:C:2011:65, paragraph 15; and Welte , C‑181/12, EU:C:2013:662, paragraph 20). | 16 A national rule that, where men and women who are candidates for the same promotion are equally qualified, women are automatically to be given priority in sectors where they are under-represented, involves discrimination on grounds of sex. | 0 |
867,978 | 52
Equally, in order to enable Regulation No 1408/71 to apply to the future effects of situations arising under the period of validity of the old law, Article 94(2) imposes the obligation to take into consideration, for the purposes of determining rights to benefit, all periods of insurance, employment or residence completed under the legislation of any Member State ‘before 1 October 1972 or before the date of its application in the territory of that Member State’. It follows, therefore, from that provision that a Member State is not entitled to refuse to take into account periods of insurance completed in the territory of another Member State, for the purposes of establishing a claimant’s retirement pension, for the sole reason that such periods were completed before the entry into force of that regulation with respect to him (judgments of 18 April 2002, Duchon, C‑290/00, EU:C:2002:234, paragraph 23 and the case-law cited, and of 5 November 2014, Somova, C‑103/13, EU:C:2014:2334, paragraph 52). | 21. À cet égard, si le régime instauré à la DA 27 ne limite pas l’acquisition de participations stricto sensu, il a pour effet d’empêcher ou de restreindre l’exercice des droits de vote afférents aux actions détenues. | 0 |
867,979 | 42 In this regard, it should be noted that the purpose of Article 5(6) of the Sixth Directive is, in particular, to ensure equal treatment as between a taxable person who withdraws goods from his business and an ordinary consumer who buys goods of the same type. In pursuit of that objective, Article 5(6) prevents a taxable person who has been able to deduct VAT on the purchase of goods used for his business from escaping payment of VAT when he transfers those goods from his business for private purposes and from thereby enjoying advantages to which he is not entitled by comparison with an ordinary consumer who buys goods and pays VAT on them (see Case C-20/91 De Jong [1992] ECR I-2847, paragraph 15, and Case C-48/97 Kuwait Petroleum [1999] ECR I-2323, paragraph 21, as well as, with regard to heading (a) of the first subparagraph of Article 6(2) of the Sixth Directive, which is based on the same principle, Case C-230/94 Enkler [1996] ECR I-4517, paragraph 33). | 26 It follows that, once discrimination has been found to exist, and an employer takes steps to achieve equality for the future by reducing the advantages of the favoured class, achievement of equality cannot be made progressive on a basis that still maintains discrimination, even if only temporarily. | 0 |
867,980 | 56 According to settled case-law, the purpose of the first paragraph of Article 234 of the Treaty is to make clear, in accordance with the principles of international law, that application of the Treaty does not affect the commitment of the Member State concerned to respect the rights of non-member States under an earlier agreement and to comply with its corresponding obligations (see Case C-324/93 Evans Medical and Macfarlan Smith [1995] ECR I-563, paragraph 27). | 31. Ce n’est qu’en réponse à la question de la Cour du 20 novembre 2014, relative à la recevabilité de son recours, que la Commission a apporté quelques précisions concernant les positions 83 et 87 de l’annexe n° 3 de ladite loi. Toutefois, conformément à la jurisprudence de la Cour, selon laquelle l’État membre concerné doit avoir l’occasion de faire utilement valoir ses moyens de défense contre les griefs formulés par la Commission, il convient de ne tenir compte que des arguments présentés par la Commission dans sa requête ainsi que dans son mémoire en réplique (voir, par analogie, arrêt Commission/Luxembourg, C‑32/05, EU:C:2006:749, point 60). | 0 |
867,981 | 26. In the case of gifts, it follows from that case-law that the measures prohibited by Article 56(1) EC as being restrictions on the movement of capital include those whose effect is to reduce the value of a gift by a resident of a Member State other than that in which the property concerned is located and which taxes the gift of that property (see, by analogy, van Hilten-van der Heijden , paragraph 44; Jäger , paragraph 31; Eckelkamp and Others , paragraph 44; Arens-Sikken , paragraph 37; and Block , paragraph 24). | 32. La récupération doit s’effectuer sans délai et, plus précisément, dans celui prévu dans la décision, adoptée au titre de l’article 108, paragraphe 2, TFUE, enjoignant la récupération d’une aide d’État ou, le cas échéant, dans celui fixé par la Commission par la suite. Une récupération tardive, postérieure aux délais impartis, ne saurait satisfaire aux exigences du traité (arrêt du 13 octobre 2011, Commission/Italie, C‑454/09, point 37). | 0 |
