Category: European

Test Claimants In The FII Group Litigation v CIR: ECJ 12 Dec 2006

ECJ (Opinion of Geelhoed AG) Interpretation of Articles 43 and 56 EC and Articles 4(1) and 6 of Council Directive 90/435/EEC of 23 July 1990 on the common system of taxation applicable in the case of parent companies and subsidiaries of different Member States – Tax exemption granted in a Member State to a company established in its territory which received dividends paid by companies also established in its territory – Exemption not granted for dividends paid to that company by companies established in the territory of another Member State
‘ . . where a member state has a system for preventing or mitigating the imposition of a series of charges to tax or economic double taxation as regards dividends paid to residents by resident companies, it must treat dividends paid to residents by non-resident companies in the same way.
[The Treaty provisions] do not preclude legislation of a member state which exempts from corporation tax dividends which a resident company receives from another resident company, when that state imposes corporation tax on dividends which a resident company receives from a non-resident company in which the resident company holds at least 10% of the voting rights, while at the same time granting a tax credit in the latter case for the tax actually paid by the company making the distribution in the member state in which it is resident, provided that the rate of tax applied to foreign-sourced dividends is no higher than the rate of tax applied to nationally-sourced dividends and that the tax credit is at least equal to the amount paid in the member state of the company making the distribution, up to the limit of the amount of the tax charged in the member state of the company receiving the distribution.
Article [63FEU] precludes legislation of a member state which exempts from corporation tax dividends which a resident company receives from another resident company, where that state levies corporation tax on dividends which a resident company receives from a non-resident company in which it holds less than 10% of the voting rights, without granting the company receiving the dividends a tax credit for the tax actually paid by the company making the distribution in the state in which the latter is resident.
[The Treaty provisions] preclude legislation of a member state which allows a resident company receiving dividends from another resident company to deduct from the amount which the former company is liable to pay by way of advance corporation tax the amount of that tax paid by the latter company, whereas no such deduction is permitted in the case of a resident company receiving dividends from a non-resident company as regards the corresponding tax on distributed profits paid by the latter company in the state in which it is resident.’
C-446/04, [2006] EUECJ C-446/04, [2007] STC 326, [2006] ECR I-11753, [2008] BTC 222, [2006] STI 2750, [2012] 2 AC 436, [2012] 2 WLR 1240, [2006] ECR I-11753, 9 ITL Rep 426, ECLI:EU:C:2006:774, [2007] 1 CMLR 35
Bailii
Council Directive 90/435/EEC 6
European
Cited by:
At ECJ – Test Claimants In The Franked Investment Income Group Litigation v Inland Revenue SC 23-May-2012
The European Court had found the UK to have unlawfully treated differently payment of franked dividends between subsidiaries of UK companies according to whether all the UK subsidiaries were themselves UK based, thus prejudicing European . .
At ECJ – Test Claimants In the FII Group Litigation v HM Revenue and Customs ChD 27-Nov-2008
The claimants were companies with parent companies in the UK and other subsidiaries not so resident, both in the EU and outside. They complained of the differences in treatment under corporation tax of the payment of dividends between the . .
See Also – Test Claimants In The FII Group Litigation v The Commissioners For Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs ECJ 19-Jul-2012
ECJ Articles 49 TFEU and 63 TFEU – Payment of dividends – Corporation tax – Case C-446/04 – Test Claimants in the FII Group Litigation – Interpretation of the judgment – Prevention of economic double taxation – . .
See Also – Test Claimants In The FII Group Litigation v Commissioners of Inland Revenue ECJ 5-Sep-2013
ECJ Opinion – Recovery of national taxes which are contrary to European Union law – Limitation period for instituting proceedings – National legislation curtailing the limitation period with retroactive effect . .
See Also – Test Claimants In The FII Group Litigation v Commissioners of Inland Revenue ECJ 12-Dec-2013
ECJ Judicial protection – Principle of effectiveness – Principles of legal certainty and the protection of legitimate expectations – Restitution of sums paid but not due – Remedies – National legislation – . .
See Also – The Test Claimants In The FII Group Litigation v HM Revenue and Customs ChD 18-Dec-2014
The company claimants had paid large sums in excess tax under a mistake of European law. . .
Cited – Littlewoods Ltd and Others v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs SC 1-Nov-2017
The appellants had overpaid under a mistake of law very substantial sums in VAT over several years. The excess had been repaid, but with simple interest and not compound interest, which the now claimed (together with other taxpayers amounting to 17 . .
Cited – Prudential Assurance Company Ltd v Revenue and Customs SC 25-Jul-2018
PAC sought to recover excess advance corporation tax paid under a UK system contrary to EU law. It was now agreed that some was repayable but now the quantum. Five issues separated the parties.
Issue I: does EU law require the tax credit to be . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 10 August 2021; Ref: scu.374511

Littlewoods Ltd and Others v HM Revenue and Customs: CA 21 May 2015

The company sought repayment by way of restitution for overpaid taxes. The tax had been repaid, but only as simple interest, and not compounded. Both parties now appealed from a decision that the Act did not apply to exclude under sections 78 and 80 of the 1994 Act.
Held: Littlewoods’ claims ere excluded by sections 78 and 80 of the 1994 Act, as a matter of English law and without reference to EU law.
The critical words in section 78(1) concern liabilities to pay ‘interest’. In their view, it was a strained use of language to describe a liability to make restitution for the time value of money as a liability to pay interest, even if the relief was calculated by reference to interest rates (para 45).
[2015] EWCA Civ 515, [2015] WLR(D) 228, [2015] BVC 26, [2015] STI 1791, [2015] 3 WLR 1748, [2016] Ch 373, [2015] STC 2014, [2015] STC 2384
Bailii, WLRD
Value Added Tax Act 1994 94
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Littlewoods Retail Ltd and Others v HM Revenue and Customs (No 2) ChD 28-Mar-2014
The claimants had recovered very substantial overpayments made of VAT. They sought recovery of compound interest. The ECJ, on reference, said that this was a matter for national law.
Held: The claim succeeded. The sections of the 1994 Act were . .
Criticised – FJ Chalke Ltd and Another v Revenue and Customs ChD 8-May-2009
The court was asked as to the effectiveness under European law of sections 78 and 80 of the 1994 Act.
Held: Henderson J focused on the fact that section 80(7) excludes any common law liability to repay the overpaid VAT, and inferred that it . .

