(Judgment) Public service – Officials – Head of Unit – Trial period – Non-confirmation in the head of unit – Execution of a judgment of annulment – Loss of opportunity
F-98/15, [2016] EUECJ F-98/15, ECLI:EU:F:2016:76
Bailii
European
European
Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.561978
ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Approximation of laws – Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 – Regulation (EC) No 854/2004 – Official controls of feed and food – Fees that may be charged by Member States to cover the costs incurred through official controls – Costs in connection with the training of official auxiliaries
C-112/15, [2016] EUECJ C-112/15, ECLI:EU:C:2016:185
Bailii
European
Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.561955
ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Intellectual property – Directive 2004/48/EC – Article 13(1) – Audiovisual work – Infringing activity – Damages – Rules for calculation – Lump sum – Moral prejudice – Inclusion)
C-99/15, [2016] EUECJ C-99/15
Bailii
Directive 2004/48/EC
European, Intellectual Property
Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.561956
(Judgment) Appeal – Community trade mark – Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 – Revocation proceedings – Article 51(1)(a) – Community word mark SMART WATER – Genuine use – Obligation to state reasons – Article 75
C-252/15, [2016] EUECJ C-252/15, ECLI:EU:C:2016:178
Bailii
Regulation (EC) No 207/2009
European, Intellectual Property
Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.561959
(Order) Radiation
T-376/14, [2016] EUECJ T-376/14 – CO, ECLI:EU:T:2016:186
Bailii
European
Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.561968
ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Directive 2004/38/EC – Decision withdrawing residence authorisation – Principle of respect for the rights of the defence – Right to be heard – Procedural autonomy of the Member States – Admissibility of grounds of appeal on a point of law – Plea based on public policy
C-161/15, [2016] EUECJ C-161/15, ECLI:EU:C:2016:175
Bailii
European
Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.561942
ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Taxation – Value added tax – Directive 2006/112/EC – Article 135(1)(a) – Exemption for insurance – Definition of ‘insurance’ transactions and of ‘related services performed by insurance brokers and insurance agents’ – Claims settlement services provided by and on behalf of an insurer
C-40/15, [2016] EUECJ C-40/15
Bailii
European, VAT
Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.561941
(Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Registration, evaluation, authorisation and restriction of chemicals – Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (REACH Regulation) – Extent of harmonised field – Registration of chemical substances with the European Chemicals Agency before placing them on the market – Article 5 – National chemical product register – Notification requirement for registration purposes – Compatibility with the REACH Regulation – Articles 34 TFEU and 36 TFEU – Quantitative restriction on imports
C-472/14, [2016] EUECJ C-472/14, ECLI:EU:C:2016:171
Bailii
European
Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.561943
ECJ Appeal – Access to documents – Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 – Documents held by the European Medicines Agency and produced in connection with proceedings concerning an application for a marketing authorisation for a medicinal product – Decision to grant a third party access to those documents – Suspension of operation of that decision – Interest in bringing proceedings – No need to adjudicate
C-550/15, [2016] EUECJ C-550/15 – CO
Bailii
Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001
European
Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.561947
ECJ (Order) Preliminary ruling – Directive 93/13 / EEC – Unfair terms in contracts concluded with consumers – Home Loans – clause relating to default interest – prepayment clause – Power of the national courts – Limitation period
C-613/15, [2016] EUECJ C-613/15 – CO
Bailii
European, Banking, Consumer
Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.561952
Appeals Competition Market in beef and veal Agreement between national federations of farmers and slaughterers with the object of suspending imports of beef and veal and fixing a minimum purchase price Fines Regulation No 17 Article 15(2) Taking into account of the turnover of undertakings which are members of the federations
C-101/07, [2009] 4 CMLR 15
Bailii
European
Updated: 12 January 2022; Ref: scu.561466
ECJ Appeals – Competition – Market in beef and veal – Agreement between national federations of farmers and slaughterers with the object of suspending imports of beef and veal and fixing a minimum purchase price Fines Regulation No 17 Article 15(2) Taking into account of the turnover of undertakings which are members of the federations
[2008] EUECJ C-110/07
Bailii
Citing:
Opinion – Coop De France Betail and Viande v Commission C-110/07 ECJ 17-Apr-2008
ECJ Appeal Competition Article 81(1) EC Cartel Beef and veal Suspension of imports Fixing of a union price scale Fines Determination of legal maximum of fine Article 15(2) of Regulation No 17 Taking into account . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
European
Updated: 12 January 2022; Ref: scu.561465
The Court’s power of review Regulations (EC) Nos 2100/94 and 1239/95 Agriculture Community plant variety rights Distinctive character of the candidate variety Variety a matter of common knowledge Proof Plant variety SUMCOL 01)
[2010] EUECJ C-38/09
Bailii
Citing:
See Also – Schrader v CPVO ECJ 3-Dec-2009
ECJ Appeal Community plant variety rights Regulation No 2100/94 and Regulation No 1239/95 Decision of the Board of Appeal of the Community Plant Variety Office Rejection of the application for Community plant . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
European, Intellectual Property
Updated: 12 January 2022; Ref: scu.561155
ECJ Judgment – Community trade mark – Invalidity proceedings – Community word mark SCOPE – Absolute grounds for refusal – Descriptive character – Distinctive character – Article 7, paragraph 1 b) and c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 – Article 52 , paragraph 1 a) of Regulation No 207/2009
T-90/15, [2016] EUECJ T-90/15, ECLI:EU:T:2016:153
Bailii
European
European, Intellectual Property
Updated: 12 January 2022; Ref: scu.561137
ECJ Judgment – Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the Community word mark SPA WISDOM – Earlier Benelux word mark SPA – Relative grounds for refusal – Unfair advantage taken of the distinctive character or the repute of the earlier trade mark – Article 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009
T-201/14, [2016] EUECJ T-201/14
Bailii
Regulation (EC) No 207/2009
European
European, Intellectual Property
Updated: 12 January 2022; Ref: scu.561132
ECJ (Order) Appeal – Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court – Application for the Community word mark AGRI.CAPITAL – Opposition proceedings – Earlier Community word marks AgriCapital and AGRICAPITAL – Rejection of the opposition
C-440/15, [2016] EUECJ C-440/15 – CO, ECLI:EU:C:2016:144
Bailii
European, Intellectual Property
Updated: 12 January 2022; Ref: scu.561131
ECJ Judgment – Consumer protection – Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 – Health claims on foods, other than those referring to the reduction of disease risk and the development and child health – Refusal to authorize certain allegations despite the positive opinion of EFSA – Proportionality – Equal treatment – Obligation to state reasons’
T-100/15, [2016] EUECJ T-100/15
Bailii
European
European
Updated: 12 January 2022; Ref: scu.561133
ECJ Judgment – EAGGF – Guarantee Section – EAGF and EAFRD – Expenditure excluded from financing – Expenditure incurred by Spain – flat-rate financial corrections – off financial corrections – Extending the financial correction to a period after the communication provided for in Article 11 , paragraph 1 of Regulation (EC) No 885/2006
T-675/14, [2016] EUECJ T-675/14, ECLI:EU:T:2016:123
Bailii
Regulation (EC) No 885/2006
European
European
Updated: 12 January 2022; Ref: scu.560967
ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Area of freedom, security and justice – Judicial cooperation in civil matters – European order for payment procedure – Regulation (EC) No 1896/2006 – Articles 17 and 20 – Obligations of a court seised in order to designate the court with territorial jurisdiction to hear contentious proceedings following the defendant’s opposition to the European order for payment – Competence of the courts of the Member State of origin of the European order for payment – Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 – Debt arising from the right to compensation under Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 on account of a flight delay
C-94/14, [2016] EUECJ C-94/14, ECLI:EU:C:2016:148
Bailii
Regulation (EC) No 1896/2006
England and Wales
European
Updated: 12 January 2022; Ref: scu.560958
C-324/98, [2000] ECR I-10745, [2000] EUECJ C-324/98
Bailii
Cited by:
Cited – The Law Society, Regina (on the Application of) v Legal Services Commission CA 29-Nov-2007
The Law Society challenged the new contract proposed for legal aid providers, saying that the Unified Contract reserved too great powers to alter its terms unilaterally, and was in breach of the European Directive on standards for public procurement . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
European
Updated: 12 January 2022; Ref: scu.162484
The Working Time Directive has direct application in the employment by an emanation of the state – a local authority, and an hourly paid part timer was entitled to four weeks paid holiday by the direct effect application of the Directive, and irrespective of any ambiguity or deficit in the implementing regulations.
Times 12-Feb-1999, Gazette 31-Mar-1999, [1999] UKEAT 526 – 98 – 0302
Bailii
Working Time Directive 93/104/EC OJ 1993 L307/18
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – Gibson v East Riding Yorkshire Council EAT 3-Jul-1998
. .
Cited by:
Appeal from – East Riding of Yorkshire Council v Lorraine Gibson CA 21-Jun-2000
The European Directive which created rights for workers to minimum holidays, was not sufficiently precise to allow it to have direct effect, and so give rise to an individual’s right to sue an employer under its provisions directly. The Directive . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment, European, Local Government
Updated: 12 January 2022; Ref: scu.80815
The claimant, a succesful businessman and benefitor of charity, had twice applied unsuccessfully to be appointed to the House of Lords. He now sought disclosure of two letters submitted by third parties apparently opposing his appointment. He was content that they be anonymised.
Held: The applications came under the exemption from disclosure in relation to ‘any honour or dignity’. This was exempted from disclosure under both the 1998 and the 2000 Acts (though limited in the second case). Moreover, in the particular respect under consideration the Directive has been implemented in a way that was compliant and proportionate.
Knowles J
[2015] EWHC 45 (QB)
Bailii
Data Protection Act 1998 7 37, Freedom of Information Act 2000 37, Data Protection Directive 95/46/EU
England and Wales
Information, Constitutional, European
Updated: 12 January 2022; Ref: scu.541574
When looking at the compliance of a company mackerel fishing with European limits, the boat had to comply with all elements of the regulations, including notification before entering the area and notification of the size of the catch.
Times 20-Jan-1999
Council Regulation 894/97 art 9
England and Wales
European, Agriculture
Updated: 12 January 2022; Ref: scu.90082
Claim on cancellation of long standing sales agency.
Flaux J
[2016] ECC 12, [2016] EWHC 486 (Comm), [2016] 4 WLR 59, 2016] WLR(D) 129
Bailii, WLRD
Commercial Agents (Council Directive) Regulations 1993
England and Wales
Agency, European
Updated: 11 January 2022; Ref: scu.560752
ECJ Judgment – Public service – Temporary staff – Staff OHIM – Fixed-term Contract involving a termination clause – Clause terminating the contract in the event that the agent is not included on the reserve list a competition – termination of the contract under the termination clause – Date of taking effect of the termination clause – Open competitions OHIM / AD / 01/13 and OHIM / AST / 02/13
F-60/15, [2016] EUECJ F-60/15, ECLI:EU:F:2016:28
Bailii
European, Intellectual Property
Updated: 11 January 2022; Ref: scu.560697
ECJ Judgment – Public service – Officials – Union Representative – provision of a trade union or professional organization – Promotion year 2014 – Decision not to promote the applicant – Article 45 of the Statute – Comparison of merits – Lack of statutory obligation to provide a specific method of comparing the merits of staff made available to union or professional organizations – Taking into account of staff reports – Analysis of the level of responsibility – evidence – Error control manifest of appreciation
F-84/15, [2016] EUECJ F-84/15, ECLI:EU:F:2016:29
Bailii
European
Updated: 11 January 2022; Ref: scu.560696
ECJ Judgment – Public service – Officials – Pensions – Reform of the status – Regulation No 1023/2013 – Article 22 of Annex XIII thereto – Raising the retirement age – Reimbursement of contributions to the Union’s pension scheme – Article 26 of Annex XIII thereto – Revaluation of the bonus pension rights
F-3/15, [2016] EUECJ F-3/15, ECLI: EU: F: 2016: 26
Bailii
European
Updated: 11 January 2022; Ref: scu.560694
Area of Freedom, Security and Justice : Judicial Cooperation In Criminal Matters : Opinion – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Urgent preliminary ruling procedure – Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters – European arrest warrant – Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA – Surrender procedures between Member States – Conditions for execution – Reasons for optional non-execution – Article 4a(1) introduced by Framework Decision 2009/299/JHA – Arrest warrant issued for the purpose of executing a custodial sentence or a detention order – ‘Trial resulting in the decision’ – Person concerned having appeared in person at first instance – Appeal proceedings involving a re-examination of the substance of the case – Arrest warrant providing no information making it possible to check whether the rights of the defence of the person convicted were upheld during the appeal proceedings
C-270/17, [2017] EUECJ C-270/17, [2017] WLR(D) 575
WLRD, Bailii
European
Cited by:
Cited – Konecny v District Court In Brno-Venkov, Czech Republic SC 27-Feb-2019
K had been convicted and sentenced in his absence. His extradition was requested under an EAW which asserted that it was based upon an enforceable judgment, but that he had an unqualified right to be retried. He argued that the delay (since 2004 for . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Extradition
Updated: 11 January 2022; Ref: scu.593573
ECJ State aid – Rescuing firms in difficulty – Aid in the form of a State guarantee – Decision declaring the aid compatible with the internal market – Failure to initiate the formal investigation procedure – Serious difficulties – Procedural rights of the interested parties
T-79/14, [2016] EUECJ T-79/14, ECLI:EU:T:2016:118
Bailii
European
European
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.560504
ECJ (Judgment) Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the Community word mark 1e1 – Earlier national word mark UNO E and earlier figurative mark unoe – Relative grounds for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
T-61/15, [2016] EUECJ T-61/15, ECLI:EU:T:2016:115
Bailii
England and Wales
European, Intellectual Property
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.560497
ECJ (Judgment) Appeal – Civil service – Staff of the EIB – Contractual nature of the employment relationship – Remuneration – Reform of the system of premiums EIB – Obligation to state reasons – Distortion – Errors of law
[2016] EUECJ T-241/14, ECLI:EU:T:2016:103
Bailii
European
European
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.560477
ECJ (Judgment) Appeal – Civil service – Staff of the EIB – Contractual nature of the employment relationship – remuneration system reform and salary progression EIB – Obligation to state reasons – Distortion – Errors of law
[2016] EUECJ T-240/14, ECLI:EU:T:2016:104
Bailii
European
European
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.560476
The claimants sought a declaration as against the residuary beneficiaries (wife and daughter) under the will, saying that the claimants had a beneficial interest in company shares within the estate. The defendants fild acknowledgments of service but asserting expressly that they did not submit to the jurisdiction of the court. The claimants said that the acknowledgment was enough to provide jurisdiction.
Held: The declaration was granted. Acknowledgment in the form used was not to be taken as the defendant having entered. It would undermine the purpose of the of Regulation to read national procedural rules so as to compel a defendant to enter an appearance. Whether a defendant had in fact entered an appearance depended on whether there had in fact been a submission to the jurisdiction according to the local law. Also the claim was outside Regulation (EC) 44/2001 because its main subject matter was ‘succession’ within article 1(2)(a) of the Regulation.
Henry Carr J
[2016] EWHC 217 (Ch), [2016] WLR(D) 101
Bailii, WLRD
Civil Procedure Rules 11(2), Regulation (EC) 44/2001 1(2)(a) 24
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Elefanten Schuh Gmbh v Pierre Jacqmain ECJ 24-Jun-1981
ECJ 1. Article 18 of the convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters applies even where the parties have by agreement designated a court which . .
Cited – Harada Limited (T/A Chequepoint) v Turner CA 2-Dec-2003
Applications for leave to appeal. The claimant had alleged unfair dismissal. The respondent denied jurisdiction. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Jurisdiction, Wills and Probate, European
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.560278
ECJ Appeal – State aid – Article 87(1) EC – Emission trading scheme for nitrogen oxides – Classification of the national measure as State aid – Decision declaring aid to be compatible with the common market – Concept of selectivity – Advantage financed through State resources – Protection of the environment – Obligation to state the reasons for decision – Admissibility
[2011] EUECJ C-279/08, C-279/08, ECLI:EU:C:2011:551
Bailii
European
Citing:
Opinion – Commission v Netherlands (State Aid) ECJ 22-Dec-2010
ECJ Opinion – Appeal – Admissibility of the action at first instance – Action by a Member State against the Commission’s decision declaring that constitutes State aid compatible with the common market a national . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
European
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.560262
Europa Article 82 EC Abuse of dominant position Pharmaceutical products Refusal to supply wholesalers engaging in parallel exports Ordinary orders.
C-478/06, [2008] EUECJ C-478/06, C-468/06, C-469/06, C-470/06, C-471/06, C-472/06, C-473/06, C-474/06, C-475/06, C-476/06, C-477/06
Bailii
European
European
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.276395
ECJ Judgment – Community design – Community design representing soles of tires and tire wheels for vehicles – Failure to apply for renewal and cancellation of the design to the expiry of the registration – Request for re-establishment and application renewal of the design
T-279/15, [2016] EUECJ T-279/15, ECLI:EU:T:2016:92
Bailii
European, Intellectual Property
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.560219
ECJ Judgment – Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the Community word mark HARRY’S BAR – Earlier national figurative mark PUB CASINO Harrys RESTAURANG – Partial refusal of registration – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009
ECLI:EU:T:2016:82, T-711/13, [2016] EUECJ T-711/13
Bailii
European, Intellectual Property
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.560213
Order – Public service – Officials – Last compulsory retirement – Retirement age for retirement – keep-alive request beyond the age limit – Article 52, second paragraph, of the Staff Regulations – Interests of the service – Article 82 of the Rules of procedure – End of inadmissibility of public order – Irregularity of the pre action procedure
F-107/15, [2016] EUECJ F-107/15 – CO
Bailii
European
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.560210
Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Directive 93/13/EEC – Unfair terms – Order for payment procedure – Enforcement proceedings – Powers of the national court responsible for enforcement to raise of its own motion the fact that the unfair term is invalid – Principle of res judicata – Principle of effectiveness – Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Judicial protection
ECLI:EU:C:2016:98, C-49/14, [2016] EUECJ C-49/14
Bailii
Directive 93/13/EEC, Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union
European, Consumer
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.560211
ECJ Judgment – Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the Community word mark HARRY’S NEW YORK BAR – Earlier national figurative mark PUB CASINO Harrys RESTAURANG – Partial refusal of registration – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009
T-84/14, [2016] EUECJ T-84/14, ECLI:EU:T:2016:83
Bailii
European, Intellectual Property
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.560214
ECJ Judgment – Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the Community word mark INFINITY – Earlier Community word mark INFINI – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of
T-30/15, [2016] EUECJ T-30/15, ECLI:EU:T:2016:87
Bailii
Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 8(1)(b)
European, Intellectual Property
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.560215
ECJ Judgment – Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures adopted against Iran with the aim of preventing nuclear proliferation – Freezing of funds – Admission restriction – Action for annulment – No need to adjudicate – Non-contractual liability – Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law conferring rights on individuals – Non-material damage
T-328/14, [2016] EUECJ T-328/14, ECLI:EU:T:2016:86
Bailii
European
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.560216
ECJ Judgment – Arbitration clause – Sixth Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration – Repayment of part of the sums paid and liquidated damages – No need to approve part – Eligible costs for funding of the Union – Penalty clause – manifestly excessive character
T-53/14, [2016] EUECJ T-53/14
Bailii
European, Arbitration
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.560217
ECJ Judgment – Arbitration clause – agricultural products supply program to Russia – Beef Supply – Breach of contract by the intervention agency – Law – Prescription – Late certain provision of guarantees – partial payment of an invoice transport – insufficient payment in foreign currencies of certain invoices – default interest
ECLI:EU:T:2016:85, T-164/14, [2016] EUECJ T-164/14
Bailii
European
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.560206
ECJ Judgment – Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Directive 2006/123/EC – Articles 14 to 16 – Article 49 TFEU – Freedom of establishment – Article 56 TFEU – Freedom to provide services – Conditions for issuing vouchers entailing a tax advantage which are provided by employers to their employees and may be used for accommodation, leisure and/or meals – Restrictions – Monopoly
ECLI:EU:C:2016:108, C-179/14, [2016] EUECJ C-179/14
Bailii
Directive 2006/123/EC
European
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.560207
ECJ Judgment – Community trade mark – Invalidity proceedings – Community figurative mark MANGO – Absolute ground for refusal – No distinctive character acquired through use – Article 7, paragraph 3 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 – Article 52, paragraph 2 of Regulation No 207/2009
T-761/14, [2016] EUECJ T-761/14, ECLI:EU:T:2016:91
Bailii
European, Intellectual Property
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.560208
The appellant challenged his extradition saying that the European Arrest Warrant under which he was held wrongly said that he was convicted, whilst he said he was wanted for trial. He had been tried in his absence, and the judgment and sentence were not under Italian law either final or enforceable until the appeal process was concluded.
Held: The prosecutor’s appeal failed. The Act reflected a clear distinction between those who are convicted, and those who are only accused. While a national court may not interpret a national law contra legem, it must ‘do so as far as possible in the light of the wording and purpose of the Framework Decision in order to attain the result which it pursues and thus comply with article 34(2)(b) EU.
Lord Bingham said that the foreign judge had treated the appellant as an accused and not a convicted person. This seems strange to an English lawyer, familiar with a procedure by which a defendant sentenced to imprisonment at the end of a jury trial goes down the steps from the dock to the cells. But such is not the practice in Italy where the trial is indeed a continuing process, not yet finally completed in this case, and not an event. On the evidence the appellant falls within section 11(5) of the Act as a person accused of the commission of an extradition offence but not alleged to be unlawfully at large after conviction of it
Baroness Hale said: ‘
The foreign judge has treated the appellant as an accused and not a convicted person. This seems strange to an English lawyer, familiar with a procedure by which a defendant sentenced to imprisonment at the end of a jury trial goes down the steps from the dock to the cells. But such is not the practice in Italy where the trial is indeed a continuing process, not yet finally completed in this case, and not an event. On the evidence the appellant falls within section 11(5) of the Act as a person accused of the commission of an extradition offence but not alleged to be unlawfully at large after conviction of it.’
Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Hope of Craighead, Baroness Hale of Richmond, Lord Carswell, Lord Mance
[2008] UKHL 51, Times 19-Aug-2008, [2008] All ER (D) 392, [2009] 1 All ER 1, [2008] 1 WLR 1724
Bailii, HL
Extradition Act 2003 26, Framework Decision of 13 June 2002 (2002/584/JHA)
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Caldarelli v The Court of Naples Admn 12-Jul-2007
The court certified a point of law for the House of Lords as follows: ‘Where a fugitive has been convicted and sentenced in his absence in the requesting state, but the conviction and sentence are neither final nor enforceable, may his case be . .
Cited – In re Coppin 1866
The French sought to extradite Coppin who had been convicted by a court in Paris in his absence in a conviction ‘par contumace’. That conviction might be annulled if he surrendered to the court’s jurisdiction, when he would be tried again for the . .
Cited – In re Guisto (application for a writ of Habeas Corpus) (Criminal Appeal from Her Majesty’s High Court of Justice) HL 3-Apr-2003
The applicant challenged an order for his extradition to the US. He had been convicted in his absence having absconded from bail.
Held: He had been arrested and held on the basis that he was a convicted person, but the procedure should have . .
Cited – Regina v Governor of Brixton Prison, ex parte Caborn-Waterfield QBD 1960
When an accused person is committed under the first paragraph of section 10 and surrendered to a foreign government he is surrendered for trial. Before that course is taken the magistrate has to be satisfied that a prima facie case is made out. When . .
Cited – In Re Ismail (Application For Writ of Habeas Corpus) (On Appeal From A Divisional Court of The Queen’s Bench Division) HL 20-Aug-1998
The term ‘Accused person’ for the purposes of extradition can include a person yet to be charged. Allowance are to be made for foreign systems, and should recognise the purpose of the legislation and includes the desire to interview or where a . .
Cited – Athanassiadis v Government of Greece (Note) 1971
The appellant was properly extradited as a convicted person since the conviction, though in his absence was not in contumacy. . .
Cited – Regina v Governor of Pentonville Prison, ex parte Zezza HL 1983
In the context of an application for extradition, where the conviction was a ‘conviction for contumacy’ that phrase is not defined. It does not have an ordinary meaning in the English language. ‘Contumacy’ indicates insubordination or disobedience . .
Cited – In re Avishalom Sarig 26-Mar-1993
An extradition request came from the United States. The applicant resisted saying that the conviction was not final.
Held: The court should examine the nature of the conviction itself. The conviction of the fugitive in his absence was treated . .
Cited – Office of the King’s Prosecutor, Brussels v Cando Armas and others HL 17-Nov-2005
The defendant resisted extradition to Brussels saying that the offence had been committed in part in England. He had absconded and been convicted. Application was made for his return to serve his sentence. The offences associated with organisation . .
Cited – Migliorelli v Government of Italy QBD 28-Jul-2000
The Government of Italy sought the return of a fugitive who had been tried and convicted in his absence. The issue was whether the warrant should have been issued against the fugitive as a convicted person and not, as it had, as an accused person. . .
Cited – La Torre v The Lord Advocate and Another HCJ 8-Nov-2006
The Lord Advocate had conceded that devolution minutes were competent in proceedings under the 2003 Act. . .
Cited – La Torre v Her Majesty’s Advocate HCJ 14-Jul-2006
The applicant resisted his extradition to Italy, saying that the provisions of Part 2 of the 2003 Act were engaged because the case started life before Italy ratified the Framework Decision and so adopted the EAW system. La Torre had been found . .
Cited – Criminal proceedings against Pupino ECJ 16-Jun-2005
ECJ (Grand Chamber) Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters – Articles 34 EU and 35 EU – Framework Decision 2001/220/JHA – Standing of victims in criminal proceedings – Protection of vulnerable . .
Cited – Dabas v High Court of Justice, Madrid HL 28-Feb-2007
The defendant sought to appeal his extradition to Spain to face terrorism charges. He complained that the certificate required under the 2003 Act could not be the European arrest warrant itself, that the offence did not satisfy the double . .
Cited by:
Cited – Konecny v District Court In Brno-Venkov, Czech Republic SC 27-Feb-2019
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Extradition, European
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.271272
(Judgment)
C-314/14, [2016] EUECJ C-314/14
Bailii
European
European
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.560133
C-204/80
European
European
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.133129
ECJ Judgment – Freedom to provide services – Article 56 TFEU – Games of chance – Public monopoly on betting on sporting competitions – Prior administrative authorisation – Exclusion of private operators – Collection of bets on behalf of an operator established in another Member State – Criminal penalties – National provision contrary to EU law – Exclusion – Transition to a system providing for the grant of a limited number of licences to private operators – Principles of transparency and impartiality – Directive 98/34/EC – Article 8 – Technical regulations – Rules on services – Obligation to notify
C-336/14, [2016] EUECJ C-336/14, ECLI:EU:C:2016:72
Bailii
European
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.559541
ECJ Judgment – EAGGF – Guarantee Section – EAGF and EAFRD – Expenditure excluded from financing – Fruit and vegetables – Processing Sector tomatoes – Aid to producer organizations – Expenditure incurred by Italy – Proportionality – res judicata
T-686/14, [2016] EUECJ T-686/14, ECLI:EU:T:2016:58
Bailii
European
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.559538
ECJ (Judgment) References for a preliminary ruling – Admissibility – Dumping – Imports of footwear with uppers of leather originating in China and Vietnam – Validity of Regulation (EC) No 1472/2006 and Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1294/2009 – WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement – Regulation (EC) No 384/96 – Article 2(7) – Determination of dumping – Imports from non-market economy countries – Claims for market economy treatment – Time limit – Article 9(5) and (6) – Claims for individual treatment – Article 17 – Sampling – Article 3(1), (5) and (6), Article 4(1) and Article 5(4) – Cooperation of the Union industry – Article 3(2) and (7) – Determination of injury – Other known factors – Community Customs Code – Article 236(1) and (2) – Repayment of duties not legally owed – Time limit – Unforeseeable circumstances or force majeure – Invalidity of a regulation which imposed anti-dumping duties)
C-659/13, [2016] EUECJ C-659/13, ECLI:EU:C:2016:74
Bailii
European
European, Customs and Excise
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.559532
ECJ Judgment – Public service contracts – Tendering procedure for tenders – Support for the European Commission Representation in Bulgaria in the context of the organization of public events – Rejection of a tender and awarding the contract to a another tenderer – award criteria – Obligation to state reasons – Concept of relative advantages of the successful tender – Transparency
T-722/14, [2016] EUECJ T-722/14, ECLI:EU:T:2016:61
Bailii
European
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.559540
ECJ Judgment – Support programme for the European audiovisual sector (MEDIA 2007) – Measures of support for the transnational distribution of European films – Call for proposals in connection with the ‘selective’ scheme 2013 – EACEA act informing the applicant of the rejection of its application for the film ‘Only God Forgives’ – EACEA act confirming the rejection but stating new reasons – Powers – Distribution of tasks between the Commission and the EACEA – Circumscribed powers – Actions for annulment – Challengeable act – Admissibility – Obligation to state reasons – Permanent Guidelines 2012-2013 – Material or physical distribution agreement – Not communicated in advance to the EACEA – Application not eligible
T-676/13, [2016] EUECJ T-676/13, ECLI:EU:T:2016:62
Bailii
European, Media
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.559537
ECJ Reference for a preliminary ruling – Community trade mark – Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 – Article 23 – Licence – Register of Community trade marks – Right of the licensee to bring proceedings for infringement notwithstanding the fact that the licence has not been entered in the Register
C-163/15, [2016] EUECJ C-163/15, [2016] WLR(D) 57, ECLI:EU:C:2016:71
Bailii, WLRD
Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 23
European, Intellectual Property
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.559534
Judgment – Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures adopted in view of the situation in Ukraine – Freezing of funds – List of persons, entities and bodies covered by the freezing of funds and economic resources – Inclusion of the applicant’s name – Proof that inclusion on the list is justified
T-486/14, [2016] EUECJ T-486/14
Bailii
European
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.559489
ECJ Judgment – Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Figurative Community trade mark Bon Appetit! – Earlier national figurative marks Bon Apetit and Good Apeti – No likelihood of confusion – Article 8, paragraph 1 b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009
T-485/14, [2016] EUECJ T-485/14, ECLI:EU:T:2016:53
Bailii
European, Intellectual Property
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.559499
ECJ Judgment – Appeal – Cartels – European market for phosphates in animal feed – Fine imposed on the applicants at the end of a transaction process – staggered payment of the fine – Requirement to provide a bank guarantee from a bank with a financial rating ‘AA’ long-term – Obligation to state reasons
C-415/14, [2016] EUECJ C-415/14, ECLI:US:C:2016:58
Bailii
European
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.559481
Judgment – Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the Community figurative mark TVR ENGINEERING – Earlier Community figurative mark TVR – Relative ground for refusal – No similarity between the signs – No likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009