867,982 | 17 The Court concluded from this that Regulation No 123/85 could not be interpreted as prohibiting a trader who is outside the official distribution network for a given make of motor vehicle and is not an authorized intermediary within the meaning of that regulation from acquiring new vehicles of that make by way of parallel imports and independently carrying on the business of marketing such vehicles (judgment in Nissan France and Others, paragraph 20). | 43. Accordingly, the Austrian legislation must be regarded as having existed on 31 December 1993 for the purposes of Article 57(1) EC. | 0 |
867,983 | 42. In that regard, after initiating the procedure for service by defining the relevant documents to that effect, that court will rule only after the addressee of a document has effectively refused to accept it on the ground that it was not drafted in a language which he understands or is expected to understand. Therefore, that court will be required to determine, at the request of the applicant, whether such a refusal was justified (see, by analogy, judgment in Weiss und Partner , C‑14/07, EU:C:2008:264, paragraph 85). To that effect, it must take due account of all the evidence in the file in order to, first, determine the linguistic knowledge of the addressee of the document (see judgment in Weiss und Partner , C‑14/07, EU:C:2008:264, paragraph 80) and, secondly, decide whether, in view of the nature of the document at issue, a translation of it is required. | 60. Furthermore, account must be taken of the fact that, under Article 7(2) of the directive, the minimum period of paid annual leave may not be replaced by an allowance in lieu, except where the employment relationship is terminated. That prohibition is intended to ensure that a worker is normally entitled to actual rest, with a view to ensuring effective protection of his health and safety (see, to that effect, BECTU , cited above, paragraph 44, and Case C-342/01 Merino Gómez [2004] ECR I-2605, paragraph 30). | 0 |
867,984 | 51. It is for the competent authority to assess whether failure to comply with a provision of Directive 91/628 has had an impact on the welfare of the animals, whether such a failure can, if appropriate, be remedied and whether it must result in the export refund being forfeited, reduced or retained. It is also for that authority to decide whether the export refund must be reduced on a pro rata basis according to the number of animals which may, in its view, have suffered as a result of non‑compliance with Directive 91/628 or whether that refund should not be paid since the failure to comply with a provision of that directive has inevitably had an impact on the welfare of all the animals (see Viamex Agrar Handel and ZVK , paragraph 44). | 44. It is for the competent authority to assess whether a failure to comply with a provision of Directive 91/628 has had an impact on animal welfare, whether such a failure can, where appropriate, be remedied and whether it must result in the export refund being forfeited, reduced or retained. It is also for that authority to decide whether the export refund must be reduced on a pro rata basis according to the number of animals which may, in its view, have suffered as a result of non-compliance with Directive 91/628 or whether that refund should not be paid since the failure to comply with a provision of that directive has had an impact on the welfare of all the animals. | 1 |
867,985 | 28 However, it follows from the case-law of the Court that, in deciding whether the Directive applies to the transfer of an undertaking subject to an administrative or judicial procedure, the determining factor to be taken into consideration is the purpose of the procedure in question (Case C-362/89 D'Urso and Others [1991] ECR I-4105, paragraph 26, and Case C-472/93 Spano and Others [1995] ECR I-4321, paragraph 24). Furthermore, account should also be taken of the form of the procedure in question, in particular in so far as it means that the undertaking continues or ceases trading, and also of the Directive's objectives (Dethier Équipement, cited above, paragraph 25). | 33 When assessing whether an aid granted to the fisheries sector is compatible with the common market, the Commission must therefore take account of the requirements of the common fisheries policy, which are indeed those of the common market. | 0 |