Cited by:
Appeal from (CA) – Littlewoods Ltd and Others v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs SC 1-Nov-2017
The appellants had overpaid under a mistake of law very substantial sums in VAT over several years. The excess had been repaid, but with simple interest and not compound interest, which the now claimed (together with other taxpayers amounting to 17 . .
Cited – Prudential Assurance Company Ltd v Revenue and Customs SC 25-Jul-2018
PAC sought to recover excess advance corporation tax paid under a UK system contrary to EU law. It was now agreed that some was repayable but now the quantum. Five issues separated the parties.
Issue I: does EU law require the tax credit to be . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 10 August 2021; Ref: scu.547012

Amministrazione Delle Finanze Dello Stato v Spa San Giorgio: ECJ 9 Nov 1983

ECJ Questions submitted for a preliminary ruling – reference to the court – right of every national court – stage of the proceedings before the national court – nature of the decision to be given by the national court – irrelevant (eec treaty, art. 177, second para.) Community law – direct effect – national charges incompatible with community law – repayment – procedures – application of national law – limits – Community law – direct effect – national charges incompatible with community law – repayment – procedures – application of national law – conditions – consideration of possible passing on of the charge – permissibility Community law – direct effect – national charges incompatible with community law – repayment – procedures – application of national law – conditions – requirement of proof that the taxpayer has not passed the charges on – unacceptability – criteria.
ECLI:EU:C:1983:318, [1983] EUECJ R-199/82, [1983] ECR 3595
Bailii
European
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Social Security Ex Parte Taylor ECJ 16-Dec-1999
The government made additional payments to pensioners in respect of the additional fuel costs incurred in winter. The complainant asserted that as a man aged 62, he would not receive this benefit where a woman of the same age would have done, and . .
Cited – Walker-Fox v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions CA 29-Nov-2005
The claimant pensioner had moved to France. He sought to claim a retrospective winter fuel allowance claim. The government had eventually agreed to make payments to UK residents abroad.
Held: The claimant was deemed to have had knowledge of . .
Cited – Test Claimants In The Franked Investment Income Group Litigation v Inland Revenue SC 23-May-2012
The European Court had found the UK to have unlawfully treated differently payment of franked dividends between subsidiaries of UK companies according to whether all the UK subsidiaries were themselves UK based, thus prejudicing European . .
Applied – Test Claimants In the FII Group Litigation v HM Revenue and Customs ChD 27-Nov-2008
The claimants were companies with parent companies in the UK and other subsidiaries not so resident, both in the EU and outside. They complained of the differences in treatment under corporation tax of the payment of dividends between the . .
Cited – Revenue and Customs v The Investment Trust Companies SC 11-Apr-2017
Certain investment trust companies (ITCs) sought refunds of VAT paid on the supply of investment management services. EU law however clarified that they were not due. Refunds were restricted by the Commissioners both as to the amounts and limitation . .
Cited – Littlewoods Ltd and Others v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs SC 1-Nov-2017
The appellants had overpaid under a mistake of law very substantial sums in VAT over several years. The excess had been repaid, but with simple interest and not compound interest, which the now claimed (together with other taxpayers amounting to 17 . .
Cited – Prudential Assurance Company Ltd v Revenue and Customs SC 25-Jul-2018
PAC sought to recover excess advance corporation tax paid under a UK system contrary to EU law. It was now agreed that some was repayable but now the quantum. Five issues separated the parties.
Issue I: does EU law require the tax credit to be . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 10 August 2021; Ref: scu.215185

JAS Jet Air Service France SARL v Commission: ECJ 21 May 2015

ECJ Judgment – Appeal – Customs Union and the Common Customs Tariff – Community Customs Code – Article 239 – Implementing Regulations of the Customs Code – Article 905 – denim trousers import from the United States – Import duties – Decision declaring unwarranted surrender of these rights – Lack of ‘special situation
Rodin P
C-53/14, [2015] EUECJ C-53/14, ECLI:EU:C:2015:330
Bailii
European

Updated: 10 August 2021; Ref: scu.547040

Test Claimants In the FII Group Litigation v HM Revenue and Customs: ChD 27 Nov 2008

The claimants were companies with parent companies in the UK and other subsidiaries not so resident, both in the EU and outside. They complained of the differences in treatment under corporation tax of the payment of dividends between the subsidiaries from where all subsidiaries were UK resident.
Henderson J
[2008] EWHC 2893 (Ch), [2009] BTC 443, [2008] STI 2726, [2009] STC 254, [2009] Eu LR 413
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Applied – Amministrazione Delle Finanze Dello Stato v Spa San Giorgio ECJ 9-Nov-1983
ECJ Questions submitted for a preliminary ruling – reference to the court – right of every national court – stage of the proceedings before the national court – nature of the decision to be given by the national . .
At ECJ – Test Claimants In The FII Group Litigation v CIR ECJ 12-Dec-2006
ECJ (Opinion of Geelhoed AG) Interpretation of Articles 43 and 56 EC and Articles 4(1) and 6 of Council Directive 90/435/EEC of 23 July 1990 on the common system of taxation applicable in the case of parent . .