T-781/14, [2016] EUECJ T-781/14, ECLI:EU:T:2016:43
Bailii
European, Intellectual Property
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.559492
ECJ Judgment – Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the Community figurative mark MOTO B – Earlier non-registered national figurative marks MOTOBI – Relative ground for refusal – Evidence that the earlier non-registered marks are well known – Article 8(2)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 – Article 6bis of the Paris Convention – Evidence submitted in support of the opposition after the expiry of the period set for that purpose – Failure to take account thereof – Discretion of the Board of Appeal – Provision to the contrary – Circumstances precluding additional or supplementary evidence from being taken into account – Article 76(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 – Rules 19 and 20 of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 – Rule 50(1), third subparagraph, of Regulation No 2868/95 – First sentence of Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 – Obligation to state reasons
T-169/13, [2016] EUECJ T-169/13
Bailii
European, Intellectual Property
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.559496
ECJ Judgment – Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for Community word mark Euromarker – Earlier Community word mark Eurimark – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8, paragraph 1 b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009
T-683/13, [2016] EUECJ T-683/13
Bailii
Regulation (EC) No 207/2009
European, Intellectual Property
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.559500
ECJ Order – Appeal – Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court – Community trade mark – Application for the Community figurative mark including the word elements ‘Royal County of Berkshire POLO CLUB’ and the representation of a polo player on horseback – Opposition by the proprietor of the earlier Community figurative marks including the word elements ‘BEVERLY HILLS POLO CLUB’ – Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 – Article 8(1)(b) – Likelihood of confusion – Partial refusal of registration – Appeal in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded
C-278/15, [2016] EUECJ C-278/15 – CO, ECLI:EU:C:2016:20
Bailii
Regulation (EC) No 207/2009
European, Intellectual Property
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.559484
ECJ Judgment – Appeal – Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Article 101(1) TFEU – Power transformers market – Oral market-sharing agreement (‘Gentlemen’s Agreement’) – Restriction of competition ‘by object’ – Barriers to entry – Presumption of participation in an unlawful cartel – Fines – Guidelines on the method of setting fines (2006) – Point 18
C-373/14, [2016] EUECJ C-373/14, [2015] EUECJ C-373/14
Bailii, Bailii
European, Commercial
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.559491
ECJ Judgment – Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Figurative Community trade mark African SIMBA – Earlier national figurative mark Simba – Obligation to state reasons – Article 75 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8 , paragraph 1 b) of Regulation No 207/2009
T-687/14, [2016] EUECJ T-687/14, ECLI:EU:T:2016:37
Bailii
European
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.559480
ECJ Order – Preliminary reference – Rome Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations – First Protocol on the interpretation by the Court of the Rome Convention – Articles 1 and 2, a) and b) – National courts have the power to seize the Court for a preliminary ruling – Court clearly lacking
C-397/15, [2016] EUECJ C-397/15 – CO
Bailii
European
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.559482
ECJ Judgment – EAGGF – Guarantee Section – EAGF and EAFRD – Expenditure excluded from financing – Verification of small plots – Absence of evidence of the serious and reasonable doubt – Extrapolation of the results of spot checks
T-667/14, [2016] EUECJ T-667/14, ECLI:EU:T:2016:34
Bailii
European
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.559486
ECJ Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Competition policy – Article 101 TFEU – Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 – International freight forwarding sector – National competition authorities – Legal status of instruments of the European Competition Network – Model Leniency Programme of that network – Application for immunity submitted to the Commission – Summary application for immunity submitted to national competition authorities – Relationship between those two applications
C-428/14, [2016] EUECJ C-428/14, ECLI:EU:C:2016:27, [2016] WLR(D) 15
Bailii, WLRD
European
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.559465
ECJ Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Articles 49 TFEU and 56 TFEU – Freedom of establishment – Freedom to provide services – Betting and gaming – Judgment of the Court of Justice which declared the national rules on licences for the collection of bets incompatible with EU law – Reorganisation of the system by way of a new call for tenders – Free-of-charge transfer of the rights to use tangible and intangible assets owned by licensees and which constitute their network for the management and collection of bets. – Restriction – Overriding reasons in the public interest – Proportionality
C-375/14, [2016] EUECJ C-375/14, ECLI:EU:C:2016:60
Bailii
European
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.559476
ECJ (Judgment) Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Directive 91/271/EEC – Urban waste water treatment – Article 4 – Secondary treatment or equivalent – Annex I, Sections B and D
C-398/14, [2016] EUECJ C-398/14, ECLI:EU:C:2016:61
Bailii
European, Utilities
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.559462
Order requiring reference to ECJ.
Park J
[2003] EWHC 1945 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – Marks and Spencer Plc v Halsey (Inspector of Taxes) 2003
Marks and Spencer Plc appealed against the refusal of group relief, on the ground that the statutory limitations on the territorial scope of group relief were incompatible with, and overridden by, Community law. The Special Commissioners dismissed . .
Cited by:
See Also – Marks and Spencer v David Halsey (Inspector of Taxes) ECJ 13-Dec-2005
ECJ Articles 43 EC and 48 EC – Corporation tax – Groups of companies – Tax relief – Profits of parent companies – Deduction of losses incurred by a resident subsidiary- Allowed – Deduction of losses incurred in . .
See Also – Marks and Spencer plc v Halsey (Inspector of Taxes) ChD 10-Apr-2006
The court considered the implementation of the ECJ decision between the parties.
Held: The matter was to be remitted to the Special Commissioners. The ‘no possibilities’ test referred to in the ECJ’s judgment required an analysis of the . .
See Also – Marks and Spencer Plc v Halsey (HM Inspector of Taxes) ChD 10-Apr-2006
Preliminary judgment. . .
See Also – Halsey (HM Inspector of Taxes) v Marks and Spencer Plc CA 20-Feb-2007
The inspector appealed against a decision granting group relief to the taxpayer a UK resident company for losses by a group company in another European state.
Held: The appeal was denied. To refuse group relief in these circumstances would be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Corporation Tax, European
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.521601
ECJ Judgment – Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for Community figurative mark Genuss fur Leib and Seele KLOSTER Andechs SEIT 1455 – Earlier Community figurative mark SEIT Andechser NATUR 1908 and earlier national figurative mark Andechser NATUR – Relative ground for refusal – Article 8, paragraph 1 b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009
T-78/14, [2015] EUECJ T-78/14, ECLI: EU: T: 2015: 768
Bailii
European
European, Intellectual Property
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.553138
Preliminary judgment.
Park J
[2006] EWHC 811 (Ch), 8 ITL Rep 1012, [2006] BTC 346, [2006] 3 CMLR 8, [2006] STC 1235, [2006] STI 1352
Bailii
Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – Marks and Spencer Plc v Halsey (Inspector of Taxes) 2003
Marks and Spencer Plc appealed against the refusal of group relief, on the ground that the statutory limitations on the territorial scope of group relief were incompatible with, and overridden by, Community law. The Special Commissioners dismissed . .
See Also – Marks and Spencer Plc v Halsey (HM Inspector of Taxes) ChD 2-May-2003
Order requiring reference to ECJ. . .
At ECJ – Marks and Spencer v David Halsey (Inspector of Taxes) ECJ 13-Dec-2005
ECJ Articles 43 EC and 48 EC – Corporation tax – Groups of companies – Tax relief – Profits of parent companies – Deduction of losses incurred by a resident subsidiary- Allowed – Deduction of losses incurred in . .
Cited by:
See Also – Marks and Spencer plc v Halsey (Inspector of Taxes) ChD 10-Apr-2006
The court considered the implementation of the ECJ decision between the parties.
Held: The matter was to be remitted to the Special Commissioners. The ‘no possibilities’ test referred to in the ECJ’s judgment required an analysis of the . .