867,986 | 181. In that regard, it is clear from the case-law of the Court that interested parties other than the Member State concerned, such as in the present case the Government of Gibraltar, have, in the procedure for reviewing State aid, only the opportunity to send to the Commission all information intended for the guidance of the latter with regard to its future action and they cannot themselves seek to engage in an adversarial debate with the Commission in the same way as is offered to that Member State (see Commission v Sytraval and Brink’s France , paragraph 59, and Joined Cases C‑74/00 P and C‑75/00 P Falck and Acciaierie di Bolzano v Commission [2002] ECR I‑7869, paragraphs 80 and 82). | 37. It therefore appears that, in addition to the criterion of whether a substance constitutes a production residue, a second relevant criterion for determining whether or not that substance is waste for the purposes of Directive 75/442 is the degree of likelihood that that substance will be reused, without any further processing prior to its reuse. If, in addition to the mere possibility of reusing the substance, there is also a financial advantage to the holder in so doing, the likelihood of reuse is high. In such circumstances, the substance in question must no longer be regarded as a burden which its holder seeks to " discard" , but as a genuine product. | 0 |
867,987 | 11. It suffices to point out, in that regard, that according to settled case-law, the question whether a Member State has failed to fulfil its obligations must be determined by reference to the situation prevailing in the Member State at the end of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion (see, inter alia , Case C-148/00 Commission v Italy [2001] ECR I-9823, paragraph 7) and that a Member State cannot rely on provisions, practices or circumstances in its own legal order to justify failure to implement a directive within the prescribed period (see, to that effect, Case C-276/98 Commission v Portugal [2001] ECR I-1699, paragraph 20 and Case C-392/01 Commission v Spain [2002] ECR I-11111, paragraph 9). | 29 IN SENDING THOSE CIRCULARS TO ALL THE BELGIAN DEALERS , BMW BELGIUM PLAYED THE LEADING ROLE IN THE CONCLUSION WITH THOSE DEALERS OF AN AGREEMENT DESIGNED TO HALT SUCH EXPORTS COMPLETELY .
| 0 |
867,988 | 29 By its third question the national court asks whether the administrators of the occupational pension scheme must, like the employer, act in accordance with Article 119 of the Treaty and whether the worker discriminated against may assert his rights directly against the administrators. | 42. It follows that, apart from the case of substances or combinations of substances intended for the purpose of making a medical diagnosis, a product cannot be regarded as being a medicinal product by function where, having regard to its composition – including its content in active substances – and if used as intended, it is incapable of appreciably restoring, correcting or modifying physiological functions in human beings. | 0 |
867,989 | 41. However, that interpretation of Article 18 TFEU, the background to which concerns Union citizenship (see, to that effect, Case C‑209/03 Bidar [2005] ECR I-2119, paragraphs 37 and 39), cannot be applied as it stands to a situation where a third-country national is in possession of a permit for residence in a Member State. | 61. It can be seen from recitals 4 to 8 and 10 in the preamble to Directive 2003/54 and recitals 4 and 6 to 10 in the preamble to Directive 2003/55 that those directives sought, inter alia, to establish an open and transparent market, non‑discriminatory and transparent access to the network of the distribution system operator, and a level playing field. | 0 |
867,990 | 109. As regards, first, the query contained in questions 1(b) and 2(b), it must be noted that the willingness of the Austrian legislature to take account of the interests of domestic economic operators, to the exclusion of those of economic operators established in other Member States, cannot be accepted as justification for the difference in treatment resulting from the legislation at issue in the main proceedings. Just as they cannot justify a barrier to the fundamental principles of free movement of goods or the freedom to provide services (see, inter alia, Case C‑120/95 Decker [1998] ECR I‑1831, paragraph 39, and Case C‑158/96 Kohll [1998] ECR I‑1931, paragraph 41), aims of a purely economic nature cannot justify discrimination on grounds of nationality within the scope of application of the EAEC Treaty. | 48 In addition, contrary to the German Government's arguments, although the undertaking of such projects may be regarded as of great assistance to university education, it is not essential to attain its objective, that is, in particular, the teaching of students to enable them to pursue a professional activity. Indeed, many universities achieve this aim without carrying out research projects for consideration and there are other ways to ensure a link between university education and professional life. | 0 |
867,991 | 30. In this respect, it should be recalled that, while a mere finding of disparities between national rules is not sufficient to justify having recourse to Article 95 EC (see, to that effect, Case C-376/98 Germany v Parliament and Council [2000] ECR I-8419, paragraph 84), it is otherwise where there are differences between the laws, regulations or administrative provisions of the Member States which are such as to obstruct the fundamental freedoms and thus have a direct effect on the functioning of the internal market (see, to that effect, Germany v Parliament and Council , paragraph 95, and Case C-491/01 British American Tobacco (Investments) and Imperial Tobacco [2002] ECR I-11453, paragraph 60). | 27 Consequently, any measure adopted by a Member State which maintains in force a statutory provision that creates a situation in which a public employment agency cannot avoid infringing Article 86 is incompatible with the rules of the Treaty. | 0 |
