Category: European

Walton and Others v The Scottish Ministers: SCS 11 Aug 2011

Outer House – Opinion

Judges:

Lord Tyre

Citations:

[2011] ScotCS CSOH – 131, [2011] CSOH 131, 2011 SCLR 686, 2011 GWD 34-703

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Roads (Scotland) Act 1984

Cited by:

At Outer House – Walton v The Scottish Ministers SC 17-Oct-2012
The appellant, former chair of a road activist group, challenged certain roads orders saying that the respondent had not carried out the required environmental assessment. His claim was that the road had been adopted without the consultation . .
At Outer House – Walton v The Scottish Ministers SCS 29-Feb-2012
The reclaimer challenged the making of several orders redesignating roads around the Aberdeen Western Peripheral Route. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Scotland, Transport, European

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442726

Akzo Nobel Chemicals and Akcros Chemicals v Commission and Others: ECJ 14 Sep 2010

ECJ Appeal – Competition – Measures of inquiry – Commission’s powers of investigation – Legal professional privilege – Employment relationship between a lawyer and an undertaking – Exchanges of e-mails.

Judges:

V. Skouris, P

Citations:

[2010] EUECJ C-550/07, C-550/07, [2011] 3 WLR 755, [2011] Bus LR 1458

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Opinion – Akzo Nobel Chemicals and Akcros Chemicals v Commission and Others (Competition) ECJ 29-Apr-2010
ECJ (Opinion) Appeal Competition – Administrative procedure – Commission’s powers of investigation – Documents copied in the course of an investigation and later placed on the file – Protection of confidentiality . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Legal Professions

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442619

Purely Creative Ltd and Others v The Office of Fair Trading: CA 29 Jul 2011

The appellants sought to challenge undertakings they had been required to as to the mode of conduct of prize draw competitions. The Regulations forbad misrepresentations that the addressee may already have won a prize. In particular they challenged the requirement that a participant should not be required to make any payment as a condition of collecting a prize.
Held: There was a need to refer the OFT’s cross appeal to the ECJ, and an order was so made, but the existing undertakings were to remain in effect.

Judges:

Sir Andrew Morritt Ch, Jackson, Munby LJJ

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Civ 920, [2012] 1 CMLR 21

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Consumer Protection Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, Unfair Commercial Practices Directive 2005/29/EC

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Office of Fair Trading v Purely Creative Ltd and Others ChD 2-Feb-2011
The OFT sought an order to restrain the defendants from continuing what it said were unfair commercial practices in the arrangements it made for prize draws.
Held: Each of the promotions relied upon by the Office contravened the Regulations. . .

Cited by:

Reference – Purely Creative And Others v Office of Fair Trading ECJ 18-Oct-2012
ECJ Directive 2005/29/EC – Unfair commercial practices – Practice of informing the consumer that he has won a prize and obliging him, in order to receive that prize, to incur a cost of whatever kind . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer, European

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442421

Zino Davidoff v OHMI – Kleinakis Kai Sia (Good Life): ECFI 15 Jul 2011

ECFI Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for Community word mark GOOD LIFE – Earlier national word mark GOOD LIFE – Genuine use of the earlier mark – Duty of diligence – Article 74(1) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 76(1) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009

Citations:

T-108/08, [2011] EUECJ T-108/08

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EC) No 207/2009

Jurisdiction:

European

Intellectual Property

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442306

Trabelsi And Others v Council: ECFI 14 Jul 2011

ECFI Order – Interim measures – Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Tunisia – Freezing of funds – Application for stay of execution and provisional measures – Lack of urgency

Citations:

T-187/11, [2011] EUECJ T-187/11

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Order – Trabelsi And Others v Council ECJ 28-May-2013
ECJ Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Tunisia – Freezing of funds – Article 17(1) of the Charter of Fundamental . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442303

Winzer Pharma v OHMI – Alcon (Oftal Cusi): ECFI 14 Jul 2011

ECFI Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for Community word mark OFTAL CUSI – Earlier Community word mark Ophtal – Relative ground for refusal – No likelihood of confusion – Article 8, paragraph 1 b) of Regulation (EC) 40/94 [now Article 8, paragraph 1 b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009]

Citations:

T-160/09, [2011] EUECJ T-160/09

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Intellectual Property

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442305

Commission v Austria (Industrial Policy) French Text: ECJ 28 Jul 2011

ECJ Failure to fulfill obligations – Directive 2007/2/EC – Environmental policy – Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community (INSPIRE) – Exchange and update data in electronic format – Incomplete.

Citations:

C-548/10, [2011] EUECJ C-548/10

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 2007/2/EC

European

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442273

Fuchs v Land Hessen: ECJ 21 Jul 2011

ECJ Directive 2000/78/EC – Article 6(1) – Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of age – Compulsory retirement of prosecutors on reaching the age of 65 – Legitimate aims justifying a difference of treatment on grounds of age – Coherence of the legislation

Judges:

Cunha Rodrigues P

Citations:

[2012] ICR 93, [2011] IRLR 1043, [2011] Eq LR 990, [2011] 3 CMLR 47, [2011] Pens LR 335, C-159/10, [2011] EUECJ C-159/10

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 2000/78/EC 6(1)

Cited by:

Cited – Seldon v Clarkson Wright and Jakes SC 25-Apr-2012
The appellant claimed that the requirement imposed on him to retire from his law firm partnership on attaining 65 was an unlawful discrimination on the grounds of age.
Held: The matter was remitted to the Employment tribunal to see whether the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Discrimination

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442289

Pacific World And FDD International v Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs: ECJ 28 Jul 2011

ECJ Common Customs Tariff – Tariff classification – Combined Nomenclature – Moulded plastic false nail sets – Validity of Regulation (EC) No 1417/2007 – Other articles of plastics (heading 3926) – Manicure or pedicure preparations (heading 3304) – Manicure or pedicure sets and instruments (heading 8214)

Judges:

D. Svaby, President

Citations:

C-215/10, [2011] EUECJ C-215/10

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EC) No 1417/2007

Jurisdiction:

European

Customs and Excise

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442298

Diputacion Foral De Vizcaya v Commission (State Aid) French Text: ECJ 28 Jul 2011

ECJ Appeal – State aid – Action for annulment – Commission Decisions on State aid schemes implemented by Spain for firms in the provinces of Vizcaya, Alava and Guipuzcoa – Reductions the tax base for certain newly established firms – legitimate expectations – Principle of legal certainty and good administration – Compliance with a reasonable time – No notification.

