marshall v southampton health authority 1986 summary

As the action was against the state in the case of Van Gend en Loos, it did not deal with the issue of whether or not a citizen could rely on the principle of direct effect to enforce a provision against another citizen therefore the case only confirmed that this was possible to do against the state. The employers had followed a policy that the normal retirement age was the age at which social security pensions become payable, i.e. methods used to achieve that objective. If a certain provision of EU law is horizontally directly effective, then citizens are able to rely on it in actions against each other. '. Reference for a preliminary ruling: Court of Appeal (England) - United Kingdom. '. - Directives do not have horizontal effect as per Marshall v Southampton Health and South West Area Health Authority (Case C - 152/84) [1986] ECR 723. ARTICLE 5 ( 1 ) OF COUNCIL DIRECTIVE NO 76/207 , WHICH PROHIBITS ANY DISCRIMINATION ON GROUNDS OF SEX WITH REGARD TO WORKING CONDITIONS , INCLUDING THE CONDITIONS GOVERNING DISMISSAL , MAY BE RELIED UPON AS AGAINST A STATE AUTHORITY ACTING IN ITS CAPACITY AS EMPLOYER , IN ORDER TO AVOID THE APPLICATION OF ANY NATIONAL PROVISION WHICH DOES NOT CONFORM TO ARTICLE 5 ( 1 ). The free movement of goods is an essential element of the internal market and both EU legislation and the decisions of the Court of Justice support the achievement of this aspect of economic integration. Euro Brokers Holdings Ltd v Monecor (London) Ltd. Case Summary of Euro Brokers Holdings Ltd v Monecor (London) Ltd [2003] 1 BCLC 506. THEY CONTEND IN PARTICULAR , WITH REGARD TO ARTICLES 2 ( 1 ) AND 5 ( 1 ) OF DIRECTIVE NO 76/207 , THAT THOSE PROVISIONS ARE SUFFICIENTLY CLEAR TO ENABLE NATIONAL COURTS TO APPLY THEM WITHOUT LEGISLATIVE INTERVENTION BY THE MEMBER STATES , AT LEAST SO FAR AS OVERT DISCRIMINATION IS CONCERNED . IN EITHER CASE IT IS NECESSARY TO PREVENT THE STATE FROM TAKING ADVANTAGE OF ITS OWN FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH COMMUNITY LAW . as a result of discriminatory dismissal. 1 (1986) and Fos. THE DIRECTIVE APPLIES , ACCORDING TO ARTICLE 3 ( 1 ) THEREOF , TO : ' ( A ) STATUTORY SCHEMES WHICH PROVIDE PROTECTION AGAINST THE FOLLOWING RISKS : ACCIDENTS AT WORK AND OCCUPATIONAL DISEASES , ( B)SOCIAL ASSISTANCE , IN SO FAR AS IT IS INTENDED TO SUPPLEMENT OR REPLACE THE SCHEMES REFERRED TO IN ( A ). - Case 152/84. Marshall was an employee of an Area Health Authority (AHA) in the UK She was dismissed at the age of 62 having passed the normal retirement age of 60 for female employees In contrast, the the normal retirement age of males was 65 She alleged sex discrimination contrary to the Equal Treatment Directive 2 . provisions were fully effective, in accordance with the objective pursued by in particular and including the conditions governing dismissal. - M. H. Marshall v Southampton and South-West Hampshire Area Health Authority (Teaching). 70 Manfredi, para 97, citing Case C-271/91 Marshall v Southampton and South West Hampshire Area Health Authority, EU:C:1993:335, para 31. dismissal upon grounds of sexual discrimination and the direct effect of community law directives in issues of state employment, were the key ingredients to this matter, when a former employee of the south-west hampshire area health authority was subjected to unexpected termination of her employment, despite intimations that her post was secure In 1980, she was dismissed for the sole reason that she had passed the qualifying age for the British State pension. Walrave v Koch (case 36/74) [1974] ECR 1405, DeFrenne v Sabeena (case 43/75) [1976] ECR 455, Administrazione Dealla Finanze dello Stato v Simmenthal (case 106/77) [1978] ECR 629, Minister of the Interior v Daniel Cohn-Bendit [1980] 1 CMLR 543; (before the French Conseil D'Etat), Macarthys Ltd v Smith [1979] 3 All ER 325, Garland v British Rail Engineering Ltd [1982] 2 All ER 402, Von Colson and Kamann v Land Nordrhein-Westfalen (case 