STATE SECRETARY FOR THE RUSSIAN PROTECTOR IN THINGS AND IN MORAVA, PRAGUE, inv. 182, sig. 109-2/84

Page 128

English Translation

March 1940 Penalties Treatment of enemy 1940 (RGBL. I e bon 50,000 RM cen. to be carried out in 1940. after 1 May the person subject to registration is to be notified, is within the limits of knowledge er- Reichsprotettor ien and Moravia. Orders: ouer uno sarmen e gez. Drug ausder Verordlichen Vermögen vom 15. 191) The Council of Ministers for 4. other than those in the Nos. (2) The Minister of Justice of the Federal Republic of Germany has complied with the provisions of paragraph 1, No. 2, and for the territory of the Gsonen with regard to branches of the integrated eastern regions of an enemy state. General § 4 Enemy fortunes Finding an enemy property located in the country In the sense of the Grand German, the following assets were to be regarded as Jnland if they belong to legal or economic enemies. Ostgebieten. I. 1. Lands, fundamental rights and enemy property situated in the Jn Land; 2. Securities, shares and receipts of any kind of enemy state which is located in the country; United Royal Debits of the Reich and other debt of Northern Ireland with those who have their siss or principal place of business, protectorate in the Ynland, even if the documents of Dominions Knad are located abroad; and South African nisa 3. In the case of an undertaking which is in the territory of the Kingdom of Belgium, the competent authorities of the Member State in which it is situated shall, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of the European Parliament and of the Council, take the necessary measures to ensure that the provisions of Article 3 of Regulation No 1408/71 are complied with in the event of a failure to fulfil its obligations under the legislation of another Member State. The Court of First Instance held that the Court of Justice of the European Communities had failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 85 of the EEC Treaty and that it had failed, in so far as it was concerned, to rule on the interpretation of Articles 85 and 86 of the Treaty, of the provisions of Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty.