263:, stated that "contracts without cause or whose cause is unlawful have no legal effect". La Comercial argued that the action should be dismissed in its entirety on the grounds that article 11 of the First Council Directive 68/151/EEC of 9 March 1968 on coordination of safeguards which, for the protection of the interests of members and others, which had not yet been implemented by Spain, provided an exhaustive list of the cases under which the nullity of a company may be ordered and that "lack of cause" was not a ground listed therein. The Spanish court then referred the following question to the European Court of Justice:
287:
obligation, is binding on all the authorities of Member States including, for matters within their jurisdiction, the courts. It follows that, in applying national law, whether the provisions in question were adopted before or after the directive, the national court called upon to interpret it is required to do so, as far as possible, in the light of the wording and the purpose of the directive in order to achieve the result pursued by the latter and thereby comply with the third paragraph of
Article 189 of the Treaty."
26:
209:
258:
Marleasing SA (the
Applicant) brought an application before the Spanish national courts for an order that the contract establishing "La Comercial" was void and that the formation of La Comercial should be nullified on the grounds that establishment "lacked cause, was a sham transaction and was
286:
ECR 1891, paragraph 26, the Member States' obligation arising from a directive to achieve the result envisaged by the directive and their duty under
Article 5 of the Treaty (article 4(3) TEU now) to take all appropriate measures, whether general or particular, to ensure the fulfilment of that
584:
Judgment of the Court of 13 November 1990. Marleasing SA v La
Comercial Internacional de Alimentacion SA. Reference for a preliminary ruling: Juzgado de Primera Instancia e Instruccion no 1 de Oviedo - Spain. Directive 68/151/CEE - Article 11 - Consistent interpretation of national law. Case
267:"Is Article 11 of Council Directive 68/151/EEC of 9 March 1968, which has not been implemented in national law, directly applicable so as to preclude a declaration of nullity of a public limited liability company on a ground other than those set out in the said article?"
602:
113:
Juzgado de
Primera Instancia e Instrucción nº 1 de Oviedo, auto de 13 March 1989, Juzgado de Primera Instancia e Instrucción nº 1 de Oviedo, sentencia de 23 February 1991
282:
464:
416:
259:
carried out in order to defraud the creditors of
Barviesa (a co-founder of La Comercial)". Spanish law at the time, Articles 1261 and 1275 of the
500:
440:
370:
227:
452:
334:
317:
245:
488:
276:
The ECJ held that the
Spanish Courts were under a duty to interpret national law in a way that gave effect to European law.
404:
192:
617:
607:
428:
392:
176:
172:
118:
30:
583:
476:
358:
76:
612:
346:
310:
191:
member states have a duty to interpret national legislation in the light of unimplemented
European Union
66:
512:
260:
184:
87:
303:
144:
139:
131:
126:
180:
188:
280:...it should be observed that, as the Court pointed out in its judgment in Case 14/83
596:
535:
45:
25:
295:
524:
218:
provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject
381:
299:
202:
168:
Marleasing SA v La
Comercial Internacional de Alimentación SA
50:
Marleasing SA v La
Comercial Internacional de Alimentacion SA
19:
Marleasing SA v La Comercial Internacional de Alimentacion SA
223:
154:
117:
109:
101:
93:
82:
72:
62:
54:
44:
37:
18:
283:Von Colson and Kamann v Land Nordrhein-Westfalen
603:Court of Justice of the European Union case law
278:
311:
8:
318:
304:
296:
246:Learn how and when to remove this message
546:
417:Marshall v Southampton Health Authority
571:Case C-106/89 1 ECR 4135, paragraph 8
562:Case C-106/89 1 ECR 4135, paragraph 4
553:Case C-106/89 1 ECR 4135, paragraph 3
501:Unilever Italia SpA v Central Food SpA
441:CIA Security v Signalson and Securitel
15:
465:Kücükdeveci v Swedex GmbH & Co KG
