Indirect Effect and State Liability & Fiscal Measures

Card Set Information

Indirect Effect and State Liability & Fiscal Measures
2013-02-22 18:21:27
EU law

eu law
Show Answers:

  1. In which case below did the Court of Justice accept that, on the facts, it was not possible to interpret the national law in conformity with EU law?

    1 Von Colson & Kamann v Land Nordhein-Westfalen

    2 Litster v Forth Dry Dock and Engineering Co

    3 Marleasing SA

    4 Wagner Miret
    Answer 4 - Wagner Miret
  2. What is the principle of state liability designed to achieve?

    1 To put the individual in the position they would have been in had the directive been implemented

    2 To compensate the individual for loss suffered as a result of a failure by the Member state to fulfil its obligations under European law

    3 To punish the member state

    4 To force the Member State to change the law
    Answer 2 - to compensate individuals
  3. Which case established the principle of state liability?

    1 Brasserie du Pecheur SA v Germany

    2 Factortame

    3 Francovich & Bonifaci v Italian Republic

    4 Dillenkofer v Germany
    Answer 3 - Francovich
  4. Which case established the principle that a
    national court can apply the principle of indirect effect to national legislation which was not intended to implement a directive?

    1 Von Colson & Kamann v Land Nordhein-Westfalen

    2 Litster v Forth Dry Dock and Engineering Co Ltd

    3 Marleasing SA v La Comercial Internacional de Alimentacion SA

    4 Wagner Miret v Fondo do Garantis Salarial
    Answer 3 - Marleasing
  5. The case of Von Colson established which principle of European law?

    1 That the principle of indirect effect can apply to legislation that was passed before the EU made a rule in the area covered by the existing national rule 
    2 That it is for the national court to determine the extent to which it may interpret national law in conformity with the wording and purpose of a directive

    3 That directives are capable of having indirect effect in that their provisions can be used by national courts in interpreting the meaning and scope of national legislation, in particular to national legislation passed specifically to implement a directive

    4 That in interpreting national law in the light of the provisions of EU law the courts must not distort the meaning of the domestic legislation
    Answer 3 - directives can have indirect effect
  6. The State Liability principle
    Individuals may recover compensation from a MS where they have sufferedloss as a result of the failure of the MS to fulfil its obligations underCommunity law
  7. Francovich & Bonifaci v Italian Republic - the rule for state emanation
    • The result prescribed by the directive should entail the grant of rights to individuals
    • It should be possible to identify the content of the those rights on the basis of the directive
    • There must be a causal link between the breach of the State’s obligation and loss and damage suffered
  8. Which cases demonstrate charges of equivalent effect?
    • Commission v Italy (Statistical Levy)
    • Commission v Belgium (Customs Warehouses)
    • Diamantarbeiders
  9. Which case note the exceptions of charges are outside scope of Art 30?
    Commission v Germany
  10. Exceptions to charges outside of Art 30

    1 General system of internal dues systematically applied to imported & domestic products alike
    Dansk Denkavit
  11. Exceptions to charges which are outside Art 30

    2  Fees for services rendered to importer
    • Commission v Belgium (Customs Warehouses)
    • In consideration for a service rendered
    • The trader benefited from the service & 
    • The charge is commensurate to the benefit
  12. Exceptions to charges outside of Art 30

    3 Charges for mandatory inspections (Community/ International Law)
    Commission v Germany (Animal Inspections)

    • - Do not exceed actual cost of inspection
    • - Inspection is obligatory 
    • - Required in general interest of EC
    • - Promote the free movement of goods
  13. General taxation defined as a general system of internal dues applied systematically to categories of products irrespective of origin
    Commission v France (Reprographic Machinery)
  14. Similar Products
    • Commission v France (Spirits) 
    • Rewe-Zentrale (Cassis)
    • John Walker (Fruit Liquors and Spirits)
    • Commission v Denmark (Fruit and Grape Wines)
    • Tarantik (Cars)
  15. Direct discrimination can never be justified
    Commission v Italy (Regenerated Oil)
  16. Which of the following should not be taken into account when deciding if goods (cars) are similar or non similar under Art 110 as decided in Tarantik?

    1 Durability
    2 Brand
    3 Price
    4 Performance
    Answer 2
  17. Which case establishes the direct effect of Art 30 ?

    1 Alfons Lutticke
    2 Commission v Belgium (Customs Warehouses)
    3 Van Gend en Loos
    4 Commission v Italy (Art Treasures)
    Answer 3
  18. In which case was a charge for an inspection held to be lawful?

    1 Dansk Denkavit ApS v Danish Ministry of Agriculture
    2 Commission v Netherlands (Van Gend en Loos)
    3 Commission v Greece
    4 Bresciani v Administrazione Italiana della Finanze
    Answer 1 - Denkavit
  19. Which case establishes that a good reason for a fiscal charge will still not render that charge legal ?

    1 Diamantarbeiders v Chougol Diamond Co
    2 Commission v Italy (Art Treasures)
    3 Van Gend en Loos
    4 Commission v Netherlands
    Answer 2 - Commission v Italy (Art Treasures)
  20. Diamantbeiders ApS v Chougol Diamond Co concerns which one of the following restrictions on trade?

    1 A measure of equivalence to a quantitative restriction (MEQR)
    2 A quantitative restriction (QR)
    3 A charge of equivalence to a customs duty (CEE)
    4 A customs duty (CD)
    Answer 3 - a charge equivalent to customs duty