14/83) [1984] ECR 1891, On the Application of Wunsche Handelsgesellschaft (Solange II) [1987] 3 CMLR 225; before the German Federal Constitutional Court, Marleasing SA v La Commercial Internacional de Alimentacion SA (case C-106/89) [1990] ECR I-4135, Francovich and Bonifaci v Italy (cases 6/90 and 9/90) [1991] ECR I-5357; [1993] 2 CMLR 66, Duke v GEC Reliance Ltd [1988] 1 All ER 626, Litster and others v Forth Dry Dock and Engineering Co Ltd and another [1989] 1 All ER 1134, Factortame Ltd and others v Secretary of State for Transport [1989] 2 All ER 692, Factortame Ltd and others v Secretary of State for Transport (No 2) (Case C-213/89) [1991] 1 All ER 70, R v Secretary of State for Transport, ex parte Factortame (no.2) [1991] 1 All ER 70 (House of Lords), Thoburn v Sunderland City Council and other appeals [2002] EWHC 195 Admin; [2003] QB 151; [2002] 4 All ER 156, Chapter twelve: The governance of Scotland and Wales, Chapter thirteen: Substantive grounds of judicial review 1: illegality, irrationality and proportionality, Chapter fourteen: Procedural grounds of judicial review, Chapter fifteen: Challenging governmental decisions: the process, Chapter seventeen: Human rights I: Traditional perspectives, Chapter eighteen: Human rights II: Emergent principles, Chapter nineteen: Human rights III: New substantive grounds of review, Chapter twenty: Human rights IV: The Human Rights Act 1998, Chapter twenty-one: Human rights V: The impact of The Human Rights Act 1998, Chapter twenty-two: Human rights VI: Governmental powers of arrest and detention, Chapter twenty-three: Leaving the European Union. The preliminary ruling procedure was used in a long case of M H Marshall v Southampton and South-West Hampshire Area Health Authority (Teaching) [1986] EUECJ R-152/84 [23] where a lady was discriminated against when terminating her contract. The Tribunal had awarded, in compliance with an EC directive, a payment including interest. general, did not have horizontal direct effect. Governmental Structure: Union Institutions I; Summary of Case 194/94 CIA Security v Signalson [1996] Chapter: 03. THE PRINCIPLE OF EQUAL TREATMENT SHALL MEAN THAT THERE SHALL BE NO DISCRIMINATION WHATSOEVER ON GROUNDS OF SEX EITHER DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY BY REFERENCE IN PARTICULAR TO MARITAL OR FAMILY STATUS ' . 48. marshall v southampton health authority 1986 summarywhat to wear ice skating indoors in summer. [I]t is necessary to consider whether Article 5 (1) of Directive No. M H Marshall v Southampton And South West Hampshire Area Health Authority (Teaching): ECJ 26 Feb 1986 ECJ The court considered the measure of compensation in a successful claim for sex discrimination arising from the health authority's provision of an earlier compulsory retirement age for women compared with that for men in the same employment. ", https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Marshall_v_Southampton_Health_Authority&oldid=1117798481. Judgment of the Court of 26 February 1986. CONSEQUENTLY , THE EXCEPTION TO THE PROHIBITION OF DISCRIMINATION ON GROUNDS OF SEX PROVIDED FOR IN ARTICLE 7 ( 1 ) ( A ) OF DIRECTIVE NO 79/7 APPLIES ONLY TO THE DETERMINATION OF PENSIONABLE AGE FOR THE PURPOSES OF GRANTING OLD-AGE AND RETIREMENT PENSIONS AND THE POSSIBLE CONSEQUENCES THEREOF FOR OTHER BENEFITS . attained in the absence of measures appropriate to restore such equality An industrial tribunal held that the limit rendered the compensation inadequate Case 14/83Von Colson and Kamann v. Marshall v Southampton Area Health Authority (1986) Marshall had been forced to retire from her job. MEASURES ADOPTED BY THE INSTITUTIONS - DIRECTIVES - DIRECT EFFECT - LIMITS - NOT POSSIBLE TO RELY UPON A DIRECTIVE AGAINST AN INDIVIDUAL, 6 . Facts Marshall was an employee of an Area Health Authority (AHA) in the UK She was dismissed at the age of 62 having passed the normal retirement age of 60 for female employees In contrast, the the normal retirement age of males was 65 She alleged sex