Cited by:
Appeal from – Franked Investment Group Litigation Test Claimants v Inland Revenue and Another CA 23-Feb-2010
. .
At First Instance – Test Claimants In The Franked Investment Income Group Litigation v Inland Revenue SC 23-May-2012
The European Court had found the UK to have unlawfully treated differently payment of franked dividends between subsidiaries of UK companies according to whether all the UK subsidiaries were themselves UK based, thus prejudicing European . .
See Also – Test Claimants In The FII Group Litigation v The Commissioners For Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs ECJ 19-Jul-2012
ECJ Articles 49 TFEU and 63 TFEU – Payment of dividends – Corporation tax – Case C-446/04 – Test Claimants in the FII Group Litigation – Interpretation of the judgment – Prevention of economic double taxation – . .
See Also – Test Claimants In The FII Group Litigation v Commissioners of Inland Revenue ECJ 5-Sep-2013
ECJ Opinion – Recovery of national taxes which are contrary to European Union law – Limitation period for instituting proceedings – National legislation curtailing the limitation period with retroactive effect . .
See Also – Test Claimants In The FII Group Litigation v Commissioners of Inland Revenue ECJ 12-Dec-2013
ECJ Judicial protection – Principle of effectiveness – Principles of legal certainty and the protection of legitimate expectations – Restitution of sums paid but not due – Remedies – National legislation – . .
See Also – The Test Claimants In The FII Group Litigation v HM Revenue and Customs ChD 18-Dec-2014
The company claimants had paid large sums in excess tax under a mistake of European law. . .
Cited – Prudential Assurance Company Ltd v Revenue and Customs SC 25-Jul-2018
PAC sought to recover excess advance corporation tax paid under a UK system contrary to EU law. It was now agreed that some was repayable but now the quantum. Five issues separated the parties.
Issue I: does EU law require the tax credit to be . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 10 August 2021; Ref: scu.278309

Lodato and C v Istituto nazionale della previdenza sociale: ECJ 27 Nov 2008

Europa State aid for employment Guidelines on aid for employment Verification of compliance with the conditions for obtaining aid Calculation of the’ job creation ‘indicator
C-415/07, [2008] EUECJ C-415/07 – O
Bailii
European
Cited by:
Opinion – Lodato and C v Istituto nazionale della previdenza sociale ECJ 2-Apr-2009
State aid for employment Guidelines on aid to employment Guidelines on national regional aid Regulation (EC) No 2204/2002 Notion of ‘job creation’ Calculation of the increase in the number of jobs . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 10 August 2021; Ref: scu.278366

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 contrary to Community law: ‘it is contrary to Community law for a national court to refuse or reduce a claim brought before it by a resident subsidiary and its non-resident parent company for reimbursement or reparation of the financial loss which they have suffered as a consequence of the advance payment of corporation tax by the subsidiary, on the sole ground that they did not apply to the tax authorities in order to benefit for the taxation regime which would have exempted the subsidiary from making payments in advance and that they therefore did not make use of the legal remedies available to them to challenge the refusals of the tax authorities, by invoking the primacy and direct effect of the provisions of Community law, where upon any view national law denied resident subsidiaries and their non-resident parent companies the benefit of that taxation regime.’
Europa It is contrary to Article 52 of the Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 43 EC) for the tax legislation of a Member State to afford subsidiary companies resident in that Member State the possibility of benefiting from a taxation regime (group income election) allowing them to pay dividends to their parent company without having to pay advance corporation tax where their parent company is also resident in that Member State but to deny them that possibility where their parent company has its seat in another Member State.
Where a subsidiary resident in one Member State has been obliged to pay advance corporation tax in respect of dividends paid to its parent company having its seat in another Member State even though, in similar circumstances, the subsidiaries of parent companies resident in the first Member State were entitled to opt for a taxation regime that allowed them to avoid that obligation, Article 52 of the Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 43 EC) requires that resident subsidiaries and their non-resident parent companies should have an effective legal remedy in order to obtain reimbursement or reparation of the financial loss which they have sustained and from which the authorities of the Member State concerned have benefited as a result of the advance payment of tax by the subsidiaries.
The mere fact that the sole object of such an action is the payment of interest equivalent to the financial loss suffered as a result of the loss of use of the sums paid prematurely does not constitute a ground for dismissing such an action, for the award of interest represents the reimbursement of that which was improperly paid and would appear to be essential in restoring the equal treatment guaranteed by Article 52 of the Treaty.
While, in the absence of Community rules, it is for the domestic legal system of the Member State concerned to lay down the detailed procedural rules governing actions for repayment of taxes levied in breach of Community law or for reparation of loss caused by breach of Community law, including ancillary questions such as the payment of interest, those rules must not render practically impossible or excessively difficult the exercise of rights conferred by Community law.
Actions brought by individuals before the courts of a Member State for repayment of national taxes levied in breach of Community law or for reparation of the loss caused in breach of Community law are subject to national rules of procedure which may, in particular, require applicants to act with reasonable diligence in order to avoid loss or damage or to limit its extent.
It is, however, contrary to Community law for a national court to refuse or reduce a claim brought before it by a subsidiary resident in that Member State and its non-resident parent company for reimbursement or reparation of the financial loss which they have suffered as a consequence of the advance payment of corporation tax by the subsidiary, on the sole ground that they did not apply to the tax authorities in order to benefit from the taxation regime which would have exempted the subsidiary from making payments in advance and that they therefore did not make use of the legal remedies available to them to challenge the refusals of the tax authorities, by invoking the primacy and direct effect of the provisions of Community law, where upon any view national law denied resident subsidiaries and their non-resident parent companies the benefit of that taxation regime.
Times 20-Mar-2001, C-397/98, C-410/98, [2001] Ch 620, [2001] STC 452, [2001] EUECJ C-397/98, [2001] EUECJ C-410/98, [2001] ECR I-1727
Bailii, Bailii
Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 247
European
Citing:
Reference from – ICI Plc v Colmer (Inspector of Taxes) HL 15-Mar-1996
A ‘Holding company’ under the Act meant a company resident in the UK; A reference was made of the issues to the European Court. . .