Citations:

C-472/09, [2011] EUECJ C-472/09

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442278

Evropaiki Dynamiki v ENSA (Law Governing The Institutions): ECJ 21 Jul 2011

ECJ Appeal – Public procurement – European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) – Call for tenders relating to the ‘SafeSeaNet’ application – Decision rejecting a tenderer’s bid – Contract award criteria – Sub-criteria – Obligation to state reasons

Citations:

C-252/10, [2011] EUECJ C-252/10, ECLI:EU:C:2011:512

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Judgment – Evropaiki Dynamiki v ENSA ECJ 13-Dec-2012
Taxation of costs . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442287

Ratiopharm v OHMI – Nycomed (Zufal): ECFI 14 Jul 2011

ECFI Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for Community word mark ZUFAL – Earlier Community word mark ZURCAL – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Similarity of signs – Similarity of goods – Article 8, paragraph 1, sub b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 – Restriction of goods of the trade mark application – Article 43, paragraph 1 of Regulation No 207/2009

Citations:

T-222/10, [2011] EUECJ T-222/10

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation No 207/2009

Jurisdiction:

European

Intellectual Property

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442300

Anita Brems v Council of the European Communities: ECFI 14 Dec 1990

ECFI Officials – Dependent child – Person treated as such – Child of the official – Illegality of general implementing rules. 1. Officials – Remuneration – Family allowances – Dependent child allowance – Grant – Circumscribed power of the administration – Person treated as a dependent child – Discretionary power of the administration -Article 2(4) of Annex VII of the Staff Regulations – Scope (Staff Regulations of Officials, Art. 67; Annex VII, Art. 2) 2. Officials – Staff Regulations – General implementing rules – Power of the institutions – Limits (Staff Regulations of Officials, Arts 67 and 110; Annex VII, Art. 2(4)) 1. The Staff Regulations confer upon the appointing authority a circumscribed power to grant the allowance provided for in Article 2 of Annex VII of the Staff Regulations in respect of a dependent child within the meaning of that provision where one of the conditions set out in Article 2(3) and (5) is fulfilled. Article 2(4), on the other hand, confers upon the administration a discretionary power to decide, in exceptional cases, to treat as a dependent child any person whom the official has a legal responsibility to maintain and whose maintenance involves heavy expenditure. It is apparent from that difference in the nature of the administration’ s powers and from the general terms of Article 2(4) of Annex VII that the Community legislature did not intend to exclude from the scope of that provision, merely because he is the legitimate, natural or adopted child of an official or of his spouse, a child who does not satisfy the conditions for the grant of dependent child allowance under Article 2(3) and (5). Any other interpretation would not be in conformity with the principle of equal treatment, which prohibits discrimination based solely on the status of a person, and would be even less justified since the family bond linking an official to his child is stronger than that linking him to other persons who may be treated as dependent children. 2. The general implementing rules adopted under the first paragraph of Article 110 of the Staff Regulations may lay down criteria capable of guiding the administration in the exercise of its discretionary power or explain more fully the scope of provisions of the Staff Regulations which are not wholly clear. However, they cannot, by way of explaining more fully a clear term of the Staff Regulations, reduce the scope of those regulations. The Council Decision of 15 March 1976 adopting general provisions for applying Article 2(4) of Annex VII of the Staff Regulations is illegal in so far as it excludes from the scope of that provision any person who is between the minimum and maximum age-limits which it imposes and thus deprives the administration of the opportunity to exercise its discretion in each individual case.

Judges:

C . Yeraris, President of Chamber

Citations:

T-75/89, [1990] EUECJ T-75/89

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Employment

Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.172359

Weidacher v Bundesminister fur Land-und Forstwirtschaft: ECJ 15 Jan 2002

ECJ Article 149 of the Act of Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden – Transitional measures – Surplus stocks – Article 4 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 3108/94 – Competence – Holder of the goods – Import charge applicable – Legitimate expectations – Proportionality – Equal treatment

Citations:

C-179/00, [2002] EUECJ C-179/00, [2002] ECR I-501

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.167458

Gottardo v Istituto nazionale della previdenza sociale: ECJ 15 Jan 2002

ECJ Reference for a preliminary ruling – Articles 12 EC and 39(2) EC – Old-age benefits – Social security convention concluded between the Italian Republic and the Swiss Confederation – Refusal to take account of periods of insurance completed by a French national in Switzerland

Citations:

C-55/00, [2002] EUECJ C-55/00

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Benefits

Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.167456

Andersen og Jensen v Skatteministeriet: ECJ 15 Jan 2002

ECJ Approximation of laws – Directive 90/434/EEC – Common system of taxation applicable to mergers, divisions, transfers of assets and exchanges of shares – Transfer of assets or of a branch of activity – Meaning

Judges:

P. Jann P

Citations:

C-43/00, [2002] EUECJ C-43/00

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 90/434/EEC

Jurisdiction:

European

Corporation Tax

Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.167455

Commission of the European Communities v Grand-duche de Luxembourg: ECJ 15 Jan 2002

ECJ 1 By application lodged at the Court Registry on 8 May 2001, the Commission of the European Communities brought an action under Article 226 EC for a declaration that the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg had failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 1(a) of Council Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste (OJ 1975 L 194, p. 39), as amended by Council Directive 91/156/EEC of 18 March 1991 (OJ 1991 L 78, p. 32) (hereinafter `Directive 75/442′), and Commission Decision 94/3/EC of 20 December 1993 establishing a list of wastes pursuant to Article 1(a) of Directive 75/442 (OJ 1994 L 5, p. 15). 2 Article 1(a) of Directive 75/442 provides as follows: `For the purposes of this Directive: (a) ‘waste’ shall mean any substance or object in the categories set out in Annex I which the holder discards or intends or is required to discard. The Commission, acting in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 18, will draw up, not later than 1 April 1993, a list of wastes belonging to the categories listed in Annex I. This list will be periodically reviewed and, if necessary, revised by the same procedure’. 3 The list referred to in the above provision was adopted by the Commission, under the title `European Waste Catalogue’ (EWC), by Decision 94/3. According to point 5 of the introductory note of the annex to that decision: `The EWC is to be a reference nomenclature providing a common terminology throughout the Community with the purpose to improve the efficiency of waste management activities….’ 4 The EWC was incorporated into Luxembourg law by the circular of the Minister for the Environment of 20 November 1998 introducing a waste nomenclature (Memorial A 1998, p. 2548). According to the first indent of point 1 of that circular: `This circular has two objectives – to introduce a Luxembourg waste nomenclature – to take over the European Waste Catalogue (EWC).’ 5 In accordance with the procedure provided for in the first paragraph of Article 226 EC, the Commission, after giving the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg an opportunity to submit observations, by letter of 25 July 2000 delivered a reasoned opinion calling upon that Member State to take the necessary measures to comply therewith within two months of notification of the opinion. Since the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg failed to do so, the Commission brought the present action. 6 The Commission submits that the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg infringed Article 1(a) of Directive 75/442 and Decision 94/3, first, by incorporating the EWC by means of a ministerial circular binding on the administration but not on third parties, and, second, by introducing alongside the EWC a purely Luxembourg nomenclature differing from the EWC and having the effect of excluding the use of the EWC for a large number of operations in which the classification of waste is taken into account. 7 The Luxembourg Government does not dispute the Commission’s submissions, but states that a Grand Ducal regulation ensuring integral and accurate use of the EWC is due to enter into force on 1 January 2002. 8 It is settled case-law that the question whether a Member State has failed to fulfil its obligations must be determined by reference to the situation prevailing in the Member State at the end of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion and the Court cannot take account of any subsequent changes (see, inter alia, Case C-261/98 Commission v Portugal [2000] ECR I-5905, paragraph 25). 9 As the Luxembourg Government does not dispute that it did not adopt the necessary measures to comply with Article 1(a) of Directive 75/442 and Decision 94/3, the Commission’s action must be regarded as well founded. 10 It must therefore be held that the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 1(a) of Directive 75/442 and Decision 94/3.