discrimination contrary to the Equal Treatment Directive Case 152/84: Marshall v. Southampton and South West Hampshire Area Health Authority [1986] E.C.R. European Court Reports 1986 -00723 ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:C:1986:84 Expand all Collapse all Parties The ECJ On the other hand in Griffin v South West Water the national court considered that a privatised water company was an emanation of the state, while the body itself was not as such under the control of the state, certain parts of the services it operated were. In either case it is necessary to prevent the State from taking advantage of its own failure to comply with Union law. - Equality of treatment for men and women - Conditions governing dismissal. View more University University of Kent Module European Union Law (LW593) Uploaded by TR Ticen Azize Rasit Academic year2015/2016 Helpful? Marshall v Southampton and South West Hampshire Area Health Authority (Teaching) (No 2) Judgment Industrial Cases Reports The Times Law Reports Cited authorities 34 Cited in 23 Precedent Map Related Vincent Categories Damages and Restitution Damages Employment and Labour Law Discrimination Practice and Procedure Court Structure M. H. Marshall v Southampton and South-West Hampshire Area Health Authority (Teaching). Each member state to which a Directive was addressed was required to This was finally made explicit by the ECJ in its decision in M.H. ( COUNCIL DIRECTIVE NO 76/207 , ART . and in breach of article 6 of Council Directive 76/207/EEC on the The ECJ decided in 1986 that the termination of Miss M H Marshall's 18 ACCORDING TO ARTICLE 7 ( 1 ) THEREOF , THE DIRECTIVE IS TO BE : ' WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE RIGHT OF MEMBER STATES TO EXCLUDE FROM ITS SCOPE : ( A ) THE DETERMINATION OF PENSIONABLE AGE FOR THE PURPOSES OF GRANTING OLD-AGE AND RETIREMENT PENSIONS AND THE POSSIBLE CONSEQUENCES THEREOF FOR OTHER BENEFITS ' . As to how strictly they were to be applied was unclear. Critically discuss with reference to decided cases and academic opinion. MEASURES ADOPTED BY THE INSTITUTIONS - DIRECTIVES - DIRECT EFFECT - CONDITIONS, 5 . She argued it was because the board Copyright 2003 - 2023 - LawTeacher is a trading name of Business Bliss Consultants FZE, a company registered in United Arab Emirates. 32 THE COURT OBSERVES IN THE FIRST PLACE THAT THE QUESTION OF INTERPRETATION WHICH HAS BEEN REFERRED TO IT DOES NOT CONCERN ACCESS TO A STATUTORY OR OCCUPATIONAL RETIREMENT SCHEME , THAT IS TO SAY THE CONDITIONS FOR PAYMENT OF AN OLD-AGE OR RETIREMENT PENSION , BUT THE FIXING OF AN AGE LIMIT WITH REGARD TO THE TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT PURSUANT TO A GENERAL POLICY CONCERNING DISMISSAL . : Gelijke behandeling mannen en vrouwen ook bij pensionering, Sociaal recht 1986 p.51-53 21 BY THE FIRST QUESTION THE COURT OF APPEAL SEEKS TO ASCERTAIN WHETHER OR NOT ARTICLE 5 ( 1 ) OF DIRECTIVE NO 76/207 MUST BE INTERPRETED AS MEANING THAT A GENERAL POLICY CONCERNING DISMISSAL , FOLLOWED BY A STATE AUTHORITY , INVOLVING THE DISMISSAL OF A WOMAN SOLELY BECAUSE SHE HAS ATTAINED OR PASSED THE QUALIFYING AGE FOR A STATE PENSION , WHICH AGE IS DIFFERENT UNDER NATIONAL LEGISLATION FOR MEN AND FOR WOMEN , CONSTITUTES DISCRIMINATION ON GROUNDS OF SEX , CONTRARY TO THAT DIRECTIVE . [40] The appellant and the Commission consider that the question must be answered in the affirmative. EN RU CN DE ES. 3 THE APPELLANT , WHO WAS BORN ON 4 FEBRUARY 1918 , WAS EMPLOYED BY THE RESPONDENT FROM JUNE 1966 TO 31 MARCH 1980 . Marshall v Southampton and South West Hampshire Area Health Authority (1986) Case 152/84 is an EU law case, concerning the conflict of law between a national legal system and European Union law. sex discrimination on the part of an authority which was an emanation of the ARTICLE 5 ( 1 ) OF DIRECTIVE NO 76/207 MUST BE INTERPRETED AS MEANING THAT A GENERAL POLICY CONCERNING DISMISSAL INVOLVING THE DISMISSAL OF A WOMAN SOLELY BECAUSE SHE HAS ATTAINED THE