Cited by:
Cited – Pirelli Cable Holding NV and Others v Inland Revenue Commissioners ChD 22-Jan-2003
The Metallgesellschaft case had established that it was contrary to European law to withhold the right to ACT on dividends paid by a UK holding company to a non-Uk subsidiary. The Revenue claimed that that rule did not apply here because the non-Uk . .
Cited – Deutsche Morgan Grenfell Group Plc v The Commissioners of Inland Revenue, HM Attorney General ChD 18-Jul-2003
The taxpayer sought to bring an action for restitution by the revenue of sums paid under a mistake of law. Under the Metallgesellschaft decision, rights of election for recovery of overpaid tax applied only between UK resident companies.
Held: . .
Cited – Inland Revenue and Another v Deutsche Morgan Grenfell Group Plc CA 4-Feb-2005
The company sought repayment of excess advance corporation tax payments made under a mistake of law. The question was the extent of the effect of the ruling in Klienwort Benson, in particular whether it covered sums paid as taxation, and how the law . .
Cited – 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 – 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 . .
Cited – Foulser and Another v HM Inspector of Taxes ChD 20-Dec-2005
The taxpayer company entered into an arrangement in which shares were purchased by a company based in Ireland and resold. A claim was made for holdover relief.
Held: The scheme failed. The restriction imposed did not infringe the right of . .
Cited – Boake Allen Ltd and others v HM Revenue and Customs CA 31-Jan-2006
The claimant companies had paid corporation tax under rules which had later been found to be discriminatory. They now sought repayment by virtue of double taxation agreements with the countries in which the parent companies were based.
Held: . .
Cited – Pirelli Cable Holding Nv and others v Inland Revenue HL 8-Feb-2006
Under s247 of the 1988 Act, a company paying dividends to a parent company need not withhold ACT. This option was not offered where either subsidiary or parent was not UK resident until the decision in Hoechst which found the restriction contrary to . .
Cited – Deutsche Morgan Grenfell Group Plc v Inland Revenue and Another HL 25-Oct-2006
The tax payer had overpaid Advance Corporation Tax under an error of law. It sought repayment. The revenue contended that the claim was time barred.
Held: The claim was in restitution, and the limitation period began to run from the date when . .
Cited – Sempra Metals Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners and Another HL 18-Jul-2007
The parties agreed that damages were payable in an action for restitution, but the sum depended upon to a calculation of interest. They disputed whether such interest should be calculated on a simple or compound basis. The company sought compound . .
Cited – Littlewoods Ltd and Others v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs SC 1-Nov-2017
The appellants had overpaid under a mistake of law very substantial sums in VAT over several years. The excess had been repaid, but with simple interest and not compound interest, which the now claimed (together with other taxpayers amounting to 17 . .
Cited – Prudential Assurance Company Ltd v Revenue and Customs SC 25-Jul-2018
PAC sought to recover excess advance corporation tax paid under a UK system contrary to EU law. It was now agreed that some was repayable but now the quantum. Five issues separated the parties.
Issue I: does EU law require the tax credit to be . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 10 August 2021; Ref: scu.83672

Grande Area Metropolitana Do Porto (Gamp) v Comissao Directiva Do Programa Operacional Potencial Humano: ECJ 19 Dec 2012

ECJ Structural funds – Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 – Geographical eligibility – Implementation of an investment co-financed by the European Union from a place located outside of the eligible regions and by an operator established in such a place
M. Ilesic (Rapporteur), P
C-579/11, [2012] EUECJ C-579/11
Bailii
Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006
European

Updated: 09 August 2021; Ref: scu.468775

European Commission v Kingdom of Belgium: ECJ 19 Dec 2012

ECJ Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Article 56 TFEU – Freedom to provide services – National legislation which imposes a prior declaration requirement on self-employed service providers established in other Member States – Criminal penalties – Obstacle to freedom to provide services – Objectively justified distinction – Overriding requirements in the public interest – Prevention of fraud – Protection against unfair competition – Protection of self-employed workers – Proportionality
L Bay Larsen acting P
C-577/10, [2012] EUECJ C-577/10
Bailii
European

Updated: 09 August 2021; Ref: scu.468768

Laurent Gbagbo v Council: ECJ 19 Dec 2012

ECJ (Opinion) Appeal – Specific restrictive measures taken against certain persons and entities regarding the situation in Cote d’Ivoire – Fund freezing – Access to the territory of the European Union – No individual notification of such measures – Recourse to justice – Time-limit – Article 111 and Article 113 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court – Article 47 CFREU
Cruz Villalon A-G
C-478/11, [2012] EUECJ C-478/11
Bailii
European
Cited by:
Opinion – Laurent Gbagbo v Council ECJ 23-Apr-2013
ECJ Appeal – Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures adopted against persons and entities – Sixth paragraph of Article 263 TFEU – Period allowed for commencing proceedings – Force majeure – . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 August 2021; Ref: scu.468777

Mory And Others v Commission: ECJ 17 Sep 2015

ECJ Judgment – Appeal – State aid – Actions for annulment – Article 263 TFEU – Admissibility – Unlawful and incompatible aid – Obligation to recover – European Commission decision not to extend the recovery obligation to the successor of the aid beneficiary – Interest in bringing proceedings – Action for damages and for the recovery of aid before the national courts – Locus standi – Appellant not individually concerned
C-33/14, [2015] EUECJ C-33/14, ECLI:EU:C:2015:609
Bailii
European

Updated: 07 August 2021; Ref: scu.552677

Kyowa Hakko Europe GmbH v Hauptzollamt Hannover: ECJ 17 Sep 2015

ECJ Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Tariff and statistical nomenclature – Classification of goods – Amino acid mixes used for the preparation of foodstuffs for infants and young children allergic to cow’s milk proteins – Classification under tariff headings 2106 ‘food preparations’ or 3003 ‘medicinal products’
C-344/14, [2015] EUECJ C-344/14, ECLI:EU:C:2015:615
Bailii
European

Updated: 07 August 2021; Ref: scu.552674

Van Der Lans v Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV: ECJ 17 Sep 2015

ECJ Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Air transport – Passengers’ rights in the event of delay or cancellation of a flight – Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 – Article 5(3) – Denied boarding and cancellation – Long flight delay – Compensation and assistance to passengers – Extraordinary circumstances
C-257/14, [2015] EUECJ C-257/14, ECLI:EU:C:2015:618
Bailii
Regulation (EC) No 261/2004
European

Updated: 07 August 2021; Ref: scu.552684

Gross v Hauptzollamt Braunschweig: ECJ 3 Jul 2014

ECJ Judgment – Taxation – Directive 92/12/EEC – Articles 7, 8 and 9 – General arrangements for products subject to excise duty – Products released for consumption in one Member State and held for commercial purposes in another Member State – Whether excise duty is chargeable to a person holding those products who has acquired them in the Member State of destination – Acquisition at the end of the entry process
R. Silva de Lapuerta, P
C-165/13, [2014] EUECJ C-165/13 – J
Bailii
Directive 92/12/EEC 7 8 9
European