Citations:

C-196/01, [2002] EUECJ C-196/01

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Environment

Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.167462

Liberos v Commission: ECJ 15 Jan 2002

ECJ Appeal – Possibility for the Judge-Rapporteur in the Court of First Instance to hear and determine a case sitting as a single Judge – Member of the temporary staff – Classification in grade – Professional experience

Citations:

C-171/00, [2002] EUECJ C-171/00P

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Legal Professions

Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.167457

Henfling, Davin, Tanghe: ECJ 14 Jul 2011

ECJ Taxation – Sixth VAT Directive – Article 6(4) – Exemption – Article 13(B)(f) – Gambling – Services provided by a commission agent ‘buraliste’ acting in his own name but on behalf of a principal operating a business of taking bets.
The Court said that ‘involvement in his own name means that . . a legal relationship is brought about not directly between the better and the undertaking on behalf of which the operator involved acts, but between that operator and the better, on the one hand, and between that operator and that undertaking, on the other’.

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2011:489, [2011] EUECJ C-464/10, [2011] STI 2600, [2011] STC 1851

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – Revenue and Customs v Secret Hotels2 Ltd SC 5-Mar-2014
The Court was asked as to: ‘the liability for Value Added Tax of a company which markets and arranges holiday accommodation through an on-line website. The outcome turns on the appropriate characterisation of the relationship between the company, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT

Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.441851

Seaport (NI) Ltd, Magherafelt District Council and Others v Department of the Environment for Northern Ireland: ECJ 14 Jul 2011

ECJ Opinion – Directive 2001/42/EC – Assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment – Consultation procedure – Designation of the authorities with environmental responsibilities – Time-limits set for the purposes of the consultation procedure.

Judges:

Bot AG

Citations:

C-474/10, [2011] EUECJ C-474/10

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 2001/42/EC

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Opinion – Seaport (NI) Ltd, Magherafelt District Council and Others v Department of the Environment for Northern Ireland ECJ 20-Oct-2011
Reference for a preliminary ruling – Directive 2001/42/EC – Article 6 – Designation, for consultation purposes, of an authority likely to be concerned by the environmental effects of implementing plans and programmes – Possibility of authority to be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Environment

Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.441856

France v People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran: ECJ 14 Jul 2011

ECJ Common Foreign And Security Policy – Appeal – Restrictive measures with a view to combating terrorism – Freezing of funds and capital.

Citations:

C-27/09, [2011] EUECJ C-27/09 – P, [2011] EUECJ C-27/09 – P

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

See Also – France v People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran ECJ 21-Dec-2011
ECJ Appeal – Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism – Common Position 2001/931/CFSC – Regulation (EC) No . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.441849

Unio De Pagesos De Catalunya: ECJ 7 Jul 2011

ECJ Common agricultural policy – Single payment scheme – National – Ability to allocate reference quantities to new farmers – Discretion of the Member States – Attribution limited for young farmers – Legality.

Citations:

C-197/10, [2011] EUECJ C-197/10, [2011] EUECJ C-197/10

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

European, Agriculture

Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.441814

Jordana v Commission: ECFI 7 Jul 2011

ECFI Access to documents – Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 – Reserve list in an open competition and decisions regarding the appointment of officials – Refusal of access – Exception relating to the protection of privacy and the integrity of the individual – Protection of personal data – Regulation (EC) No 45/2001.

Citations:

T-161/04, [2011] EUECJ T-161/04

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, Regulation (EC) No 45/2001

European, Information

Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.441816

KJHS v Winfried Schulte: ECJ 7 Jul 2011

ECJ Working conditions – Working time arrangements – Article 7 of Directive 2003/88/EC – Right to paid annual leave – Compensation for paid annual leave not taken at the end of the employment relationship – Extinction of right to annual leave paid not taken due to illness at the end of a period prescribed by national legislation.

Citations:

C-214/10, [2011] EUECJ C-214/10, [2011] EUECJ C-214/10

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

European, Employment

Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.441792

Commission v United Kingdom (Law Governing The Institutions): ECJ 7 Jul 2011

ECJ Promotion and retirement rights of teachers seconded or assigned by a Member State to the European Schools – Freezing of remuneration during secondment or assignment – Interpretation and application of Articles 12(4)(a) and 25(1) of the Convention defining the Statute of the European Schools – Arbitration clause.

Citations:

C-545/09, [2011] EUECJ C-545/09, [2012] EUECJ C-545/09

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

European

Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.441776

Commission v Luxembourg C-481/03: ECJ 30 Sep 2004

ECJ (Transport) Failure to fulfill obligations – Directives 2001/12 / EC and 2001/13 / EC – Community railways – Development – Level playing, uniform and non-discriminatory access to the infrastructure – Licensing of railway undertakings – Common scheme – Failure -transposition within the prescribed period

Citations:

C-481/03, [2004] EUECJ C-481/03

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Transport

Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.214653

Commission v Belgium (Environment And Consumers): ECJ 30 Sep 2004

ECJ Failure to fulfill obligations – Directive 2001/18 / EC – Deliberate release of genetically modified organisms into the environment – Failure to implement within the prescribed period

Citations:

C-417/03, [2004] EUECJ C-417/03

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 2001/18/EC

Jurisdiction:

European

Environment

Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.214651

Briheche v Ministre de l’Interieur, Ministre de l’Education nationale and Ministre de la Justice (Social Policy): ECJ 30 Sep 2004

ECJ Social policy – Equal treatment for men and women – Article 141, paragraph 4 EC – Directive 76/207 / EEC – Conditions of access to public employment – Provisions reserving to widows who have not remarried the benefit of the exemption from limits age for access to such jobs

Citations:

C-319/03, [2004] EUECJ C-319/03

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 76/207/EEC

Jurisdiction:

European

Discrimination

Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.214649

Engin Ayaz v Land Baden-Wurttemberg (External Relations): ECJ 30 Sep 2004

ECJ EEC-Turkey Association – Freedom of movement for workers – First paragraph of Article 7 of Decision No 1/80 of the Association Council – Personal scope – Concept of ‘member of the family’ of a Turkish worker duly registered as belonging to the labour force of a Member State – Stepson of such a worker

Citations:

C-275/02, [2004] EUECJ C-275/02

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.214648

Commission v Austria C-359/03 (Social Policy): ECJ 30 Sep 2004

ECJ Failure to fulfill obligations – Directive 90/270 / EEC – Protection of workers – Work with display screen equipment – Minimum safety and health requirements – Failure to transpose

Citations:

[2004] EUECJ C-359/03

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 90/270/EEC

Jurisdiction:

European

European, Health and Safety

Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.214650

Leichtle v Bundesanstalt fur Arbeit: ECJ 18 Mar 2004

ECJ Freedom to provide services – Sickness insurance scheme for civil servants – Health cure taken in another Member State – Expenditure on board, lodging, travel, visitors’ tax and a final medical report – Conditions for reimbursement – Prior declaration of eligibility for assistance – Criteria – Justification

Judges:

C.W.A. Timmermans

Citations:

C-8/02, [2004] EUECJ C-8/02, [2004] ECR I-2641, [2006] 3 CMLR 4

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.194871

Nouazli, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 20 Apr 2016

The court considered the compatibility with EU law of regulations 21 and 24 of the 2006 Regulations, and the legality at common law of the appellant’s administrative detention from 3 April until 6 June 2012 and of bail restrictions thereafter until 2 January 2013. The regulations were designed to give effect to the Citizens Directive 2004/58/EC of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the member states. The claimant was a non EU national. He had married an EU national resident within the UK. After criminal convictions, he was detained pending deportation on public policy grounds.
Held: His appeal failed. The pre-decision detention had not been unlawful. It was not necessary to refer the case to the ECJ. Article 18 TFEU is concerned only with the way in which EU citizens are treated in member states other than their states of nationality, and not the way in which member states treat nationals of other countries residing within their territories.
There is in place a clear statutory framework which involves appropriate judicial scrutiny and the consideration of the guidelines referred to above. In short, each case depends upon its particular facts.
The primary responsibility to comply with the Hardial Singh principles lies with the Secretary of State but the courts provide supervision of their application and challenges can be brought to secure release and not just for damages after the event.

