Since the objective of this Directive, namely to ensure that radio equipment made available on the market fulfils requirements providing a high level of protection of health and safety, adequate level of electromagnetic compatibility and an effective and efficient use of radio spectrum so as to avoid harmful interference while guaranteeing the proper functioning of the internal market, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States but can rather, by reason of its scale and effects, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle ...[+++] of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union.

In circumstances such as those of the case in the main proceedings, in which the transaction is not carried out by linked parties for the purposes of Article 80(1) of Directive 2006/112, which it is nevertheless for the referring court to ascertain, Articles 73 and 80 of that directive must be interpreted as meaning that they preclude a national provision, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, under which, where the consideration for a supply of goods or services is entirely in the form of goods or services, the basis of assessment for the supply is, in any event, to be the open market value of the goods or services supplied.

The application of the principle of equality as provided for in the draft Directive is without prejudice to national legislation related to the secular nature and organisation by Member States of their educational systems.

In any case, an entity which has issued transferable securities on a regulated market within the meaning of point 14 of Article 4(1) of Directive 2004/39/EC should always be audited by an auditor either registered in a Member State or overseen by competent authorities of the third country from which the auditor comes from, provided that the said third country is acknowledged by the Commission or a Member State as meeting the requirements equivalent to Community requirements in the field of principles of oversight, quality assurance sy ...[+++]stems and systems of investigations and penalties, and that the basis of this arrangement is reciprocity.

12. Where the number of undertakings authorized to provide satellite telecommunications services is limited by a Member State through special rights, and a fortiori exclusive rights, these constitute restrictions that could be incompatible with Article 59 of the Treaty, whenever such limitation is not justified by essential requirements, since these rights prevent other undertakings from supplying (or obtaining) the services concerned to (or from) other Member States. In the case of satellite network services, such essential requirements could be the effective use of the frequency spectrum and the avoidance of harmful interference between satellite telecommunications systems a other space-based or terrestrial technical systems. Consequently ...[+++], provided that equipment used to offer the services satisfies the essential requirement applicable to satellite communications, separate legal treatment of the latter is not justified. On the other hand, special rights consisting only in special legal or regulatory advantages, do not, in principle, preclude other undertakings from entering the market. The compatibility of these rights with the EC Treaty must therefore be assessed on a case-by-case basis, regard being had to their impact on the effective freedom of other entities to provide the same telecommunications service and their possible justifications regarding the activity concerned.

Whereas official acceptances of varieties of agricultural plant species and of vegetable species granted by Member States before 1 July 1972 in accordance with principles other than those laid down in Directives 70/457/EEC and 70/458/EEC respectively expire in principle not later than 30 June 1980 if by that date the varieties in question have not been accepted in accordance with the provisions of those Directives;