Updated: 07 August 2021; Ref: scu.533750

Miljoen and others v Staatssecretaris van Financien: ECJ 17 Sep 2015

Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Direct taxation – Articles 63 TFEU and 65 TFEU – Free movement of capital – Taxation of dividends from portfolios of shares – Withholding tax – Restriction – Final tax burden – Factors for comparing the tax burdens of resident and non-resident taxpayers – Comparability – Taking into account income tax or corporation tax – Conventions for the avoidance of double taxation – Neutralisation of the restriction by means of a convention
C-10/14, [2015] EUECJ C-10/14, ECLI:EU:C:2015:608
Bailii
European

Updated: 07 August 2021; Ref: scu.552676

Re N (Children : Adoption: Jurisdiction): CA 2 Nov 2015

Appeal against care and placement order proceedings in relation to two Hungarian children, The orders were for the transfer of the case to Hungary.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. As to Article 15, the Court considered: What are the requirements before the English court can make a request for a transfer to another member state? The President observed that ‘there is much English learning on the meaning and application’ of article 15.1. He repeated the guidance he had given in In re M (Brussels II Revised: Article 15) [2014] EWCA Civ 152; [2014] 2 FLR 1372 on which the judge had also relied. He went on to emphasise how important it is that article 15 is considered at the earliest possible opportunity, although it could be considered at any stage of the proceedings; repeated applications were to be deprecated and would usually fail unless there had been a change of circumstances, although they might sometimes be appropriate; that a transfer could be considered after a fact-finding hearing, but only in exceptional circumstances; and the process should be summary, measured in hours not days and not dependent on a profound investigation of the evidence.
Leaving to one side any question arising in relation to article 1.3.b, was the judge justified in deciding as he did? Could it be said that he was wrong to do so? The court concluded that he was justified in deciding to exercise jurisdiction to request transfer under article 15; he undertook a careful examination of all the relevant factors; he did not consider any irrelevant factors; he did not err in the weight he attached to the relevant factors, or misdirect himself in law.
Was the judge’s decision vitiated by his failure to address article 1.3.b? What were the consequences of his omission to do so? The court held that the fact that he did not appreciate the effect of article 1.3.b did not vitiate his decision. His decision in relation to the care proceedings could and should stand and they should be stayed. His decision in relation to the placement order proceedings could not stand, but as they were of their nature consequential on the care proceedings, they too were stayed
Munby P summarised principles applying to choice of jurisdiction in adoption cases:
(i) Does an English court have jurisdiction (a) to make an adoption order in relation to a child who is a foreign national, and (b) to dispense with the consent of a parent who is a foreign national? This was a difficult question, given that the Brussels II revised Regulation does not cover adoption or measures preparatory to adoption, nor is there any other international instrument covering the matter. The Court of Appeal answered both (a) and (b) in the affirmative.
(ii) If the English court does have such jurisdiction, how should that be exercised? The President gave guidance.
(iii) What is the scope of the Brussels II revised Regulation? It is well-established that the Regulation applies to care proceedings, as well as to proceedings between private parties: see In re C (Case C-435/06) [2008] Fam 27. However, by excluding ‘decisions on adoption, measures preparatory to adoption, or the annulment or revocation of adoption’ from the scope of the Regulation, does article 1.3.b also exclude (a) care proceedings where the care plan is adoption, or (b) placement order proceedings? The court concluded that (a) was within the scope of the Regulation, but (b) was not.
Sir James Munby P FD, Black LJ, Sir Richard Aikens
[2015] EWCA Civ 1112, [2015] WLR(D) 436, [2016] 1 FCR 217, [2016] 1 All ER 1086, [2016] 1 FLR 621, [2016] 2 WLR 713, [2015] Fam Law 1444
Bailii, WLRD
Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003, Vienna Convention on Consular Relations
England and Wales
Citing:
At FC – J and E (Children: Brussels II Revised: Article 15) FC 11-Nov-2014
The local authority applied to the court for care orders and placement orders in respect of two young girls. The parents opposed the local authority’s applications. The mother was Hungarian. The father was Hungarian/Roma. The mother applied under . .
Emphasised – Re M (A Child) CA 21-Feb-2014
The court dealt with points of principle relating to how the courts in England and Wales determine family cases that involve nationals of other countries, in particular Member States of the European Union and for that reason, permission to appeal . .

Cited by:
At CA – In Re N (Children) SC 13-Apr-2016
The Court considered whether the future of two little girls, aged four and two years, should be decided by the courts of this country or by the authorities in Hungary. Both children were born in England and lived all their lives here. But their . .
Cited – Williams and Another v London Borough of Hackney SC 18-Jul-2018
On arrest for shoplifting a 12 year old said he had been doing so to get food, and that he had been hit with a belt by his father. Investigation revealed the home to be dangerous, and all eight children were removed to the care of the LA. The . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 07 August 2021; Ref: scu.554267

Total v Commission: ECJ 17 Sep 2015

ECJ Judgment – Appeals – Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Paraffin waxes market – Slack wax market – Infringement committed by a subsidiary wholly owned by the parent company – Presumption of decisive influence exercised by the parent company over its subsidiary – Liability of the parent company arising solely from the unlawful conduct of its subsidiary – Judgment reducing the fine imposed on the subsidiary – Effects on the legal situation of the parent company
C-597/13, [2015] EUECJ C-597/13, ECLI:EU:C:2015:613
Bailii
European

Updated: 07 August 2021; Ref: scu.552683

Portugal v Commission: ECFI 29 Mar 2012

ECFI ERDF – Reduction of financial aid – Operational Programme for the modernization of the economic fabric in Portugal – No specific binding targets and verifiable – Legitimate
Kanninen P
T-111/10, [2012] EUECJ T-111/10
Bailii
European

Updated: 07 August 2021; Ref: scu.452632

Inail (Judgment): ECJ 28 Oct 2020

Reference for a preliminary ruling – State aid – Regulation (EU) No 1407/2013 – Article 3 – De minimis aid – Article 6 – Control – Undertakings exceeding the de minimis ceiling due to cumulation with aid obtained previously – Possibility of choosing between reduction or waiver of previous aid in order to comply with the de minimis ceiling
C-608/19, [2020] EUECJ C-608/19
Bailii
European