Judges:

Lord Neuberger, President, Lady Hale, Deputy President, Lord Clarke, Lord Carnwath, Lord Toulson

Citations:

[2016] UKSC 16, [2016] HRLR 11, [2016] WLR(D) 220, [2016] 1 WLR 1565, [2016] INLR 460, [2016] 4 All ER 720, [2016] 3 CMLR 17, [2016] 1 WLR 1565, [2016] WLR(D) 220, [2016] INLR 460, UKSC 2014/0139

Links:

Bailii, Bailii Summary, WLRD, SC, SC Summary

Statutes:

Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006, Citizens Directive 2004/58/EC

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Vatsouras v Arbeitsgemeinschaft (ARGE) Nurnberg 900; Koupatantze v Arbeitsgemeinschaft (ARGE) Nurnberg 90 – C-22/08 ECJ 4-Jun-2009
ECJ European citizenship Free movement of persons Articles 12 EC and 39 EC Directive 2004/38/EC Article 24(2) Assessment of validity Nationals of a Member State Professional activity in another Member State Level . .
At Admn – Nouazli, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department Admn 15-Mar-2013
Challenge to power of the SS to detain the claimant a national of the European Economic Area pending a decision to deport. The claimant was a third country national married to an EU national. He was detained pending deportation on the grounds of . .
At CA – Nouazli, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 10-Dec-2013
The appellant sought to challenge an order for his detention pending his deportation by the respondent. A national of a non EU state he had married an EU national resident in the UK. He had been convicted of offences here and detained pending . .
Cited – Moustaquim v Belgium ECHR 18-Feb-1991
The applicant was a Moroccan national who arrived in Belgium in 1965 when he was aged under 2. In 1984, nineteen years later, after a career of juvenile crime, he was deported, but the deportation order was suspended in 1989 and he returned to . .
Cited – Martinez Sala v Freistaat Bayern ECJ 12-May-1998
ECJ A benefit such as the child-raising allowance, which is automatically granted to persons fulfilling certain objective criteria, without any individual and discretionary assessment of personal needs, and which . .
Cited – Bhavyesh and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department Admn 26-Jul-2012
Rolled up hearing for permission and, if permission be granted, the substantive hearing of a challenge to an amendment made in November 2010 to the Immigration Rules laid before Parliament by the respondent, Secretary of State. In essence, these . .
Cited – Ponomaryov and Others v Bulgaria ECHR 18-Sep-2007
The applicants complained they were required to pay school fees as a result of their Kazakh nationality and immigration status.
Held: ‘… [A state] may also, in certain circumstances, justifiably differentiate between different categories of . .
Cited – NS v Secretary of State for the Home Department etc ECJ 21-Dec-2011
Prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment
ECJ (Grand Chamber) European Union law – Principles – Fundamental rights – Implementation of European Union law – Prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment – Common European Asylum System – Regulation (EC) No . .
Cited – Regina v Governor of Durham Prison, ex parte Hardial Singh QBD 13-Dec-1983
Unlawful Detention pending Deportation
An offender had been recommended for deportation following conviction. He had served his sentence and would otherwise have been released on parole. He had no passport and no valid travel documents. He complained that the length of time for which he . .
Cited – Regina v Immigration Appeal Tribunal and Surinder Singh, ex parte Secretary of State for the Home Department ECJ 7-Jul-1992
ECJ The provisions of the Treaty relating to the free movement of persons are intended to facilitate the pursuit by Community citizens of occupational activities of all kinds throughout the Community and preclude . .
Cited – Tan Te Lam v Superintendent of Tai A Chau Detention Centre PC 27-Mar-1996
(Hong Kong) Migrants from Vietnam of Chinese ethnic origin had landed in Hong Kong by boat, and been refused refugee status. They were detained for several years under section 13D of the Immigration Ordinance ‘pending . . removal from Hong Kong’. . .
Cited – Chahal v The United Kingdom ECHR 15-Nov-1996
Proper Reply Opportunity Required on Deportation
(Grand Chamber) The claimant was an Indian citizen who had been granted indefinite leave to remain in this country but whose activities as a Sikh separatist brought him to the notice of the authorities both in India and here. The Home Secretary of . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex parte Saadi and others HL 31-Oct-2002
The applicants were Kurdish asylum seekers. The Home Secretary introduced powers to detain certain asylum seekers for a short period in order to facilitate the speedy resolution of their applications. Only those who it was suspected might run away . .
Cited – Saadi v United Kingdom ECHR 29-Jan-2008
(Grand Chamber) The applicant sought judicial review of the decision to detain him for a short period while his asylum claim was being subject to fast-track processing. The decision was made pursuant to a policy under which all asylum claimants . .
Cited – Hussein v Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 21-Oct-2009
The complaint as to a detention pending a decision on whether one of the exceptions to automatic deportation applies. . .
Cited – Lumba (WL) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 23-Mar-2011
The claimants had been detained under the 1971 Act, after completing sentences of imprisonment pending their return to their home countries under deportations recommended by the judges at trial, or chosen by the respondent. They challenged as . .
Cited – Kambadzi (previously referred to as SK (Zimbabwe)) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 25-May-2011
False Imprisonment Damages / Immigration Detention
The respondent had held the claimant in custody, but had failed to follow its own procedures. The claimant appealed against the rejection of his claim of false imprisonment. He had overstayed his immigration leave, and after convictions had served a . .
Cited – Tabassum v The United Kingdom ECHR 24-Jan-2012
. .
Cited – Francis, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Another CA 23-May-2014
Appeal against rejection of claim for damages after alleged unlawful detention in immigration detention centre pending examination of immigration status. . .
Cited – Fardous v Secretary of State for the Home Department QBD 5-Sep-2014
The claimant had been subject to administrative detention after his failed asylum claim. The court considered whether he was entitled to an award for wrongful imprisonment. . .
Cited – Fardous v Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 25-Aug-2015
The Secretary of State appealed against a finding that the claimant had been unlawfully detained pending his removal to Morocco.
Held: The approach taken in Hardial Singh requires both the SSHD and the courts to take a fact sensitive approach . .
Cited – Ismoilov And Others v Russia ECHR 24-Apr-2008
The court criticised the Russian system in prisons: ‘in the absence of clear legal provisions establishing the procedure for ordering and extending detention with a view to extradition and setting up time-limits for such detention, the deprivation . .
Cited – Abdolkhani And Karimnia v Turkey ECHR 22-Sep-2009
The Court in the context of detention pending deportation, concluded: ‘In sum, in the absence of clear legal provisions establishing the procedure for ordering and extending detention with a view to deportation and setting time-limits for such . .
Cited – Charahili v Turkey ECHR 13-Apr-2010
. .
Cited – Dbouba v Turkey ECHR 13-Jul-2010
. .
Cited – Alipour And Hosseinzadgan v Turkey ECHR 13-Jul-2010
. .
Cited – Safir v Skattemyndigheten I Dajarnas Lan ECJ 1-May-1998
Different tax treatment of insurance products according to whether company offering them was based in the member country or another was unlawful breach of Treaty. . .
Cited – Digital Rights Ireland v The Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources etc ECJ 8-Apr-2014
ECJ Grand Chamber – Electronic communications – Directive 2006/24/EC – Publicly available electronic communications services or public communications networks services – Retention of data generated or processed . .
Cited – Lumsdon and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Legal Services Board SC 24-Jun-2015
The appellant, barristers and solicitors, challenged the respondent’s approval of alterations to their regulatory arrangements, under Part 3 of Schedule 4 to the 2007 Act. The alterations gave effect to the Quality Assurance Scheme for Advocates . .