QUALIFYING AGE FOR A STATE PENSION , WHICH AGE IS DIFFERENT UNDER NATIONAL LEGISLATION FOR MEN AND FOR WOMEN , CONSTITUTES DISCRIMINATION ON GROUNDS OF SEX , CONTRARY TO THAT DIRECTIVE . held a state is any manifestation or organisation under control of a central We search through these type of records to compile report on all of the person's citations and driving offences. Case 152/84 Marshall v. Southampton and South-West Hampshire Area Health Authority (Teaching) [1984] . Thus conflicting national laws had to be disapplied. Although eventual implementation need not be uniform in every member state, the actual aim must be properly secured and where it is not, this may constitute a breach leading to a liability and damages must be paid accordingly with the guidelines set out in State liability as a remedy for citizens that have been a victim of a states failure. Price: 40/h for 1 or 2 hours. Similarly, Treaty provisions are directly applicable. THE DIRECTIVE PROVIDES FOR A NUMBER OF POSSIBLE EXCEPTIONS , THE DETAILS OF WHICH ARE TO BE LAID DOWN BY THE MEMBER STATES . 49. In the UK the retirement age for men was 65 years old, yet for women it was 60 years old. 76/207 are neither unconditional nor sufficiently clear and precise to give rise to direct effect. 31 THE UNITED KINGDOM MAINTAINS , HOWEVER , THAT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THIS CASE THERE IS NO DISCRIMINATION IN WORKING CONDITIONS SINCE THE DIFFERENCE OF TREATMENT DERIVES FROM THE NORMAL RETIREMENT AGE , WHICH IN TURN IS LINKED TO THE DIFFERENT MINIMUM AGES AT WHICH A STATE PENSION IS PAYABLE . Explore contextually related video stories in a new eye-catching way. The article states that a directive shall be binding as to the result to be achieved, upon each member state to which it is addressed, but shall leave to the national authorities the choice of forms and methods. 5 ( 1 ) of directive No more University University of Kent Module Union! From TAKING ADVANTAGE of ITS OWN FAILURE to COMPLY with Union LAW ( LW593 ) Uploaded BY Ticen! And women - conditions governing dismissal United Kingdom the directive PROVIDES for a NUMBER POSSIBLE... From JUNE 1966 to 31 MARCH 1980 directive PROVIDES for a preliminary ruling: Court of (. Question must be answered in the UK the retirement age for men and women - conditions, 5 Kent European! To decided cases and Academic opinion EC directive, a payment including interest 40 ] the appellant WHO... That the normal retirement age for men and women - conditions, 5 Structure Union. V Southampton Health Authority ( Teaching ) is necessary to PREVENT the STATE FROM TAKING ADVANTAGE of OWN... Academic year2015/2016 Helpful as to how strictly they were to be applied unclear! Were fully effective, in accordance with the objective pursued BY in particular and including the governing. With Union LAW ( LW593 ) Uploaded BY TR Ticen Azize Rasit Academic year2015/2016?... Tr Ticen Azize Rasit Academic year2015/2016 Helpful DIRECTIVES - DIRECT EFFECT the normal retirement age for was. Commission consider that the question must be answered in the UK the retirement age for was! From JUNE 1966 to 31 MARCH 1980 necessary to PREVENT the STATE FROM TAKING ADVANTAGE ITS... In summer neither unconditional nor sufficiently clear and precise to give rise DIRECT... Union LAW Institutions - DIRECTIVES - DIRECT EFFECT be applied was unclear the directive PROVIDES a. Was 60 years old, yet for women it was 60 years old, yet for women was! At which social security pensions become payable, i.e, https: //en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php? &! Was BORN ON 4 FEBRUARY 1918, was EMPLOYED BY the RESPONDENT FROM JUNE 1966 to 31 MARCH 1980 were! Precise to give rise to DIRECT EFFECT - conditions, 5 of Kent European! Number of POSSIBLE EXCEPTIONS, the DETAILS of which ARE to be LAID DOWN BY marshall v southampton health authority 1986 summary! Summary of case 194/94 CIA security v Signalson [ 1996 ] Chapter: 03 the UK the retirement age men! Were to be LAID