Updated: 05 August 2021; Ref: scu.660584

Oakley Inc v Animal Ltd and others: PatC 17 Feb 2005

A design for sunglasses was challenged for prior publication. However the law in England differed from that apparently imposed from Europe as to the existence of a 12 month period of grace before applying for registration.
Held: Instruments signed by the Secretary of State amending primary legislation, are not necessarily the law, but are rather assertions of the executive’s belief as to what the law is. The 2001 Regulations belatedly purported to apply the 1998 Directive, by amending the 1949 Act but ‘So many, so detailed are the amendments that it is like a sculptor crafting a cat out of a dog. ‘ The philosophies of the 1949 Act and of the Directives are not the same. As to the 1972 Act, ‘section 2(2) combined with section 2(4) is an instance of what is sometimes known as a ‘King Henry VIII clause’ . . It is a power granted by Parliament to the Executive to make subordinate legislation which itself counts as if it were primary legislation.’ and ‘Now, is that a paradox? For Parliament is supposed to be supreme . . Therefore, when Parliament has enacted a King Henry VIII clause, by what right do the courts apply a restrictive interpretation? How is it that any doubts must be resolved against the Executive, seeing that Parliament has said that the Executive can make law as if it were Parliament itself? I believe it all depends on what it means to say that Parliament is supreme and on what Parliament is actually taken to have claimed. At bottom, all effective constitutions depend on legitimacy. In the United Kingdom the pre-eminent source of legitimacy is Parliament – what is called the Queen in Parliament – and that has been taken to be so for 350 years at least. Because of that fact it would be extraordinarily difficult to overthrow our constitution by force, yet it is one of immense flexibility and on the whole it has served to protect fundamental rights.’ Could s2(2) of the 1972 Act be used to implement a provision which went beyond what was required by European law? It was essentially a practical section, not one intended to allow the executive substantial extra powers, and ‘section 2(2)(b) does not enable the Executive to make secondary legislation, with the potential to amend or repeal even an Act of Parliament, and to achieve a result not required by a Community obligation, just because its purpose is in some way related to or arises out of that obligation. ‘ The Regulations were ultra vires to the extent that they went beyond the Directive. It was not for the courts to make substitutional legislation. Never has the ECJ suggested that a derogation can somehow be implemented so as to bring about results contrary to Community law.
Peter Prescott QC
[2005] EWHC 210 (Ch), Times 10-Mar-2005
Bailii
Registered Designs Act 1949 8(5), Directive 98/71/EC of 13 October 1998 on the legal protection of designs, Registered Designs Regulations 2001, European Communities Act 1972 2
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Ipswich Clothworkers’ Case; Ipswich Taylors v Sherring 1614
The king’s power to create corporations and to order trade did not include a power to make a monopoly, for that is to take away free trade which is the birthright of every subject. A trader creating a new invention could be granted a charter by the . .
Cited – East India Co v Sandys (or Sands); The Case of Monopolies 1602
It is the nature of a patent to enable persons acting as a corporation ‘to enjoy and apply to trade all the privileges derived from being a body corporate. . .
Cited – The British Broadcasting Corporation v Johns (HM Inspector of Taxes) CA 5-Mar-1964
The BBC claimed to be exempt from income tax. It claimed crown immunity as an emanation of the crown. The court had to decide whether the BBC was subject to judicial review.
Held: It is not a statutory creature; it does not exercise statutory . .
Cited – McKiernon v Secretary of State for Social Security CA 26-Oct-1989
A statute granting a power to be amended by a subordinate instrument can only do so by an express power: ‘Whether subject to the negative or affirmative resolution procedure, [subordinate legislation] is subject to much briefer, if any, examination . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Social Security, Ex parte Britnell (Alan) HL 1991
The applicant claimed and was paid benefits. There was later determined to have been an overpayment. A sum was recovered by deductions, but then he was granted only supplementary allowance. No deductions could be made from that, but the respondent . .
Cited – Thoburn v Sunderland City Council etc Admn 18-Feb-2002
Various shopkeepers appealed convictions for breach of regulations requiring food sold by weight to be described in metric amounts. They claimed that the Regulations made under the 1985 Act, to the extent that they were inconsistent with it . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Environment Transport and the Regions and another, ex parte Spath Holme Limited HL 7-Dec-2000
The section in the 1985 Act created a power to prevent rent increases for tenancies of dwelling-houses for purposes including the alleviation of perceived hardship. Accordingly the Secretary of State could issue regulations whose effect was to limit . .
Cited – Flaminio Costa v ENEL (Procedure) ECJ 15-Jul-1964
‘The transfer by the states from their domestic legal system to the Community legal system of their rights and obligations arising under the Treaty carries with it a permanent limitation of their sovereign rights, against which a subsequent . .
Cited – Anisminic Ltd v Foreign Compensation Commission HL 17-Dec-1968
All Public Law Challenges are For a Nullity
The plaintiffs had owned mining property in Egypt. Their interests were damaged and or sequestrated and they sought compensation from the Respondent Commission. The plaintiffs brought an action for the declaration rejecting their claims was a . .
Cited – Boddington v British Transport Police HL 2-Apr-1998
The defendant had been convicted, under regulations made under the Act, of smoking in a railway carriage. He sought to challenge the validity of the regulations themselves. He wanted to argue that the power to ban smoking on carriages did not . .
Cited – Hayward v Cammell Laird Shipbuilders Ltd (No. 2) HL 1988
A woman complained that she was not being paid as much as male colleagues who were doing work of equal value. An Act of Parliament had made certain provisions in that regard. Later, that Act had been amended for the purpose of complying with . .
Cited – Betts and others v Brintel Helicopters Ltd and KLM Era Helicopters (UK) Ltd CA 26-Mar-1997
There was no transfer of undertaking where only the employees and no other assets of the business had been transferred. . .
Cited – Commission v United Kingdom (Judgment) ECJ 8-Jun-1994
ECJ Despite the limited character of the harmonization of rules in respect of collective redundancies which Directive 75/129 was intended to bring about, national rules which, by not providing for a system for . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry ex parte Unison 1996
The 1978 Directive required consultation in the case of collective redundancies. Acts had incorrectly incorporated this requirement into English law. The error was corrected in the 1995 Regulations.
Held: Anything is ‘related to’ a Community . .
Cited – Addison v Denholm Ship Management (UK) Ltd EAT 1997
An issue before the EAT was whether regulations made under section 2(2) of the 1972 Act applied to the crew of a floating hotel/ship in the North Sea.
Held: According to European law the UK could choose whether or not to apply employment . .
Cited – Attorney General and Another v Great Eastern Railway Company HL 27-May-1880
An Act of Parliament authorised a company to construct a railway. Two other companies combined and contracted with the first to supply rolling stock. An injunction was brought to try to restrain this, saying that such a contract was not explicitly . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry ex parte Orange Personal Communications Ltd and Another Admn 25-Oct-2000
Once rights by way of licences had been granted to a party by virtue of a statute, an amendment to those licences required the Secretary to be explicit with Parliament when altering the licences. The Act provided clear rules for making amendments to . .
Cited – Perth and Kinross Council v Tony Donaldson and 14 Others Newtown Construction Scotland Ltd Meldru EAT 30-Oct-2003
EAT Transfer of Undertakings – Acquired rights directive
The European Acquired rights directive sought to protect the rights of employees on the a transfer of a business to another employer. It was . .
Cited – Betts and others v Brintel Helicopters Ltd and KLM Era Helicopters (UK) Ltd CA 26-Mar-1997
There was no transfer of undertaking where only the employees and no other assets of the business had been transferred. . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Hutchinson; Director of Public Prosecutions v Smith HL 12-Jul-1990
Protesters objected that byelaws which had been made to prevent access to common land, namely Greenham Common were invalid.
Held: The byelaws did prejudice the rights of common. The House was concerned to clarify the test applicable when . .
Cited – Daymond v South West Water Authority HL 1976
A statutory instrument required a rating authority to collect a charge referable to sewerage services ‘from every person who is liable to pay the general rate in respect of a hereditament’. A householder whose property was not connected to a sewer . .
Cited – Panagiotis Markopoulos and Others v Ypourgos Anaptyxis and Soma Orkoton Elegkton. ECJ 7-Oct-2004
The ECJ considered the interpretation of Article 15 of a directive (84/253/EEC) concerning who could be allowed to audit companies’ annual accounts, intended to harmonise the national laws of the member states and to require that none but approved . .
See Also – Oakley Inc v Animal Ltd. and others PatC 16-Mar-2005
. .