Cited by:

Cited – Hemmati and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 27-Nov-2019
The Home Secretary appealed from a finding that illegally entered asylum seekers had been unlawfully detained pending removal. The five claimants had travelled through other EU member states before entering the UK. The court considered inter alia . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Immigration, Prisons

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.562189

Societe Des Produits Nestle v OHMI – Terapia (Alete): ECFI 12 Nov 2015

ECJ Judgment – Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Community trade mark Alete – Earlier national word mark ALETA – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8, paragraph 1 b) of Regulation (EC) No 207 / 2009 – Suspension of the administrative procedure – Rule 20, paragraph 7, c) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95

Citations:

T-544/14, [2015] EUECJ T-544/14, ECLI: EU: T: 2015:842

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Intellectual Property

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.554660

Jakutis And Kretingalas Kooperatine ZUB v Nacionaline mokejimo agentura prie Zemes ukio ministerijos: ECJ 12 Nov 2015

ECJ Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Agriculture – Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 – Articles 7(1), 10(1), 121 and 132(2) – Acts implementing that regulation – Validity, in the light the TFEU Treaty, the 2003 Act of Accession and the principles of non-discrimination, legal certainty, the protection of legitimate expectations and sound administration – Modulation of direct payments granted to farmers – Reduction of the amounts – Level of direct payments applicable in the Member States of the European Community as constituted on 30 April 2004 and in the Member States that joined it on 1 May 2004 – No publication and no statement of reasons

Citations:

C-103/14, [2015] EUECJ C-103/14, ECLI:EU:C:2015:752

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Agriculture

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.554656

Alexandrou v Commission: ECFI 12 Nov 2015

ECJ Judgment – Appeal – Civil service – Recruitment – Notice of competition EPSO / AD / 231/12 -Not admission to participate in the assessment tests – Obligation to state reasons – Access to documents – Refusal of access to multiple choice questions posed in the admission tests – Secret of jury work – Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 – Findings of Competency of Public Service – Article 270 TFEU – Meaning of act adversely affecting – Article 90 paragraph 2 of the Statute

Citations:

T-515/14, [2015] EUECJ T-515/14, ECLI:EU:T:2015:844

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.554847

Visnapuu v Kihlakunnansyyttaja: ECJ 12 Nov 2015

Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Articles 34 TFEU and 110 TFEU – Directive 94/62/EC – Articles 1(1), 7 and 15 – Distance selling and transport of alcoholic beverages from another Member State – Excise duty on certain beverage packaging – Exemption where packaging is integrated into a deposit and return system – Articles 34 TFEU, 36 TFEU and 37 TFEU – Requirement of a licence for the retail sale of alcoholic beverages – Monopoly on the retail sale of alcoholic beverages – Justification – Protection of health

Judges:

T. von Danwitz, P

Citations:

C-198/14, [2015] EUECJ C-198/14, ECLI:EU:C:2015:751

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 94/62/EC 1 7 15, TFEU 34

Jurisdiction:

European

European, Customs and Excise

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.554663

United Kingdom v Parliament And Council: ECJ 12 Nov 2015

ECJ Judgment – Action for annulment – Regulation (EU) No 1316/2013 establishing the Connecting Europe Facility – Projects of common interest which relate to the territory of a Member State – Approval of that State – Extension of a rail freight corridor – Legal basis – Article 171 TFEU and second paragraph of Article 172 TFEU

Judges:

R. Silva de Lapuerta (Rapporteur), P

Citations:

C-121/14, [2015] EUECJ C-121/14, ECLI:EU:C:2015:749

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EU) No 1316/2013

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.554662

Italy v Commission: ECFI 12 Nov 2015

ECJ Judgment – EAGGF – Guarantee Section – EAGF and EAFRD – Expenditure excluded from financing – Financial corrections lump – Direct payments – Conditionality – Aid for processing of citrus fruit – Conditions for the approval of a paying agency

Citations:

T-255/13, [2015] EUECJ T-255/13, ECLI:EU:T:2015:838

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Agriculture

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.554655

HSH Investment Holdings Coinvest-C And HSH Investment Holdings FSO v Commission: ECFI 12 Nov 2015

ECJ Judgment – State aid – Banking – HSH Nordbank Restructuring – Decision declaring the aid compatible with the internal market under certain conditions – Action for annulment – Not individually concerned – a minority shareholder of the aid recipient – Meaning of ‘ distinct interest – Partial inadmissibility – capital Dilution

Citations:

T-499/12, [2015] EUECJ T-499/12, ECLI: EU: T : 2015 840

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Banking

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.554654

Begum (EEA – Worker – Jobseeker) Pakistan: UTIAC 13 Jul 2011

UTIAC (1) When deciding whether an EEA national is a worker for the purposes of the EEA Regulations, regard must be had to the fact that the term has a meaning in EU law, that it must be interpreted broadly and that it is not conditioned by the type of employment or the amount of income derived. But a person who does not pursue effective and genuine activities, or pursues activities on such a small scale as to be regarded as purely marginal and ancillary or which have no economic value to an employer, is not a worker. In this context, regard must be given to the nature of the employment relationship and the rights and duties of the person concerned to decide if work activities are effective and genuine.
(2) When considering whether an EEA national is a jobseeker for the purposes of EU law, regard must be had to whether the person entered the United Kingdom to seek employment and, if so, whether that person can provide evidence that they have a genuine chance of being engaged. If a person does not or cannot provide relevant evidence, then an appeal is bound to fail on this ground.

Citations:

[2011] UKUT 275 (IAC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration, European

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.441715

JS v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 13 Jul 2011

The claimant, a French woman and qualified teacher, now appealed against rejection of her claim for income support, saying that the defendant had failed to comply with the obligations of the European Citizens Directive designed to allow European Citizens to move freely within the Union. She had been in the late stages of pregnancy and had given up work temporarily.
Held: The claimant’s appeal failed.