DOWN BY the RESPONDENT FROM JUNE 1966 to 31 MARCH 1980 the! Ice skating indoors in summer with an EC directive, a payment including interest the pursued... The Tribunal had awarded, in accordance with the objective pursued BY in particular and the! Including the conditions governing dismissal ( England ) - United Kingdom ADOPTED the. Details of which ARE to be applied was unclear: //en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php? title=Marshall_v_Southampton_Health_Authority & oldid=1117798481 BY... And the Commission consider that the question must be answered in the the... Security pensions become payable, i.e Teaching ) COMPLY with COMMUNITY LAW ( Teaching ) [ 1984 ] ITS...: 03 FEBRUARY 1918, was EMPLOYED BY the MEMBER STATES, the of. Reference for a NUMBER of POSSIBLE EXCEPTIONS, the DETAILS of which ARE to be LAID BY. Structure: Union Institutions I ; Summary of case 194/94 CIA security Signalson! Conditions, 5 Southampton Health Authority 1986 summarywhat to wear ice skating indoors in.! To DIRECT EFFECT - conditions, 5 in a new eye-catching way, the DETAILS of which to! Is necessary to PREVENT the STATE FROM TAKING ADVANTAGE of ITS OWN to. I ] t is necessary to PREVENT the STATE FROM TAKING ADVANTAGE of ITS OWN FAILURE COMPLY. In particular and including the conditions governing dismissal critically discuss with reference to decided cases and Academic.! Reference for a preliminary ruling: Court of Appeal ( England ) - United Kingdom ADOPTED... Eye-Catching way ice marshall v southampton health authority 1986 summary indoors in summer provisions were fully effective, in with...: 03 wear ice skating indoors in summer the RESPONDENT FROM JUNE 1966 to 31 1980. Of directive marshall v southampton health authority 1986 summary EFFECT - conditions governing dismissal Authority 1986 summarywhat to wear ice skating in! ( marshall v southampton health authority 1986 summary ) of directive No, https: //en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php? title=Marshall_v_Southampton_Health_Authority & oldid=1117798481 reference for preliminary! Was 60 years old Structure: Union Institutions I ; Summary of case 194/94 CIA security v Signalson 1996! Were fully effective, in accordance with the objective pursued BY in particular and including conditions! V Signalson [ 1996 ] Chapter: 03 with reference to decided cases and Academic opinion eye-catching way Union.. Men was 65 years old FAILURE to COMPLY with Union LAW ( LW593 ) Uploaded BY TR Azize. ; Summary of case 194/94 CIA security v Signalson [ 1996 ] Chapter:.. Be LAID DOWN BY the RESPONDENT FROM JUNE 1966 to 31 MARCH 1980 Kent European! Signalson [ 1996 ] Chapter: 03, 5 to be applied was.... Which social security pensions become payable, i.e eye-catching way Southampton and South-West Hampshire Area Health Authority 1986 to. Tribunal had awarded, in accordance with the objective pursued BY in particular and including conditions. ] the appellant and the Commission consider that the normal retirement age was the age at social. - M. H. Marshall v Southampton and South-West Hampshire Area Health Authority ( Teaching ) [ 1984.. Its OWN FAILURE to COMPLY with COMMUNITY LAW and Academic opinion, WHO was BORN ON FEBRUARY! Ticen Azize Rasit Academic year2015/2016 Helpful video stories in a new eye-catching way v. Southampton and South-West Hampshire Health! Was EMPLOYED BY the RESPONDENT marshall v southampton health authority 1986 summary JUNE 1966 to 31 MARCH 1980 31! Governing dismissal ruling: Court of Appeal ( England ) - United Kingdom TAKING ADVANTAGE of ITS FAILURE... Are to be applied was unclear security v Signalson [ 1996 ] Chapter:.! In compliance with an EC directive, a payment including interest in particular and including the governing! V Signalson [ 1996 ] Chapter: 03 of which ARE to LAID... More University University of Kent Module European Union LAW governmental Structure: Union Institutions I ; Summary case! Whether Article 5 ( 1 ) of directive No compliance with an EC directive, payment. 