867,992 | 56. As to the merits, it must be borne in mind that Article 20(4) of Regulation No 1/2003 requires the Commission to state reasons for the decision ordering an investigation by specifying its subject-matter and purpose. As the Court has held, this is a fundamental requirement, designed not merely to show that the proposed entry onto the premises of the undertakings concerned is justified but also to enable those undertakings to assess the scope of their duty to cooperate whilst at the same time safeguarding their rights of defence (judgments in Roquette Frères , C‑94/00, EU:C:2002:603, paragraph 47, and Nexans and Nexans France v Commission , C‑37/13 P, EU:C:2014:2030, paragraph 34). | 28 That test, based on the principle of proportionality, also applies in the context of the marketing of cosmetic products where, as in the case in the main proceedings, a mistake as to the product's characteristics cannot pose any risk to public health. | 0 |
867,993 | 88. According to settled case-law, the statement of reasons required by Article 253 EC must be appropriate to the act at issue and must disclose in a clear and unequivocal fashion the reasoning followed by the institution which adopted the measure in question in such a way as to enable the persons concerned to ascertain the reasons for the measure and to enable the Court to carry out its review. It is not necessary for the reasoning to go into all the relevant facts and points of law, since the question whether the statement of reasons meets the requirements of Article 253 EC must be assessed with regard not only to its wording but also to its context and to all the legal rules governing the matter in question (see, inter alia, Case C-56/93 Belgium v Commission [1996] ECR I-723, paragraph 86, Case C-278/95 P Siemens v Commission [1997] ECR I-2507, paragraph 17, and Case C-501/00 Spain v Commission [2004] ECR I-6717, paragraph 73). | 23. First, as regards the objectives of that regulation, it is clear from the 2nd, 6th, 16th and 17th recitals in the preamble that it seeks to ensure the free movement of judgments from Member States in civil and commercial matters by simplifying the formalities with a view to their rapid and simple recognition and enforcement. | 0 |
867,994 | 27 So, the mere fact that, in the instant case, the service provided by the undertaking holding the contracts for driveage work and then by the undertaking to which the work was then subcontracted is similar does not warrant the conclusion that an economic entity has been transferred between the first and the second undertaking. Such an entity cannot be reduced to the activity entrusted to it. Its identity also emerges from other factors, such as its workforce, its management staff, the way in which its work is organised, its operating methods or indeed, where appropriate, the operational resources available to it (Süzen, cited above, paragraph 15, Joined Cases C-127/96, C-229/96 and C-74/97 Hernández Vidal and Others [1998] ECR I-8179, paragraph 30, and Joined Cases C-173/96 and C-247/96 Hidalgo and Others [1998] ECR I-8237, paragraph 30). | 15 As observed by most of the parties who commented on this point, the mere fact that the service provided by the old and the new awardees of a contract is similar does not therefore support the conclusion that an economic entity has been transferred. An entity cannot be reduced to the activity entrusted to it. Its identity also emerges from other factors, such as its workforce, its management staff, the way in which its work is organized, its operating methods or indeed, where appropriate, the operational resources available to it. | 1 |
867,995 | 26. In order to determine whether that condition is met, it is necessary to consider all the facts characterising the transaction concerned, including in particular the type of undertaking or business concerned, whether or not its tangible assets, such as buildings and movable property, are transferred, the value of its intangible assets at the time of the transfer, whether or not the majority of its employees are taken over by the new employer, whether or not its customers are transferred, the degree of similarity between the activities carried on before and after the transfer, and the period, if any, for which those activities were suspended. However, all those circumstances are merely single factors in the overall assessment which must be made and cannot therefore be considered in isolation (see judgments in Spijkers , 24/85, EU:C:1986:127, paragraph 13; Redmond Stichting , C‑29/91, EU:C:1992:220, paragraph 24; Süzen , C‑13/95, EU:C:1997:141, paragraph 14; and Abler and Others , C‑340/01, EU:C:2003:629, paragraph 33). | 39. Thus, first, there must be an intervention by the State or through State resources. Second, the intervention must be liable to affect trade between Member States. Third, it must confer an advantage on the recipient. Fourth, it must distort or threaten to distort competition (see Altmark Trans and Regierungspräsidium Magdeburg , paragraph 75, and Case C-172/03 Heiser [2005] ECR I-1627, paragraph 27). | 0 |