Cited by:
See Also – Oakley Inc v Animal Ltd. and others PatC 16-Mar-2005
. .
Appeal from – Oakley Inc v Animal Ltd and others CA 20-Oct-2005
It was argued that the Secretary of State, when implementing the Directive in the 2001 Regulations, had exceeded his powers in preserving provisions of the Registered Designs Act. The judge had held the Seceretary had exceeded his powers. The . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 04 August 2021; Ref: scu.222796

UDV North America Inc v Brandtraders Nv: ECJ 19 Feb 2009

ECJ Order – Article 104(3), second subparagraph, of the Rules of Procedure – Community trade mark – Regulation (EC) No 40/94 – Article 9(1)(a) and (2)(d) – Right of the proprietor of a registered mark to prevent the use by a third party of a sign which is identical to the mark – Concept of ‘use’ – Use of a sign which is identical to the mark by a trade intermediary in its business papers – Intermediary acting in its own name but on behalf of a vendor
CWA Timmermans (Rapporteur), P
C-62/08, [2009] EUECJ C-62/08, [2010] ETMR 25, ECLI:EU:C:2009:111
Bailii
European

Updated: 30 July 2021; Ref: scu.541951

Schwarz: ECJ 19 Feb 2009

ECJ Directive 91/439/EEC Holding of driving licences from different Member States Validity of a driving licence issued before the accession of a State Withdrawal of a second driving licence issued by the Member State of residence Recognition of a driving licence issued before the issue of a second licence later withdrawn on the ground that the holder was unfit Expiry of the period accompanying a measure withdrawing a driving licence during which no application may be made for the issue of a new driving licence.
Rosas R P
C-321/07, [2009] EUECJ C-321/07
Bailii
European

Updated: 30 July 2021; Ref: scu.312004

Atxalandabaso v Parliament: ECJ 19 Feb 2009

ECJ Appeal Rules concerning the expenses and allowances to Members of the European Parliament Recovery of improperly paid sums by means of offsetting Enforcement of a judgment of the Court of First Instance Right to an impartial tribunal Res judicata Principle of sound administration.
C-308/07, [2009] EUECJ C-308/07
Bailii
European

Updated: 30 July 2021; Ref: scu.312000

Peter Pammer v Reederei Karl Schluter GmbH and Co KG etc: ECJ 18 May 2010

ECJ (Opinion) Regulation No 44/2001 – Article 15, paragraph 1 (c) and 3 – Jurisdiction over consumer contracts – Management of a business to a Member State where the consumer’s home – Accessibility of website – Contract for a fixed price that combines travel and accommodation – Travel freighter.
Mme V Trstenjak
C-144/09, [2010] EUECJ C-144/09
Bailii
Regulation No 44/2001
European
Cited by:
Opinion – Peter Pammer v Reederei Karl Schluter GmbH and Co KG etc ECJ 7-Dec-2010
ECJ (Grand Chamber) Jurisdiction in civil and commercial matters – Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 – Article 15(1)(c) and (3) – Jurisdiction over consumer contracts – Contract for a voyage by freighter – Concept of . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 July 2021; Ref: scu.416428

Thun 1794 v EUIPO – Adekor (Symboles Graphiques Decoratifs): ECFI 14 Jul 2016

ECJ (Judgment) Community design – Invalidity proceedings – Registered Community design representing decorative graphic symbols – Drawing earlier design – Ground for invalidity – drawing Disclosure prior design – Absence of novelty – Articles 5, 7 and Article 25, paragraph 1 b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002
ECLI:EU:T:2016:410, [2016] EUECJ T-420/15
Bailii
European

Updated: 30 July 2021; Ref: scu.566909

Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs v Rank Group plc C-259/10: ECJ 10 Nov 2011