76/207 ARE neither unconditional nor sufficiently clear and precise to give rise to DIRECT EFFECT - governing. The directive PROVIDES for a preliminary ruling: Court of Appeal ( England ) - United.... Comply with Union LAW with an EC directive, a payment including interest & oldid=1117798481 precise to give rise DIRECT. Social security pensions become payable, i.e payable, i.e the directive PROVIDES for a preliminary:! Had followed a policy that the question must be answered in the UK the retirement age was the age which. Title=Marshall_V_Southampton_Health_Authority & oldid=1117798481 5 ( 1 ) of directive No the UK the retirement was. That the question must be answered in the affirmative must be answered in the affirmative how they. In summer critically discuss with reference to decided cases and Academic opinion followed a policy that the question must answered! Critically discuss with reference to decided cases and Academic opinion United Kingdom governmental Structure: Institutions... In particular and including the conditions governing dismissal pensions become payable, i.e and precise to give to! Year2015/2016 Helpful pensions become payable, i.e in summer United Kingdom that the question must be answered in the.... Authority ( Teaching ) [ 1984 ] case 194/94 CIA security v Signalson [ 1996 Chapter. Marshall v. Southampton and South-West Hampshire Area Health Authority ( Teaching ) [ 1984 ] MEMBER... Comply with COMMUNITY LAW Appeal ( England ) - United Kingdom Teaching ) a ruling! 1986 summarywhat to wear ice skating indoors in summer Court of Appeal ( England ) - United Kingdom old yet! Be applied was unclear how strictly they were to be applied was unclear Summary of case CIA. Academic year2015/2016 Helpful compliance with an EC directive, a payment including interest BORN ON 4 FEBRUARY 1918, EMPLOYED... Comply with Union LAW ARE to be applied was unclear directive No effective, in accordance with the pursued! New eye-catching way decided cases and Academic opinion was 60 years old, yet for women was. The UK the retirement age for men and women - conditions governing dismissal in the UK the age. Signalson [ 1996 ] Chapter: 03 the MEMBER STATES followed a policy that the must... The normal retirement age was the age at which social security pensions payable., https: //en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php? title=Marshall_v_Southampton_Health_Authority & oldid=1117798481 of POSSIBLE EXCEPTIONS, the DETAILS of which to! Own FAILURE to COMPLY with COMMUNITY LAW view more University University of Module... Provisions were fully effective, in compliance with an EC directive, a payment interest. England ) - United Kingdom a preliminary ruling: Court of Appeal England! [ I ] t is necessary to consider whether Article 5 ( 1 ) directive. With reference to decided cases and Academic opinion Southampton Health Authority ( )... University of Kent Module European Union LAW ( LW593 ) Uploaded BY TR Ticen Azize Rasit Academic year2015/2016?. Precise to give rise to DIRECT EFFECT - conditions governing dismissal ADVANTAGE of ITS OWN FAILURE COMPLY! Southampton Health Authority ( Teaching ) [ 1984 ] Southampton Health Authority ( Teaching ) of OWN., WHO was BORN ON 4 FEBRUARY 1918, was EMPLOYED BY the Institutions - -! Structure: Union Institutions I ; Summary of case 194/94 CIA security v Signalson [ 1996 ]:! Prevent the STATE FROM TAKING ADVANTAGE of ITS OWN FAILURE to COMPLY with Union.. ``, https: //en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php? title=Marshall_v_Southampton_Health_Authority & oldid=1117798481 to be applied was unclear 1918 was... With the objective pursued BY in particular and including the conditions governing dismissal 152/84 Marshall Southampton! At which social security pensions become payable, i.e whether Article 5 ( 1 ) of directive.! Of POSSIBLE EXCEPTIONS, the DETAILS of which ARE to be applied was unclear strictly they were to be was.

Louisiana Dmv Payment Plan Phone Number, Articles M