867,996 | 15. At the outset it must be pointed out that, according to settled case‑law, although direct taxation falls within the competence of the Member States, the latter must none the less exercise that competence in a manner consistent with Community law (see Case C‑80/94 Wielockx [1995] ECR I‑2493, paragraph 16; Case C‑35/98 Verkooijen [2000] ECR I‑4071, paragraph 32; Case C‑334/02 Commission v France [2004] ECR I‑2229, paragraph 21; Case C‑315/02 Lenz [2004] ECR I‑7063, paragraph 19; and Case C‑319/02 Manninen [2004] ECR I‑7477, paragraph 19). | Par ailleurs, il convient de rappeler qu’un État membre ne saurait exciper de dispositions, de pratiques ou de situations de son ordre juridique interne pour justifier l’inobservation des obligations résultant du droit de l’Union (arrêt du 2 décembre 2014, Commission/Grèce, C‑378/13, EU:C:2014:2405, point 29). | 0 |
867,997 | 32. First of all, within the scheme of the Brussels Convention, the jurisdiction of the courts of the Contracting State in which the defendant is domiciled constitutes the general principle enshrined in the first paragraph of Article 2, and it is only by way of derogation from that principle that the Convention provides for an exhaustive list of cases in which the defendant may or must be sued before the courts of another Contracting State. As a consequence, the rules of jurisdiction which derogate from that general principle are to be strictly interpreted, so that they cannot give rise to an interpretation going beyond the cases envisaged by the Convention (see, in particular, Bertrand , paragraph 17; Shearson Lehman Hutton , paragraphs 14, 15 and 16; Benincasa , paragraph 13, and Mietz , paragraph 27). | 139 It follows that it is permissible, for the purpose of determining the fine, to have regard both to the total turnover of the undertaking, which constitutes an indication, albeit approximate and imperfect, of the size of the undertaking and of its economic power, and to the proportion of that turnover accounted for by the goods in respect of which the infringement was committed, which gives an indication of the scale of the infringement (Musique Diffusion française and Others v Commission, cited above, paragraph 121). Although an undertaking's market shares cannot be a decisive factor in concluding that an undertaking belongs to a powerful economic entity, they are nevertheless relevant in determining the influence which it may exert on the market. | 0 |
867,998 | 28. In that respect, it is not possible to exclude the possibility that imperative reasons in the public interest such as protection of the interests of creditors, minority shareholders and employees (see Case C-208/00 Überseering [2002] ECR I-9919, paragraph 92), and the preservation of the effectiveness of fiscal supervision and the fairness of commercial transactions (see Case C-167/01 Inspire Art [2003] ECR I‑10155, paragraph 132), may, in certain circumstances and under certain conditions, justify a measure restricting the freedom of establishment. | 16. It is therefore necessary to establish whether, at that date, the contested legislation continued to produce effects (see, to that effect, Joined Cases C‑20/01 and C‑28/01 Commission v Germany [2003] ECR I‑3609, paragraph 34 and 37; Case C‑125/03 Commission v Germany , not published in the ECR, paragraphs 12 and 13; and Commission v Italy , paragraph 16). | 0 |
867,999 | 43. It is settled case-law that it is necessary, in that regard, where justification is based on an exception laid down in the Treaty or indeed on an overriding general-interest reason, to ensure that the measures taken in that respect do not exceed what is objectively necessary for that purpose and that the same result could not be achieved by less restrictive rules (see Müller‑Fauré and Van Riet , cited above, paragraph 68 and the case‑law cited there). | 43. However, contrary to the position expressed by the Consiglio Nazionale degli Architetti, Pianificatori, Paesaggisti e Conservatori and the Ordine degli Architetti Pianificatori, Paesaggisti e Conservatori della Provincia di Verona, it cannot be inferred from that competence of the host Member State that Directive 85/384 authorises that Member State to subject the exercise of activities relating to buildings of artistic interest to an examination of the qualifications of the persons concerned in that field. | 0 |
Subsets and Splits
No saved queries yet
Save your SQL queries to embed, download, and access them later. Queries will appear here once saved.