See Also – Halsey (HM Inspector of Taxes) v Marks and Spencer Plc CA 20-Feb-2007
The inspector appealed against a decision granting group relief to the taxpayer a UK resident company for losses by a group company in another European state.
Held: The appeal was denied. To refuse group relief in these circumstances would be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Corporation Tax, European
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.521602
ECJ Judgment – Community trade mark – Invalidity proceedings – Community figurative mark GUGLER – Absolute ground for refusal – Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 – Relative ground for refusal – Article 8(4) and Article 53(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009 – Obligation to state reasons – Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 – Ground raised by the Court of its own motion
T-674/13, [2016] EUECJ T-674/13, ECLI:EU:T:2016:44
Bailii
European, Intellectual Property
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.559470
ECJ Judgment – Appeal – Civil Aviation – Submissions flight conditions presented – Decision of the European Aviation Safety Agency – Rejection of application – compulsory preliminary administrative procedure – Possibility of an appeal before the Courts of the Union European – judge’s Office – Adoption of measures of organization of the procedure – Obligation – complex technical Likes
C-61/15, [2016] EUECJ C-61/15, ECLI:EU:C:2016:59
Bailii
European
Citing:
See Also – Heli-Flight v EASA ECFI 11-Dec-2014
ECJ Judgment – Civil Aviation – Application for approval of flight conditions for a type of Robinson R66 helicopter – Decision EASA – Action for annulment – Extent of review of the Board of Appeal – Court’s . .
Cited by:
See Also – Heli-Flight v EASA ECJ 27-Oct-2017
Procedure – Costs of costs – Legal fees – Representation of an institution by two lawyers – Participation of agents of the institution at the hearing – Recoverable costs . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Transport
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.559471
ECJ Trade marks – Keyword advertising on the internet – Selection by the advertiser of a keyword corresponding to a competitor’s trade mark with a reputation – Directive 89/104/EEC – Article 5(1)(a) and (2) – Regulation (EC) No 40/94 – Article 9(1)(a) and (c) – Condition that one of the trade mark’s functions be adversely affected – Detriment to the distinctive character of a trade mark with a reputation (‘dilution’) – Unfair advantage taken of the distinctive character or repute of that trade mark (‘free-riding’)
A. Tizzano, P
[2012] FSR 3, [2011] EUECJ C-323/09, [2012] Bus LR 1440, [2012] ETMR 1
Bailii
European
Citing:
Opinion – Interflora And Others v Marks and Spencer plc, Flowers Direct Online Limited ECJ 24-Mar-2011
ECJ (Opinion) Trade marks – Keyword advertising corresponding to the trade mark of a competitor of the advertiser – Trade marks with a reputation – Blurring – Tarnishment – Free-riding – Directive 89/104 – . .
See Also – Interflora Inc and Another v Marks and Spencer Plc and Another ChD 29-Apr-2010
Response to request for clarification of reference to the ECJ. . .
Cited by:
ECJ – Interflora Inc and Another v Marks and Spencer Plc and Another ChD 20-Jun-2012
Application for permission to to adduce witness evidence at trial from witnesses gathered from two pilot surveys. . .
ECJ – Marks and Spencer Plc v Interflora Inc and Another CA 20-Nov-2012
The court gave guidance on the use of surveys in trials for passing off and trade mark infringement.
Lewison LJ reviewed the practice of conducting interviews and surveys in passing off cases: ‘The upshot of this review is that courts have . .
ECJ – Interflora Inc and Another v Marks and Spencer Plc and Another ChD 21-Feb-2013
‘The Claimants (‘Interflora’) seek the permission of the Court to adduce in evidence the witness statements of 13 witnesses at the trial of this action scheduled for mid April 2013. Interflora do not accept that they need the Court’s permission, but . .
ECJ – Interflora Inc v Marks and Spencer Plc CA 22-Mar-2013
Interflora had been refused permision to adduce survey evidence, but now appealed against refusal of permission to adduce evidence of confusion by witness statements.
Held: Appeal allowed. Reasons to follow. . .
ECJ – Interflora Inc and Another v Marks and Spencer Plc CA 5-Apr-2013
The court gave its reasons for allowing the claimant to bring additional witness evidence as to confusion as opposed to survey evidence. . .
ECJ – Interflora Inc and Another v Marks and Spencer Plc and Another ChD 15-Apr-2013
The defendant objected to the introduction of certain evidence by the claimant under a Civil Evidence Act notice. Claimants seeking to adduce academic journals as expert evidence . .
ECJ – Interflora Inc and Another v Marks and Spencer Plc and Another ChD 21-May-2013
Mark use in search engine was infringing use
The claimant mark owner alleged that the defendant, in paying a search engine to use the claimants mark as a search keyword was infringing its rights. The defendant argued that the use of the same sign in different contexts could amount to a . .
ECJ – Interflora Inc and Another v Marks and Spencer Plc and Another ChD 12-Jun-2013
The court considered the form of the injunction requested to give effect to the earlier full judgment in the case brought, requiring the defendant to discontinue any use of the terms complained of as infringing the claimant’s registered marks as . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
European, Intellectual Property
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.526105
ECJ Judgment – Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures adopted in view of the situation in Ukraine – Freezing of funds – List of persons, entities and bodies covered by the freezing of funds and economic resources – Inclusion of the applicant’s name – Proof that inclusion on the list is justified
T-341/14, [2016] EUECJ T-341/14, ECLI:EU:T:2016:47
Bailii
European
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.559473
ECJ Judgment – Appeal – concentration of business operation on the market for book publishing – Decision adopted in the wake of the cancellation of a buyer’s accreditation decision of some lack of independence for assets of an agent – Article 266 TFEU – Execution of the judgment of annulment – Subject – Legal basis of the contested decision – Retroactive effect of it – Independence of the buyer of the assets transferred vis-a-vis the transferee
C-514/14, [2016] EUECJ C-514/14, ECLI:US:C:2016:55
Bailii
European
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.559466
UTTC EUROPEAN LAW – group relief for losses of non-resident subsidiaries – whether there are no possibilities for those losses to be taken into account at the date of the group relief claim – date of valid claim where series of group relief claims – whether valid group relief claim can be made out of time – application of principle of effectiveness – method of quantifying losses for which group relief claim can be made
Warren J P, Sadler J
[2010] UKUT 213 (TCC), [2010] STC 2470
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
At FTTTx – Marks and Spencer plc v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 2-Apr-2009
FTTTx EUROPEAN LAW – group relief for losses of non-resident subsidiaries – whether there are no possibilities for those losses to be taken into account at the date of the group relief claim – no at the date of . .
Cited by:
At UTTC – Revenue and Customs v Marks and Spencer Plc SC 22-May-2013
The company wished to assign losses in its European subsidiaries against its profits. Since the losses were first claimed, the subsidiaries had gone into insolvent liquidation.
Held: Lord Hope said: ‘I would answer the first issue by rejecting . .
Appeal from – HM Revenue and Customs v Marks and Spencer Plc CA 14-Oct-2011
The taxpayers claimed relief for losses incurred within their European subsidiaries. The claim having been referred to the ECJ, Moses LJ summarised the issues outstanding: ‘(i) Is the test that the ECJ established to identify those circumstances in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Corporation Tax, European
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.428158
Marks and Spencer Plc appealed against the refusal of group relief, on the ground that the statutory limitations on the territorial scope of group relief were incompatible with, and overridden by, Community law. The Special Commissioners dismissed the taxpayer’s appeal.
Park J
[2003] STC (SCD) 70
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Metallgesellschaft Ltd and Others v Inland Revenue Commissioners and Another Hoechst Ag and Another v Same ECJ 8-Mar-2001
The British law which meant that non-resident parent companies of British based businesses were not able to recover interest on payments of advance corporation tax, was discriminatory against other European based companies. Accordingly the law was . .