Judges:

Ward, Stanley Burnton, Black LJJ

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Civ 806, [2011] PTSR D51, [2011] 3 CMLR 48

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 2004/38/EC

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Prix v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions SC 31-Oct-2012
The claimant had come from France to England, and worked as a teaching assistant. She set out on a course to train as a teacher but became pregnant, gave up the course, and eventually gave up work temporarily. Her claim to Income Support was refused . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits, European

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.441630

I-Content v OHIM (Betwin) (Intellectual Property) French Text: ECFI 6 Jul 2011

ECFI Community trade mark – Application for Community word mark BETWIN – Absolute grounds for refusal – Descriptive character-Article 7, paragraph 1, b) and c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 – Obligation to state reasons – Equal treatment – Article 49 EC.

Citations:

T-258/09, [2011] EUECJ T-258/09

Links:

Bailii

European, Intellectual Property

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.441526

Audi And Volkswagen v OHIM (TDI): ECFI 6 Jul 2011

ECFI Community trade mark – Application for the Community word mark TDI – Absolute ground for refusal – Descriptive character – No distinctive character acquired through use – Article 7(1)(c) and 7(3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 – Articles 75 and 76(1) of Regulation No 207/2009.

Citations:

T-318/09, [2011] EUECJ T-318/09

Links:

Bailii

European, Intellectual Property

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.441525

Timehouse v OHIM (Forme D’Une Montre A Bords Denteles) (Intellectual Property) French Text: ECFI 6 Jul 2011

ECFI Community trade mark – Application for three-dimensional mark – Shape of a watch with serrated edges – Absolute ground for refusal – Lack of distinctive character – Article 7, paragraph 1 b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009.

Citations:

T-235/10, [2011] EUECJ T-235/10

Links:

Bailii

European, Intellectual Property

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.441527

Imagion v OHIM (Dynamic HD) (Intellectual Property): ECFI 30 Jun 2011

ECFI Community trade mark – Application for Community word mark DYNAMIC HD – Absolute grounds for refusal – Lack of distinctive character – Lack of distinctive character acquired through use – Article 7, paragraph 1 b) and paragraph 3 of Regulation (EC ) No 40/94 [now Article 7, paragraph 1 b) and paragraph 3 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009].

Citations:

T-463/08, [2011] EUECJ T-463/08

Links:

Bailii

European, Intellectual Property

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.441520

ATB Norte v OHMI – Bricocenter Italia (Maxi Brico Center): ECFI 28 Jun 2011

ECFI Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for Community figurative mark max BRICO CENTER – Earlier Community figurative marks ATB CENTROS DIY Brico Centro CENTROS DIY BricoCentro – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8, paragraph 1, sub b of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009.

Citations:

T-481/09, [2011] EUECJ T-481/09

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 8

European, Intellectual Property

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.441389

ATB Norte v OHMI – Bricocenter Italia (Bricocenter): ECFI 28 Jun 2011

ECFI Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for Community figurative mark BRICOCENTER – Earlier Community figurative marks ATB CENTROS DIY Brico Centro CENTROS DIY BricoCentro – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8, paragraph a, b, Regulation (EC) No 207/2009.

Judges:

Forwood P

Citations:

T-480/09, [2011] EUECJ T-480/09

Links:

Bailii

European, Intellectual Property

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.441388

Atb Norte v OHMI – Bricocenter Italia (Brico Center Citta): ECFI 28 Jun 2011

ECFI Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for Community figurative mark Citt BRICO CENTER – Earlier Community figurative marks ATB CENTROS DIY Brico Centro CENTROS DIY BricoCentro – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8, paragraph 1, sub b of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009.

Citations:

T-482/09, [2011] EUECJ T-482/09

Links:

Bailii

European, Intellectual Property

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.441382

Boston Scientific v OHMI – Terumo (Capio: ECFI 10 Sep 2008

ECFI Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for Community word mark CAPIO – Earlier national word mark CAPIOX – Relative ground for refusal – Genuine use of the mark – Article 43(1) and (2) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 40/94.

Citations:

T-325/06, [2008] EUECJ T-325/06

Links:

Bailii

European, Intellectual Property

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.441357

ATB Norte v OHMI – Bricocenter Italia (Affiliato Brico Center): ECFI 28 Jun 2011

ECFI Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for Community figurative mark Affiliato BRICO CENTER – Earlier Community figurative marks ATB CENTROS DIY Brico Centro CENTROS DIY BricoCentro – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8, paragraph 1, sub b of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009.

Citations:

T-483/09, [2011] EUECJ T-483/09

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EC) No 207/2009

European, Intellectual Property

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.441381

AS v Commission (Staff Regulations): ECJ 28 Jun 2011

ECJ Public service – Officials – Vacancy notice – Rejection of application – Interest in bringing proceedings – Official on disability – indivisibility of the rejection of nomination and appointment decision – None – Distinction between officials of the same function group and hold the same rank and different career paths – Correspondence between grade and employment.

Citations:

55/10, [2011] EUECJ 55/10

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.441281

Commission v Spain (Environment And Consumers): ECJ 28 Jun 2011

ECJ Site’ Alto Sil ‘- Directive 85/337/EEC – Assessment of the effects of certain projects on the environment – Directive 92/43/EEC – Protection of natural habitats and wild species – brown bear (Ursus arctos) – Capercaillie (Tetrao urugallus).

Citations:

C-404/09, [2011] EUECJ C-404/09, [2011] EUECJ C-404/09

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

European

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.441283

Ziegler v Commission (Competition): ECFI 16 Jun 2011

ECFI Competition – Cartels – International removal services market in Belgium – Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC – Price-fixing – Market-sharing – Bid rigging – Appreciable effect on trade – Fines – 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines.

Citations:

T-199/08, [2011] EUECJ T-199/08

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.441200

Zollamt Linz Wels v Laki DOOEL: ECJ 16 Jun 2011

ECJ Community Customs Code – Regulation implementing the Customs Code – Articles 555(1)(c) and 558(1) – Vehicle which has entered the customs territory under the temporary importation procedure with total relief from import duties – Vehicle used for internal traffic – Unlawful use – Incurring of a customs debt – National authorities competent to levy customs duties.

Citations:

C-351/10, [2011] EUECJ C-351/10

Links:

Bailii

European, Customs and Excise

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.441201

Union Investment Privatfonds v Unicredito Italiano And OHIM: ECJ 16 Jun 2011

ECJ Appeals – Community trade mark – Regulation (EC) No 40/94- Article 8(1)(b) – Word marks UNIWEB and UniCredit Wealth Management – Opposition by the proprietor of the national word marks UNIFONDS and UNIRAK and of the national figurative mark UNIZINS – Assessment of the likelihood of confusion – Likelihood of association – Series or family of trade marks.

Citations:

C-317/10, [2011] EUECJ C-317/10

Links:

Bailii

European, Intellectual Property

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.441196

Gosselin Group v Commission (Competition) French Text: ECFI 16 Jun 2011

ECFI Competition – Cartels – Market for international removal services in Belgium – Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC – Price-fixing – Market Shares – Handling bids – Single and continuous infringement – Concept of undertaking – Liability for the infringement – Fines – Guidelines on Fines in 2006 – Gravity – Time.

