ECJ Judgment – Appeals – Article 340, first paragraph, TFEU – Contractual liability of the European Union – Article 272 TFEU – Arbitration clause – Sixth framework programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities – Contracts relating to the Ontogov, FIT and RACWeb projects – Eligible costs and amounts advanced by the Commission – … Continue reading Planet v Commission: ECJ 26 Feb 2015
ECJ (Judgment Of The Court) Failure to fulfill obligations – Directive 2002/22/EC – Electronic communications – Networks and services – Designation of undertakings responsible for universal service obligations – Incorrect transposition – Judgment of the Court establishing such failure – Non-compliance – Article 260, paragraph 2, TFEU ??- Financial penalties – Penalty payment – Lump … Continue reading Commission v Portugal: ECJ 25 Jun 2014
(Appeal – Arbitration Clause – Opinion) Appeal – Arbitration clause – Contract staff of EU international missions – Common Foreign and Security Policy – Jurisdiction of the EU Courts – Contractual dispute – Admissibility – Concept of act separable from its contractual context – Partial reclassification of the action – Action for annulment – Contractual … Continue reading SC v Eulex Kosovo: ECJ 5 Mar 2020
(Order Of The Court) REFERENCE for a preliminary ruling under Article 267 TFEU from the Curtea de Apel Bacau (Romania), by decision of 7 January 2014, received at the Court on 15 January 2014 in the proceedings MCG Fernlund, P C-13/14, [2014] EUECJ C-13/14 – CO Bailii European Updated: 05 December 2021; Ref: scu.527245
ECJ Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Bathroom fittings and fixtures markets of Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Austria – Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement – Coordination of price increases and exchange of sensitive business information – Attributability of unlawful conduct … Continue reading Roca Sanitario, SA v European Commission: ECFI 16 Sep 2013
. .
The claimants were companies with parent companies in the UK and other subsidiaries not so resident, both in the EU and outside. They complained of the differences in treatment under corporation tax of the payment of dividends between the . .