Cited by:
See Also – NEC Semi-Conductors Limited and Other Test Claimants v The Commissioners of Inland Revenue ChD 24-Nov-2003
UK companies were subsidiaries of companies resident abroad, and complained that they were unable to make group income elections.
Held: The prohibition infringed non-discrimination provisions of double taxation agreements – non-discrimination . .
At Special Comissioners – Autologic Holdings Plc and others v Commissioners of Inland Revenue HL 28-Jul-2005
Taxpayer companies challenged the way that the revenue restricted claims for group Corporation Tax relief for subsidiary companies in Europe. The issue was awaiting a decision of the European Court. The Revenue said that the claims now being made by . .
Reference from – Marks and Spencer v David Halsey (Inspector of Taxes) ECJ 13-Dec-2005
ECJ Articles 43 EC and 48 EC – Corporation tax – Groups of companies – Tax relief – Profits of parent companies – Deduction of losses incurred by a resident subsidiary- Allowed – Deduction of losses incurred in . .
See Also – Halsey (HM Inspector of Taxes) v Marks and Spencer Plc CA 20-Feb-2007
The inspector appealed against a decision granting group relief to the taxpayer a UK resident company for losses by a group company in another European state.
Held: The appeal was denied. To refuse group relief in these circumstances would be . .
Reference to ECJ – Marks and Spencer plc v Halsey (Inspector of Taxes) ChD 10-Apr-2006
The court considered the implementation of the ECJ decision between the parties.
Held: The matter was to be remitted to the Special Commissioners. The ‘no possibilities’ test referred to in the ECJ’s judgment required an analysis of the . .
See Also – HM Revenue and Customs v Marks and Spencer Plc CA 14-Oct-2011
The taxpayers claimed relief for losses incurred within their European subsidiaries. The claim having been referred to the ECJ, Moses LJ summarised the issues outstanding: ‘(i) Is the test that the ECJ established to identify those circumstances in . .
Reference to ECJ – Revenue and Customs v Marks and Spencer Plc SC 22-May-2013
The company wished to assign losses in its European subsidiaries against its profits. Since the losses were first claimed, the subsidiaries had gone into insolvent liquidation.
Held: Lord Hope said: ‘I would answer the first issue by rejecting . .
See Also – Marks and Spencer Plc v Halsey (HM Inspector of Taxes) ChD 2-May-2003
Order requiring reference to ECJ. . .
See Also – Marks and Spencer Plc v Halsey (HM Inspector of Taxes) ChD 10-Apr-2006
Preliminary judgment. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Corporation Tax, European
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.229077
The court considered the implementation of the ECJ decision between the parties.
Held: The matter was to be remitted to the Special Commissioners. The ‘no possibilities’ test referred to in the ECJ’s judgment required an analysis of the recognised possibilities legally available given the objective facts of the company’s situation at the relevant time, and that the test was to be applied at the date when the group relief claim was made.
Park J
[2006] STC 1235, [2006] EWHC 811 (Ch)
England and Wales
Citing:
Reference to ECJ – Marks and Spencer Plc v Halsey (Inspector of Taxes) 2003
Marks and Spencer Plc appealed against the refusal of group relief, on the ground that the statutory limitations on the territorial scope of group relief were incompatible with, and overridden by, Community law. The Special Commissioners dismissed . .
At ECJ – Marks and Spencer v David Halsey (Inspector of Taxes) ECJ 13-Dec-2005
ECJ Articles 43 EC and 48 EC – Corporation tax – Groups of companies – Tax relief – Profits of parent companies – Deduction of losses incurred by a resident subsidiary- Allowed – Deduction of losses incurred in . .
See Also – Marks and Spencer Plc v Halsey (HM Inspector of Taxes) ChD 2-May-2003
Order requiring reference to ECJ. . .
See Also – Marks and Spencer Plc v Halsey (HM Inspector of Taxes) ChD 10-Apr-2006
Preliminary judgment. . .
Cited by:
Appeal from – Halsey (HM Inspector of Taxes) v Marks and Spencer Plc CA 20-Feb-2007
The inspector appealed against a decision granting group relief to the taxpayer a UK resident company for losses by a group company in another European state.
Held: The appeal was denied. To refuse group relief in these circumstances would be . .
See Also – HM Revenue and Customs v Marks and Spencer Plc CA 14-Oct-2011
The taxpayers claimed relief for losses incurred within their European subsidiaries. The claim having been referred to the ECJ, Moses LJ summarised the issues outstanding: ‘(i) Is the test that the ECJ established to identify those circumstances in . .
See Also – Revenue and Customs v Marks and Spencer Plc SC 22-May-2013
The company wished to assign losses in its European subsidiaries against its profits. Since the losses were first claimed, the subsidiaries had gone into insolvent liquidation.
Held: Lord Hope said: ‘I would answer the first issue by rejecting . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Corporation Tax, European
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.518021
For the purposes of corporation tax, MandS claimed group relief in respect of losses sustained by two of their subsidiaries, resident in Germany and in Belgium. Lord Hope observed that the claims were originally made and refused by HMRC over ten years before and raised questions about the availability of cross-border group relief and the method of quantifying such relief as was available which, despite having been the subject of nine separate hearings since the case was first considered in December 2002, had still not yet been resolved. This was the tenth such hearing. As to the losses in respect of which relief is sought, the earliest losses relied upon extend back to 1997 in the case of MSD and back to 1998 in the case of MSB.
Held: The company had been entitled to make multiple claims for cross-border group Corporation Tax relief in relation to the same loss incurred in the appropriate accounting periods by its European subsidiary which had gone into liquidation and then, at a later point, to withdraw earlier claims in respect of the same surrendered loss which proved not to meet the subsequent judicially determined test. The remaining condition was that such claims should not be statute-barred.
Lord Neuberger, President, Lord Mance, Lord Clarke, Lord Reed, Lord Carnwath
[2014] UKSC 11, [2014] 2 All ER 331, [2014] 1 WLR 711, [2014] STC 819, [2014] BTC 7, [2014] STI 682, [2014] WLR(D) 90
Bailii, Bailii Summary, SC summary, SC, WLRD
England and Wales
Citing:
At ECJ – Marks and Spencer v David Halsey (Inspector of Taxes) ECJ 13-Dec-2005
ECJ Articles 43 EC and 48 EC – Corporation tax – Groups of companies – Tax relief – Profits of parent companies – Deduction of losses incurred by a resident subsidiary- Allowed – Deduction of losses incurred in . .
At CA – HM Revenue and Customs v Marks and Spencer Plc CA 14-Oct-2011
The taxpayers claimed relief for losses incurred within their European subsidiaries. The claim having been referred to the ECJ, Moses LJ summarised the issues outstanding: ‘(i) Is the test that the ECJ established to identify those circumstances in . .
See Also – Revenue and Customs v Marks and Spencer Plc SC 22-May-2013
The company wished to assign losses in its European subsidiaries against its profits. Since the losses were first claimed, the subsidiaries had gone into insolvent liquidation.
Held: Lord Hope said: ‘I would answer the first issue by rejecting . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Corporation Tax, European
Leading Case
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.521992
ECJ (Opinion) Trade marks – Keyword advertising corresponding to the trade mark of a competitor of the advertiser – Trade marks with a reputation – Blurring – Tarnishment – Free-riding – Directive 89/104 – Article 5(2) – Regulation No 40/94 – Article 9(1)(c).
Jaaskinen AG
C-323/09, [2011] EUECJ C-323/09
Bailii
Directive 89/104
European
Citing:
Reference – Interflora, Inc and Another v Marks and Spencer Plc and Another ChD 22-May-2009
Each of the parties provided a service delivering flowers. The claimant had a trade mark, and the defendants each purchased the use of that trade mark and variations of it with a search engine (Google) so that a search under the trade mark produced . .
See Also – Interflora Inc and Another v Marks and Spencer Plc and Another ChD 29-Apr-2010
Response to request for clarification of reference to the ECJ. . .