Citations:

T-208/08, [2011] EUECJ T-208/08

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.441182

FMC Foret v Commission (Competition): ECFI 16 Jun 2011

ECFI Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Hydrogen peroxide and sodium perborate – Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC – Duration of the infringement – Presumption of innocence – Rights of the defence – Fines – Attenuating circumstances.

Citations:

T-191/06, [2011] EUECJ T-191/06

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.441180

Forsakringskassan v Bergstrom: ECJ 21 Jun 2011

ECJ Free movement of persons – Agreement between the European Community and its Member States on the one hand, and the Swiss Confederation, on the other hand, on the free movement of persons – Social Security – Family benefits – Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 – Articles 3, paragraph 1, and 72.

Citations:

C-257/10, [2011] EUECJ C-257/10, [2011] EUECJ C-257/10

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

European

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.441174

FMC v Commission (Competition): ECFI 16 Jun 2011

ECFI Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Hydrogen peroxide and sodium perborate – Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC – Imputability of the infringement – Rights of the defence – Obligation to state the reasons on which the decision is based.

Citations:

T-197/06, [2011] EUECJ T-197/06

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.441181

Logstor ROR Polska sp. z o.o. v Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Katowicach: ECJ 16 Jun 2011

ECJ Taxation – Capital duty – Directive 69/335/EEC – Indirect taxes on the raising of capital – Taxation of a loan taken up by a capital company from a person entitled to a percentage of the profits of the same company – Right of a Member State to reintroduce a tax which was no longer in force at the date of its accession to the European Union.

Citations:

C-212/10, [2011] EUECJ C-212/10

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 69/335/EEC

European

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.441186

Ministry of Defence and Support of the Armed Forces for the Islamic Republic of Iran v Faz Aviation Ltd and Another: ComC 9 May 2007

Challenge by defendant to jurisdiction to bring claim.

Judges:

Langley J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 1042 (Comm), [2008] 1 All ER (Comm) 372

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – 889457 Alberta Inc v Katanga Mining Ltd and others ComC 5-Nov-2008
The parties had set out on a joint venture with deeds providing for control of the shareholdings in each other. The claimant asserted a breach of the deed and sought a remedy. The first defendant company, incorporated in Bermuda argued that the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction, European

Updated: 14 September 2022; Ref: scu.252328

Federacion Espanola de Empresas de Tecnologia Sanitaria (FENIN) v Commission (Competition): ECJ 11 Jul 2006

Europa Appeal – Competition – Management bodies of the Spanish national health system – Medical treatment – Definition of ‘undertaking’ – Payment conditions imposed on suppliers of medical goods and equipment.

Citations:

C-205/03, [2006] EUECJ C-205/03

Links:

Bailii, Bailii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 14 September 2022; Ref: scu.243087

Schempp v Finanzamt Munchen: ECJ 12 Jul 2005

Europa Citizenship of the Union – Articles 12 EC and 18 EC – Income tax – Deductibility from taxable income of maintenance paid by a taxpayer resident in Germany to his former spouse resident in Austria – Proof of taxation of the maintenance payments in that Member State.

Citations:

C-403/03, [2005] EUECJ C-403/03

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 14 September 2022; Ref: scu.228464

Hemmati and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 4 Oct 2018

Conjoined hearing of appeals in respect of three judgments covering the cases of five individual immigrants who were placed in detention for periods pending possible removal to other EU Member States pursuant to the asylum claim arrangements under the so-called Dublin III Regulation (Regulation (EU) No. 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 – ‘Dublin III’ or ‘the Regulation’). In each case, the individual claimed damages for false imprisonment or under EU law in respect of his detention.
Held: (Sales LJ dissenting) The appeals by claimants succeeded, and that of the HS was rejected. The touchstone applied by the CJEU in Al Chodor for assessing compliance with articles 28(2) and 2(n) of the Dublin III Regulation was whether the provisions relied upon for detention had the requisite legal basis and the safeguards of clarity, predictability, accessibility and protection against arbitrariness within a framework of certain predetermined limits. The majority also held that it was clear that neither the Hardial Singh principles nor the Secretary of State’s published policy in Chapter 55 of the EIG satisfied these requirements. It followed that the detention of all of the respondents was in breach of article 28(2).
Each of the respondents had established all of the necessary ingredients of the common law cause of action for wrongful imprisonment. They had all been detained and that detention was unlawful because it was effected pursuant to the policy in Chapter 55 of the EIG, and that was itself unlawful in so far as it failed to give effect to articles 28(2) and 2(n) of the Regulation. The respondents were therefore entitled to damages for false imprisonment.
Dissenting, Sales LJ held that a policy statement such as that contained in Chapter 55 of the EIG was in principle capable of satisfying the requirements of articles 28(2) and 2(n) of the Dublin III Regulation, and that here it did satisfy those requirements. However, conscious that he was in the minority on this issue, he went on to consider whether, on the footing that he was wrong, the respondents were entitled to damages. He concluded that they were not. In his view, the claim turned on the alleged failure by the United Kingdom to adopt a particular form of law when implementing articles 28(2) and 2(n). In these circumstances the proper approach in considering whether the Secretary of State was liable for damages was to ask whether the relevant criteria for an award of damages in respect of a breach of European law had been satisfied and, in particular, whether the breach was sufficiently serious within the meaning of the decision of the CJEU in Factortame, that is to say whether the member state had manifestly and gravely disregarded the limits of its discretion. Here, any breach of articles 28(2) and 2(n) did not satisfy that ‘sufficiently serious’ test.
He also addressed the separate claims by the first and second respondents for false imprisonment based upon a breach of the Hardial Singh principles. In his view there was nothing in them, and in this regard he agreed with the decision of Garnham J: the first and second respondents were detained for proper reasons; they were assessed as posing a risk of absconding and that assessment was rational and justified; and throughout the period of their detention, there remained a real prospect that they would be removed eventually.

Judges:

Sir Terence Etherton MR and Sales, Peter Jackson LJJ

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Civ 2122, [2018] WLR(D) 632, [2019] INLR 179, [2019] 2 WLR 814, [2019] QB 708, [2019] 1 CMLR 21

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

At Admn – SS, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Another Admn 26-May-2017
The claimant sought asylum, claiming to be a child.
Held: He was not a child when detained. However, he had been detained to secure his transfer to the responsible member state under the Dublin III scheme; that it had to be established that he . .
Applied – Policie CR, Krajske reditelstvi policie Usteckeho kraje, odbor cizinecke policie v Al Chodor and Others ECJ 15-Mar-2017
Police detention of Immigrants to follow rules
ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection – Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 . .

Cited by:

At CA (Appeal from) – Hemmati and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 27-Nov-2019
The Home Secretary appealed from a finding that illegally entered asylum seekers had been unlawfully detained pending removal. The five claimants had travelled through other EU member states before entering the UK. The court considered inter alia . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, European

Updated: 13 September 2022; Ref: scu.625415

HK (Iraq) and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 23 Nov 2017

The claimants had applied for asylum, but had arrived from other EU countries. Their claims being dismissed, they were detained pending removal. They said that on return to Bulgaria, they would face harsh treatment.

