Exemplos de uso de Direct effect of article em Inglês e suas traduções para o Português
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
-
Medicine
-
Financial
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Computer
-
Official/political
Direct effect of Articles 85 and 86.
Ð cases concerning the direct effect of Article 88(3);
Direct effect of Article 41(1) of the Agreement.
We have already referred to the judgment in Delimitis and the rules it sets out regarding the direct effect of Articles 85 and 86.
The direct effect of Article 41(1) of the Additional Protocol.
The second point which I believe is relevant andhas not been mentioned is the need to guarantee and consolidate the direct effect of Article 8A.
J Borrie Clarke ν Chief Direct effect of Article 4(1) of Directive 79/7/ Article 177 ECC Adjudication Officer EEC as regards a woman's invalidity benefit.
The main judgments so far delivered relate to the definition of an undertaking("entreprise")within the meaning of article 85 EEC Treaty(CSJ 30.11.1983 not published), or the direct effect of article 85 EEC Treaty T. Arr.
The surviving spouse may also rely upon the direct effect of Article 119 of the EEC Treaty with regard to entitlements to benefits which the deceased worker had under an occupational pension scheme.
As regards the courts, the Lisbon Court of Appeal, in a judgment of 6 March 1990(Case No 2426,1st Section), acknowledged the primacy of Community competition law and, implicitly, the direct effect of Article 85.
Due to the direct effect of Articles 85(1) and 86, however, the ECJ has strongly criticised the carrying on of contemporaneous proceedings to enforce EU competition rules at both a national and European level.
There is no specific provision on thismatter in the Directive, but these principles apply as a direct effect of Article 30 of the Treaty, in accordance with the decisions of the Euro pean Courtof Justice as recalled in the preamble.
In this case, the retrospective effect i.e. the application of the principle of equal treatment in social security schemes, should be 8 April 1976 this is the date of the Defrenne II judgement,where the Court recognised for the first time the direct effect of Article 141.
However, the Council of the European Union andthe Commission of the European Communities have acknowledged that the direct effect of Articles 43 EC and 49 EC, recognised in the Reyners 2and Van Binsbergen 3judgments respectively, with effect from 1 January 1970, the end of the transitional period.
The direct effect of Article 119 may not, however, be relied on in relation to pension entitlements which correspond to periods of employment served before the date of the judgment in these cases, except in the case of workers or those claiming under them who have before that date initiated legal proceedings or raised an equivalent claim under the applicable national law.
Employees who have suffered discrimination such as that described above as concerns the right to membership of an occupational pension scheme andto the payment of benefits on the basis of that scheme may rely on the direct effect of Article 119 in contesting national provisions contrary to that article retroactively from 8 April 1976, the date on which the Court delivered its judgment in Defrenne II.
In support of its action, it claimed that the direct effect of Article 59 rendered invalid the national legislation's restrictions on services provided by transport undertakings established in other Member States of the Community, where they had obtained authorization to transport goods.
Such a rule did not simply limit, in the interests of legal cer tainty, the retroactive effect of a claim for cer tain benefits; it affected the very nature of the rights conferred bythe Community legal order, and limited in time the direct effect of Article 119 of the Treaty in cases where no such limita tion had been laid down either in the case law of the Court or in Protocol No 2 annexed to the Treaty on European Union.
Since the latter judgment included no limitation in time, the direct effect of Article 119 can be relied upon in order retroactively to claim equal treatment in relation to the right to join an occupational pension scheme and this may be done as from 8 April 1976, the date of the Defrenne II judgment in which the Court held for the first time that Article 119 has direct effect. .
Preliminary ruling- Immigration Appeal Tribunal- Validity of Article 6(1)of Decision 1/80 of the EEC/Turkey Association Council in so far as it restricts the scope of Article 12 of the EEC/Turkey Association Agreement of 12 September 1963- Direct effect of Article 12 of the Association Agreement- Interpretation of the expression'duly registered as belonging to the labour force of a Member State' used in Article 6(1)of Decision 1/80.
The direct effect of Article 119 may not, however, be relied upon in this regard in relation to pension entitlements which correspond to periods of employment served before the date of the judgment in these cases, except in the case of workers or those claiming under them who have before that date initiated legal proceedings or raised an equivalent claim under the applicable.
However, in paragraphs 74 and 75 of the same judgment, the Court made it clear that, by virtue of overriding considerations of legal certainty affecting all the interests involved,both public and private, the direct effect of Article 119 could not be relied on in order to support claims relating to pay periods prior to the date of that judgment, namely 8 April 1976, except as regards those workers who had already brought legal proceedings or made an equivalent claim.
The direct effect of Article 119 of the Treaty cannot be relied upon to claim an occupational pension acquired on the basis of periods of employment prior to the date of the judgment of 17 May 1990 in Case C-262/88 Barber saving the case of employees or those entitled under them who before that date brought an action or made an equivalent complaint according to the applicable law.
As far as occupational pension schemes are concerned, the Court held in paragraphs 44 and 45 of Barber,that by reason of overriding considerations of legal certainty, the direct effect of Article 119 of the Treaty could not be relied upon in order to claim entitlement to a pension with effect from a date prior to that of that judgment, namely 17 May 1990, except in the case of claimants who had before that date initiated legal proceedings or raised an equivalent claim.
The direct effect of Article 119 of the EEC Treaty may not be relied on in order to claim entitlement to an occupational pension which was acquired in connection with periods of employment served prior to the date of the Barber judgment of 17 May 1990, except in the case of workers or those claiming under them who have, before that date, initiated legal proceedings or raised an equivalent claim under the applicable national law.
Protocol 2 incorporates paragraph 45 of the Barber judgment(Case 262/88 of 17 May 1990) which states that the direct effect of Article 119 of the Treaty cannot be invoked with a view to requesting, with effect from a date prior to the date of the judgment, entitlement to a pension, except in the case of workers who, before that date, initiated legal proceedings or Introduced an equivalent claim.
The direct effect of Article 119 of the Treaty may be relied upon, for the purpose of claiming equal treatment in the matter of occupational pensions, only in relation to benefits payable in respect of periods of employment subsequent to 17 May 1990, subject to the exception in favour of workers or those claiming under them who had, before that date, initiated legal proceedings or raised an equivalent claim under the applicable national law.
The limitation in time of the possibility of relying on the direct effect of Article 119 of the Treaty, resulting from the judgment in Defrenne II, does not preclude national provisions which lay down a principle of equal treatment by virtue of which, in circumstances like those of the main proceedings, pañ-time workers are entitled to retroactive membership of an occupational pension scheme and to receive a pension under that scheme.
By virtue of the Barber judgment the direct effect of Article 119 of the Treaty may be relied upon, for the purpose of claiming equal treatment in the matter of occupational pensions, only in reunion to benefits payable in respect of periods of service subsequent to 17 May 1990, subject to the exception in favour of workers or those claiming under them who have, before that date, initiated legal proceedings or raised an equivalent claim under the applicable national law.
Barber ν Guardian Royal Exchange the direct effect of Article 119 of the EEC Treaty may be relied upon, for the purpose of claiming equal treatment in the matter of occupational pensions, only in relation to benefits payable in respect of periods of employment subsequent to 17 May 1990, subject to the exception in favour of workers or those claiming under them who have, before that date, initiated legal proceedings or raised an equivalent claim under the applicable national law.