Level 10 Level 12
Level 11

Famous European Law Cases


51 words 0 ignored

Ready to learn       Ready to review

Ignore words

Check the boxes below to ignore/unignore words, then click save at the bottom. Ignored words will never appear in any learning session.

All None

Ignore?
Van Gend en Loos
Dutch import tax, establishes Direct Effect (esp. for treaty articles with negative effects), vertical application of direct effect
Costa v Enel
Italian electricity company nationalisation not conforming to EU law, asserts doctrine of supremacy of EU Law over domestic law
EU Law supremacy confirmed unconditionally
Amministrazione delle Finanze dello Stato v Simmenthal SpA
Cooperativa Agricola Zootecnica S. Antonio and Others v Amministrazione delle finanze dello Stato
Establishes two requirements for fulfilling Van Gend en Loos (sufficiently clear and precise to give rise rise to rights, must be unconditional)
Defrenne v SABENA (No 2)
Sex discrimination- equal pay on airline, example of Direct Effect criteria applied, articles can be horizontal and vertical in direct effect
Alfons Lutticke
Treaty articles with positive obligations have direct effect after any relevant implementation deadlines have passed.
Franz Grad v Finanzmant Traunstein
Regulations and directions have direct effect
Grimaldi v Fonds des Maladies Professionnelles
Recommendation and opinions are not binding forms of EU Law: no direct effect
Van Duyn v Home Office
Directives can have vertical direct effect if Van Gend is satisfied. If court can successfully interpret a right, it is sufficiently clear and precise.
Directive cannot have horizontal direct effect
Marshall v Southampton and South West Area Helth Authority
Ratti
Directive is only directly effective after deadline has been implemented, but if deadline is missed, direct effect occurs (estoppel)
NUT v Governing Body of St Mary's Church of England School (Aided) Junior School
The bipartite test for emanations of the state may be used in place of the tripartite test
Von Colson
Female prison officers- no direct effect as not sufficiently clear or precise, but gives rise to indirect effect. Interpret in light of wording and purpose of directive. Applies vertically.
Francovich
State liability- no implementation and deadline had passed.
Foster v British Gas
Construction of tests for emanation of state (bipartite: under control of state or has special powers, tripartite: responsible for public service, under state control, and has special powers for that purpose)
Doughty v Rolls
Operating at arm's length from the state, not an emanation (tripartite)
Emanation under tripartite test
Griffin v South West Water Services
Una Film
Only case where the choice of emanation test made a difference
Harz
Indirect effect applies horizontally
Adeneler
Indirect effect applies after deadline
Marleasing
For Indirect Effect, interpret national legislation whether adopted before or after the directive's implementation date
Wagner Miret
It is not always possible to interpret national law in light of directive (as happened here).
Pupino
National courts are not required to interpret for indirect effect against the principles of their own law
Webb
UK demonstration of Marleasing- legislation unrelated to EU law could be interpreted
IDT Card Services
Can't rewrite legislatoin or go against its purpose- only interpret
Brasserie du Pecheur
For state liability, the breach must be sufficiently serious, there must be a direct causal link between breach and damage, and the law must confer rights.
Hedley Lomas
Live animals to Spain- mere infringement where no discretion was given to adapt law=sufficiently serious breach for state liability.
Dillenkofer
Brasserie du Pecheur and Francovich are essentially the samet
Factortame
Spanish fishing
Commission v Italy (Italian Art)
Goods are products that can be valued in money and which are capable of forming the subject of commercial transactions. Customs duties are charges having the effect that an imported good is more expensive relative to rival domestic goods.
Commissions v Italy (Statistical Levy)
A levy imposed on all imports and exports for collecting statistical material gave no benefit to importers and was therefore a charge of equivalent effect to a customs duty. Any pecuniary charge however small…
Diamantarbeiders v Chougol
Charges on imports are prohibited even where they are non-protectionist
Commission v Germany (Case 18/87)
Veterinary inspections were not a CEE as were necessary for EU law compliance. Where a charge relates to a general sustem of internal dues applied to domestic and improted products, is a proportional sum…
Dansk Denkavit v Danish Ministry of Agriculture
A charge imposed for checking samples of foodstuffs was not a CEE under article 30.
Bresciani v Amministrazione Italiana delle Finanze
Public health inspections on cowhides were in the public interest and needed to be paid from public funds, not by importers. Criteria for internal dues must be applied to domestic and imported products in the same way.
Commission v Belgium (Customs Warehouses)
Charges for use of a warehouse where customs clearance was completed was a charge having equivalent effect. In order to not be a CEE, the charge must be consideration for a service rendered, of ben…
Lutticke v Hauptzollamt
Article 110 has direct effect
Commission v France (Repographic Machinery)
A tax governed by article 110 is a general system of internal dues applied systematically and in accordance with the same criteria to domestic products and imported products alike. Any such tax is permissible un…
Commission v France (Spirits)
Similarity between goods will be determined on basis of similar and comparable use.
Rewe-Zentrale
Test for similar goods is whether at the same stage of production or marketing the products had similar characteristics and met the same needs from point of view of consumer.
John Walker v Afgifter
Danish whisky tax higher than on fruit liqueur. Not similar. Production method was wholly different. Consumption patterns not sufficient to render them similar. Characteristics for similar goods determined objectively. Needs are determined from point of view of consumer.
Commission v Denmark
Wine made from grapes and wine made from fruit taxed differently. Held to be similar goods. Met same needs for consumer- refreshments at meal times. Method of manufacturing was identical.
Tarantik v Direction des Services Fiscaux de Seine et Marne
Cars will be judged for similarity based on price, size, comfort, performance, fuel consumption, durability, reliability and other matters. CJ emphasises need for flexibility and a broad economic approach.
Commission v Italy (Regenerated Oil)
Lower tax on sale of regenerated oil than that imposed on normal oil, but only for domestic products. Imported regenerated oil still paid higher tax. Discriminatory tax, example of direct discrimination tax in breach of article 110.
Nadasdi and Nemeth
Taxation might be indirectly discriminatory as a result of its effects.
Humblot v Directeur des Services Fiscaux
Humblot paid higher tax on bigger engine. French cars did not have large engines so the tax was indirectly discriminatory against imported cars. Tax increase was disproportionate to engine size increase. An incremental tax would not have been discriminatory.
Chemial Farmaceutici
High tax on synthetic alcohol, mainly imported, was not indirectly discriminatory as it promoted argicultural production and environmental benefits
Commission v Greece
Taxes on cylinder capacity of car, social policy allowed tax increases discouraging purchase of cars with larger cylinders and so was not discriminatory even though only smaller cylinder cars were produced in Greece.
Commission v UK (Wine and Beer)
Wine and beer in competition even though not similar. Tax on wine made it expensive to consume. Tax policies of member states should not crystallise consumer habits and custom to the advantage of national industries.
Commission v Belgium
The tax difference was less than the retail price difference, therefore there was no protectionist tax on beer as against wine.
Cooperativa Co-Frutta v Amministrazione delle Finanze dello Stato
No domestic production of bananas but no equivalent tax imposed on other fruit compared to bananas, therefore there was an indirectly discriminatory tax with protective effect on domestic fruits.