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 1871

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 3, EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants etc) Act 2004

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – SS, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Another Admn 26-May-2017
The claimant sought asylum, claiming to be a child.
Held: He was not a child when detained. However, he had been detained to secure his transfer to the responsible member state under the Dublin III scheme; that it had to be established that he . .

Cited by:

Cited – Hemmati and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 27-Nov-2019
The Home Secretary appealed from a finding that illegally entered asylum seekers had been unlawfully detained pending removal. The five claimants had travelled through other EU member states before entering the UK. The court considered inter alia . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, European, Human Rights

Updated: 13 September 2022; Ref: scu.599608

FV v Council (Judgment): ECJ 28 Jun 2016

Civil service – Notation – Appraisal report – Interest in bringing proceedings – Deterioration of analytical assessments – Referral to the Reports Committee – Amendment by the second reporting officer of certain assessments not affecting the overall rating – Manifest error of assessment – Obligation to motivation – Duty of care

Citations:

F-40/15, [2016] EUECJ F-40/15

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Employment

Updated: 13 September 2022; Ref: scu.566456

Schulz-Delzers And Schulz (Free Movement Of Persons): ECJ 26 May 2011

ECJ Free movement of workers – Taxation of residence allowances – Exemption of indemnities paid to employees of a taxpayer corporation governed by public law – No such exemption in respect of allowances for taxpayers employed in the national territory by a legal person of public law of another Member State – Compliance with Section 45 TFEU – Non-discrimination and lack of interference.

Citations:

C-240/10, [2011] EUECJ C-240/10

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 13 September 2022; Ref: scu.440422

Space Beach Club v OHMIi – Flores Gomez (Sps Space Of Sound): ECFI 24 May 2011

ECFI Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for Community figurative SPS Space of Sound – Earlier national figurative marks and community space ibiza, space DANCE BARCELONA, MADRID space DANCE, DANCE VALENCIA space, space MALLORCA DANCE, DANCE EIVISSA space, space SPACE IBIZA WORLD, DANCE space and earlier national word mark VIVA SPACE – Relative ground for refusal – No likelihood of confusion – Absence of similarity of the signs – Article 8, paragraph 1 b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009.

Citations:

T-144/10, [2011] EUECJ T-144/10

Links:

Bailii

European, Intellectual Property

Updated: 13 September 2022; Ref: scu.440423

FA (Iraq) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 25 May 2011

Having failed in his asylum claim, FA claimed the protection of European law, saying that a right of appeal should be available to him against the refusal of his application for humanitarian relief under Eurpean law.
Held: The matter raised issues requiring an answer from the ECJ, and the matter was referred accordingly.

Judges:

Lord Phillips, President, Lord Hope, Deputy President, Lord Brown, Lord Kerr, Lord Dyson

Citations:

[2011] UKSC 22, UKSC 2010/0142

Links:

Bailii, Bailii Summary, SC Summary, SC

Statutes:

Council Directive 2004/83/EC

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration, European

Updated: 13 September 2022; Ref: scu.440439

Gebhard Stark v DAS Osterreichische Allgemeine Rechtsschutzversicherung AG: ECJ 26 May 2011

ECJ Legal expenses insurance – Directive 87/344/EEC – Article 4(1) – Freedom of the insured person to choose his lawyer – Limitation of the reimbursement allowed in respect of the costs relating to representation of the insured person in judicial proceedings – Reimbursement limited to the amount corresponding to that claimed by a lawyer established in the judicial district of the court having jurisdiction at first instance.

Judges:

Bonichot P

Citations:

C-293/10, [2011] EUECJ C-293/10

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 87/344/EEC

Cited by:

Cited – Brown-Quinn and Another v Equity Syndicate Management Ltd and Another CA 12-Dec-2012
The court was asked as to the requirement for a client to be given free choice of a lawyer in the context of legal expenses insurance. The various claimants insured by the defendants had sought to instruct solicitors not on the respondent’s approved . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Legal Professions

Updated: 13 September 2022; Ref: scu.440424

Residex Capital IV CV v Gemeente Rotterdam: ECJ 26 May 2011

ECJ Opinion – Competition – State Aid-Recovery of state aid contrary to EU law – Guarantee given to a loan – Nullity of acts into national law in violation of mandatory provisions of law – Powers of the national courts – Article 108, paragraph 3, third paragraph, TFEU.

Judges:

Kokott AG

Citations:

C-275/10, [2011] EUECJ C-275/10

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Opinion – Residex Capital IV CV v Gemeente Rotterdam ECJ 8-Dec-2011
ECJ Article 88(3) EC – State aid – Aid granted in the form of a guarantee to a lender for the purpose of enabling the latter to grant a loan to a borrower – Infringement of procedural rules – Obligation to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 13 September 2022; Ref: scu.440420

Salesforce.Com v EUIPO (Socialcom) (Judgment): ECFI 28 Jun 2016

European Union trade mark – Application for European Union word mark SOCIAL.COM – Absolute grounds for refusal – Descriptive character – Lack of distinctive character – Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009

Citations:

T-134/15, [2016] EUECJ T-134/15, ECLI:EU:T:2016:366

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Intellectual Property

Updated: 12 September 2022; Ref: scu.566468

Bermejo Garde v EESC (Judgment): ECJ 28 Jun 2016

Civil service – Referral back to the Tribunal after setting aside – Article 12a of the Staff Regulations – Official who has been the victim of harassment – Article 22a of the Staff Regulations – Official, whistleblower – Request for assistance – Rejection – Right to protection – Conditions – Rejection – Consequences – Application for compensation

Citations:

F-41/10, [2016] EUECJ F-41/10, ECLI:EU:F:2016:137

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 12 September 2022; Ref: scu.566447

AF Steelcase v Euipo (Judgment) French Text: ECFI 28 Jun 2016

Public service contracts – Invitation to tender procedure – Supply and installation of furniture and fittings in EUIPO’s buildings – Rejection of a tenderer’s tender – Action for annulment – Award decision – Failure to direct effect – Inadmissibility – Obligation to state reasons – Principle of good administration – Proportionality – Exclusion regime for tenders – Non-contractual liability – Material damage – Non-pecuniary damage

Citations:

T-652/14, [2016] EUECJ T-652/14

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 12 September 2022; Ref: scu.566444

Peri v EUIPO (Forme D’Un Verrou De Coffrage) (Judgment) French Text: ECFI 28 Jun 2016

Trademark of the European Union – Three-dimensional application for a European Union mark – Form of a formwork latch – Absolute ground for refusal – Sign consisting exclusively of the shape of the product necessary to obtain a technical result – Article 7 (1) (e) (ii) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009

Citations:

T-656/14, [2016] EUECJ T-656/14

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Intellectual Property

Updated: 12 September 2022; Ref: scu.566465

Lorenzet v EASA (Judgment) French Text: ECJ 28 Jun 2016

Civil service – Temporary staff – Article 2 (f) of the Conditions of Employment – Contract for an indefinite period – Leave without pay – Leave for personal reasons – Refusal to extend a leave without pay for an additional year – Article 52 of the Conditions of Employment

Citations:

F-144/15, [2016] EUECJ F-144/15, ECLI: EU: F: 2016: 139

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Employment

Updated: 12 September 2022; Ref: scu.566462