Cited by:
Opinion – Interflora And Others v Marks and Spencer plc, Flowers Direct Online Limited ECJ 22-Sep-2011
ECJ Trade marks – Keyword advertising on the internet – Selection by the advertiser of a keyword corresponding to a competitor’s trade mark with a reputation – Directive 89/104/EEC – Article 5(1)(a) and (2) – . .
ECJ Opinion – Interflora Inc and Another v Marks and Spencer Plc and Another ChD 20-Jun-2012
Application for permission to to adduce witness evidence at trial from witnesses gathered from two pilot surveys. . .
ECJ Opinion – Marks and Spencer Plc v Interflora Inc and Another CA 20-Nov-2012
The court gave guidance on the use of surveys in trials for passing off and trade mark infringement.
Lewison LJ reviewed the practice of conducting interviews and surveys in passing off cases: ‘The upshot of this review is that courts have . .
ECJ Opinion – Interflora Inc and Another v Marks and Spencer Plc and Another ChD 21-Feb-2013
‘The Claimants (‘Interflora’) seek the permission of the Court to adduce in evidence the witness statements of 13 witnesses at the trial of this action scheduled for mid April 2013. Interflora do not accept that they need the Court’s permission, but . .
ECJ Opinion – Interflora Inc v Marks and Spencer Plc CA 22-Mar-2013
Interflora had been refused permision to adduce survey evidence, but now appealed against refusal of permission to adduce evidence of confusion by witness statements.
Held: Appeal allowed. Reasons to follow. . .
ECJ Opinion – Interflora Inc and Another v Marks and Spencer Plc CA 5-Apr-2013
The court gave its reasons for allowing the claimant to bring additional witness evidence as to confusion as opposed to survey evidence. . .
ECJ Opinion – Interflora Inc and Another v Marks and Spencer Plc and Another ChD 15-Apr-2013
The defendant objected to the introduction of certain evidence by the claimant under a Civil Evidence Act notice. Claimants seeking to adduce academic journals as expert evidence . .
ECJ Opinion – Interflora Inc and Another v Marks and Spencer Plc and Another ChD 21-May-2013
Mark use in search engine was infringing use
The claimant mark owner alleged that the defendant, in paying a search engine to use the claimants mark as a search keyword was infringing its rights. The defendant argued that the use of the same sign in different contexts could amount to a . .
ECJ Opinion – Interflora Inc and Another v Marks and Spencer Plc and Another ChD 12-Jun-2013
The court considered the form of the injunction requested to give effect to the earlier full judgment in the case brought, requiring the defendant to discontinue any use of the terms complained of as infringing the claimant’s registered marks as . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
European, Intellectual Property
Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.431357
ECJ Order – Application for interim measures – Appeal – Suspension of operation of a judgment of the General Court of the European Union – Request for confidential treatment of certain information contained in a decision of the European Commission finding an unlawful cartel on the European market for glass for use in motor vehicles – Rejection decision by the Commission and judgment of the General Court dismissing the action for annulment of that decision – Urgency – Serious and irreparable damage – None
C-517/15, [2016] EUECJ C-517/15 – CO, [2017] EUECJ C-517/15
Bailii, Bailii
European
Updated: 09 January 2022; Ref: scu.559452
ECJ Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Public contracts – Articles 49 TFEU and 56 TFEU – Directive 2004/18/CE – Medical transport services – National legislation authorising regional health authorities to entrust medical transport activities to registered voluntary associations fulfilling the legal requirements, directly and without advertising, by means of reimbursement of the expenditure incurred – Lawfulness
C-50/14, [2016] EUECJ C-50/14, [2016] WLR(D) 38, ECLI:EU:C:2016:56
Bailii, WLRD
European
Updated: 09 January 2022; Ref: scu.559459
ECJ Judgment – References for a preliminary ruling – Regulation (EU) No 158/2013 – Validity – Anti-dumping duty imposed on imports of certain prepared or preserved citrus fruits originating in China – Effect to be given to a judgment having found a preceding regulation to be invalid – Reopening of the initial investigation to determine the normal value – Reimposition of the anti-dumping duty on the basis of the same data – Investigation period to be taken into account
C-283/14, [2016] EUECJ C-283/14, ECLI:EU:C:2016:57
Bailii
European
Updated: 09 January 2022; Ref: scu.559460
ECJ Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Taxation – General arrangements for excise duty – Directive 2008/118/EC – Occurrence of an irregularity during a movement of excise goods – Movement of goods under a duty suspension arrangement – Goods missing on delivery – Levying of excise duty in the absence of proof of destruction or loss of the goods)
C-64/15, [2016] EUECJ C-64/15, ECLI:EU:C:2016:62
Bailii
European, Customs and Excise
Updated: 09 January 2022; Ref: scu.559456
ECJ Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Article 343 TFEU – Protocol on the privileges and immunities of the European Union – Article 3 – Tax exemptions – Brussels-Capital Region – Contributions in respect of the supply of electricity and gas
[2016] EUECJ C-163/14
Bailii
Citing:
Opinion – Commission v Belgium (Advocate Generals Opinion) ECJ 2-Jul-2015
ECJ Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Protocol (No 7) on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union – Article 3 – Fiscal immunity of the Union – Exemption – Regional gas and electricity . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
European, Utilities
Updated: 09 January 2022; Ref: scu.559142
ECJ Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Directive 2009/147/EC – Conservation of wild birds – Kaliakra and Belite Skali special protection areas – Directive 92/43/EEC – Conservation of natural habitats and wild species – Kompleks Kaliakra site of Community importance – Directive 2011/92/EU – Assessment of the effects of certain projects on the environment – Temporal applicability of the system of protection – Deterioration of natural habitats of species and disturbance of species – Wind power – Tourism
[2016] EUECJ C-141/14
Bailii
Directive 2009/147/EC, Directive 92/43/EEC
Citing:
Opinion – Commission v Bulgaria (Advocate Generals Opinion) ECJ 3-Sep-2015
ECJ Nature conservation – Directive 2009/147/EC – Conservation of wild birds -‘Kaliakra’ and ‘Belite Skali’ special protection areas – Directive 92/43/EEC – Conservation of natural habitats and of wild species – . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
European, Environment
Updated: 09 January 2022; Ref: scu.559141
ECJ Reference for a preliminary ruling – Public procurement contracts – Directive 2004/18/EC – Economic and financial standing – Technical and/or professional ability – Articles 47(2) and 48(3) – Tender specifications laying down the obligation for a tenderer to conclude a cooperation agreement or to set up a partnership with the entities on whose capacities it relies
[2016] EUECJ C-234/14
Bailii
Directive 2004/18/EC
Citing:
Opinion – Ostas Celtnieks SIA v Talsu novada pasvaldiba, (Advocate Generals Opinion) ECJ 4-Jun-2015
ECJ Request for a preliminary ruling – Public contracts – Directive 2004/18/EC – Articles 47(2) and 48(3) – Economic operator relying on the capacities of other entities – Obligation to conclude a cooperation . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
European
Updated: 09 January 2022; Ref: scu.559143
ECFI Public service contracts – Tender procedure – Shuttle service in Italy and Europe – Tenderer’s bid rejected – Decision to award the contract to another tenderer – Non-contractual liability – Access to documents – Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 – Bid of the successful tenderer – Access refused – Exception relating to the protection of the commercial interests of a third party
NJ Forwood, P
T-339/10, [2013] EUECJ T-339/10
Bailii
Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001
European
European
Updated: 09 January 2022; Ref: scu.470644
ECJ Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings Application for the figurative Community trade mark Thai Silk – Earlier national figurative trade mark representing a winged creature Admissibility of the action – Relative ground for refusal Likelihood of confusion Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
T-361/08, [2010] EUECJ T-361/08
Bailii
European
Intellectual Property
Updated: 09 January 2022; Ref: scu.408763