371:Von Colson v Land Nordrhein-Westfalen
228:providing more context for the reader
7:
187:. It established that the courts of
453:Pfeiffer v Deutsches Rotes Kreuz eV
335:Van Gend en Loos v Ned Belastingen
14:
207:
24:
489:Marleasing SA v La Comercial SA
183:of European Community law, now
160:Interprets Directive 68/151/EEC
1:
634:
405:Pubblico Ministero v Ratti
521:
509:
497:
485:
473:
461:
449:
437:
429:Faccini Dori v Recreb Srl
425:
413:
401:
389:
379:
367:
355:
343:
331:
177:European Court of Justice
159:
150:
137:
124:
31:European Court of Justice
23:
477:Foster v British Gas plc
359:Defrenne v Sabena (No 2)
40:Decided 13 November 1990
347:Van Duyn v Home Office
289:
269:
175:was a decision of the
102:Nationality of parties
38:Submitted 3 April 1989
265:
155:Legislation affecting
326:Direct effect cases
224:improve the article
513:Francovich v Italy
420:(1986) Case 152/84
408:(1979) Case 148/78
393:Commission v Italy
261:Spanish Civil Code
185:European Union law
110:Procedural history
88:preliminary ruling
77:ECLI:EU:C:1990:395
531:
530:
396:(1972) Case 39/72
374:(1984) Case 14/83
362:(1976) Case 43/75
350:(1974) Case 41/74
338:(1963) Case 26/62
256:
255:
248:
164:
163:
145:Walter van Gerven
119:Court composition
625:
618:Spanish case law
608:1990 in case law
572:
569:
563:
560:
554:
551:
320:
313:
306:
297:
251:
244:
240:
237:
231:
211:
210:
203:
140:Advocate General
127:Judge-Rapporteur
86:Reference for a
28:
16:
633:
632:
628:
627:
626:
624:
623:
622:
593:
592:
590:
580:
575:
570:
566:
561:
557:
552:
548:
544:
532:
527:
517:
505:
504:(2000) C-443/98
493:
492:(1990) C-106/89
481:
480:(1990) C-188/89
469:
468:(2010) C-555/07
457:
456:(2005) C-397/01
445:
444:(1996) C-194/94
433:
421:
409:
397:
385:
375:
363:
351:
339:
327:
324:
294:
274:
252:
241:
235:
232:
221:
212:
208:
201:
181:indirect effect
179:concerning the
143:
130:
39:
33:
12:
11:
5:
631:
629:
621:
620:
615:
610:
605:
595:
594:
588:
587:
579:
578:External links
576:
574:
573:
564:
555:
545:
543:
540:
539:
538:
529:
528:
522:
519:
518:
510:
507:
506:
498:
495:
494:
486:
483:
482:
474:
471:
470:
462:
459:
458:
450:
447:
446:
438:
435:
434:
432:(1994) C-91/92
426:
423:
422:
414:
411:
410:
402:
399:
398:
390:
387:
386:
380:
377:
376:
368:
365:
364:
356:
353:
352:
344:
341:
340:
332:
329:
328:
325:
323:
322:
315:
308:
300:
293:
290:
273:
270:
254:
253:
215:
213:
206:
200:
197:
189:European Union
162:
161:
157:
156:
152:
151:
148:
147:
135:
134:
122:
121:
115:
114:
111:
107:
106:
103:
99:
98:
95:
91:
90:
84:
80:
79:
74:
70:
69:
64:
60:
59:
56:
52:
51:
48:
46:Full case name
42:
41:
35:
34:
29:
21:
20:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
630:
619:
616:
614:
613:1990 in Spain
611:
609:
606:
604:
601:
600:
598:
591:
586:
582:
581:
577:
568:
565:
559:
556:
550:
547:
541:
537:
536:Direct effect
534:
533:
526:
520:
516:(1991) C-6/90
515:
514:
508:
503:
502:
496:
491:
490:
484:
479:
478:
472:
467:
466:
460:
455:
454:
448:
443:
442:
436:
431:
430:
424:
419:
418:
412:
407:
406:
400:
395:
394:
388:
383:
378:
373:
372:
366:
361:
360:
354:
349:
348:
342:
337:
336:
330:
321:
316:
314:
309:
307:
302:
301:
298:
291:
288:
285:
284:
277:
271:
268:
264:
262:
250:
247:
239:
236:February 2016
229:
225:
219:
216:This section
214:
205:
204:
198:
196:
194:
190:
186:
182:
178:
174:
170:
169:
158:
153:
149:
146:
142:
141:
136:
133:
132:Tom O'Higgins
129:
128:
123:
120:
116:
112:
108:
104:
100:
97:Sixth chamber
96:
92:
89:
85:
81:
78:
75:
71:
68:
65:
61:
57:
53:
49:
47:
43:
36:
32:
27:
22:
17:
589:
567:
558:
549:
511:
499:
487:
475:
463:
451:
439:
427:
415:
403:
391:
369:
357:
345:
333:
281:
279:
275:
266:
257:
242:
233:
222:Please help
217:
167:
166:
165:
138:
125:
67:61989CJ0106
597:Categories
542:References
193:directives
83:Case type
585:C-106/89
292:See also
272:Judgment
173:C-106/89
58:C-106/89
384:art 288
171:(1990)
94:Chamber
63:CelexID
525:EU law
199:Facts
105:Spain
523:See
382:TFEU
73:ECLI
55:Case
226:by
599::
195:.
319:e
312:t
305:v
249:)
243:(
238:)
234:(
230:.
220:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