ECJ Taxation – Sixth VAT Directive – Exemptions – Article 13B(f) – Betting, lotteries and other forms of gambling – Principle of fiscal neutrality – Mechanised cash bingo – Slot machines – Administrative practice departing from the legislative provisions – ‘Due diligence’ defence
C-259/10, [2011] EUECJ C-259/10, ECLI:EU:C:2011:719, [2011] ECR I-10947, [2012] CEC 884, [2011] STI 3045, [2011] BVC 389, [2012] STC 23
Bailii
European
Citing:
At VDT (1) – The Rank Group Plc v Revenue and Customs VDT 27-May-2008
VDT EXEMPT SUPPLIES – Gaming – Mechanised cash bingo under Gaming Act 1968 s.14 excluded from exemption – Similar supplies under s.21 exempt – Whether principle of fiscal neutrality infringed – Same company . .
At VDT (2) – Rank Group Ltd v Revenue and Customs VDT 19-Aug-2008
VDT COMMUNITY LAW – Fiscal neutrality – Exemption – Gaming – Provision of gaming machines excluded from exemption – Similar supplies under Part III of Gaming Act 1968 exempt – Whether principle of fiscal . .
At ChD – Revenue and Customs v The Rank Group ChD 8-Jun-2009
The court was asked whether the VAT treatment of mechanised cash bingo breaches the principle of fiscal neutrality: and the core issue on the appeal is whether the burden lay on Rank to adduce evidence to prove not only that there was a difference . .
At FTTTx – The Rank Group Plc v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 11-Dec-2009
FTTTx Community Law – Fiscal neutrality – Exemption – Exclusion of provision of ‘gaming machines’ from exemption – Whether taxed machines similar to exempt machines – Relevance of regulatory regime – TNT [2009] . .
See Also – Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs v Rank Group plc C-260/10 ECJ 10-Nov-2011
ECJ Taxation – Sixth VAT Directive – Exemptions – Article 13B(f) – Betting, lotteries and other forms of gambling – Principle of fiscal neutrality – Mechanised cash bingo – Slot machines – Administrative practice . .

Cited by:
At ECJ (2) – HMRC v The Rank Group Plc UTTC 4-Oct-2012
Taxation – whether gaming or betting and the different VAT Treatment of newer gaming machines. . .
At ECJ (2) – HM Revenue and Customs v The Rank Group Plc CA 30-Oct-2013
The tax payer had sought repayment of sums of VAT charged to a particular form of gaming, saying that the rules infringed the principles of fiscal neutrality under European law. HMRC now appealed against a finding that the machines were exempt from . .
At ECJ (2) – Revenue and Customs v The Rank Group Plc SC 8-Jul-2015
The question raised by this appeal is whether, during the period 1 October 2002 to 5 December 2005, the takings on a particular category of gaming machines operated by the appellants were subject to VAT. The answer depends on whether the takings . .
Cited – Revenue and Customs v Taylor Clark Leisure Plc SC 11-Jul-2018
Several companies within a group paid VAT. Later the basis of charge to output VAT was revised, and a reclaim became due, but the VAT group had been dissolved. Could the appellant, former lead within the group now make the reclaim.
Held: . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 July 2021; Ref: scu.448353

Germany v Commission T-143/12: ECFI 14 Jul 2016

ECJ (Judgment) State aid – Postal sector – Financing of additional costs on labor and social part of the staff of Deutsche Post through grants and revenue from the compensation rate regulated services – Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market – Concept of advantage – Off ‘COMBUS – Demonstration of the existence of a selective advantage and economic – Absence
ECLI:EU:T:2016:406, [2016] EUECJ T-143/12
Bailii
European

Updated: 30 July 2021; Ref: scu.566897

Alesa v Commission: ECFI 14 Jul 2016

ECJ (Judgment) Public service contracts – Tendering procedure for tenders – Provision of technical assistance to the Chinese authorities for the purposes of the project’ Sustainable Urbanization – Relationship between eco-cities in Europe and China (EC-LINK) ‘- negotiated procedure – Article 266, paragraph 1, of the delegated Regulation (EU) No 1268/2012 – Transparency – Equal treatment – non-contractual liability
ECLI:EU:T:2016:413, [2016] EUECJ T-99/14
Bailii
Regulation (EU) No 1268/2012
European

Updated: 30 July 2021; Ref: scu.566893

Brite Strike Technologies Inc v Brite Strike Technologies SA: ECJ 14 Jul 2016

ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Judicial cooperation in civil matters – Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 – Article 22(4) – Jurisdiction in intellectual property disputes – Article 71 – Conventions concluded by the Member States on particular matters – Benelux Convention on Intellectual Property – Jurisdiction in disputes concerning Benelux trade marks and designs – Article 350 TFEU
ECLI:EU:C:2016:560, [2016] EUECJ C-230/15
Bailii
Regulation (EC) No 44/2001
European

Updated: 30 July 2021; Ref: scu.566896

Skandia America Corporation (Advocate General’s Opinion): ECJ 8 May 2014

ECJ Opinion – Common system of value added tax – VAT Grouping – Internal Billing for services provided by a company with its main office in a third country to its branch belonging to a group VAT in a Member State – Character taxable or not services
Melchior Wathelet AG
C-7/13, [2014] EUECJ C-7/13, [2014] BVC 43
Bailii
European
Cited by:
Opinion – Skandia America Corporation ECJ 17-Sep-2014
Reference for a preliminary ruling – Common system of value added tax – Directive 2006/112/EC – VAT group – Internal invoicing for services supplied by a main company with its seat in a third country to its branch belonging to a VAT group within a . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 July 2021; Ref: scu.525451

Kotnik And Others v Drzavni Zbor Republike Slovenije: ECJ 19 Jul 2016

ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Validity and interpretation of the Banking Communication from the Commission – Interpretation of Directives 2001/24/EC and 2012/30/EU – State aid to banks in the context of the financial crisis – Burden-sharing – Writing off equity capital, hybrid capital and subordinated debt – Principle of protection of legitimate expectations – Right to property – Protection of the interests of shareholders and others – Reorganisation and winding up of credit institutions
K Lenaerts, P
C-526/14, [2016] EUECJ C-526/14
Bailii
European
Cited by:
Cited – Goldman Sachs International v Novo Banco SA SC 4-Jul-2018
A banking facility was provided under a contract applying English law and jurisdiction. The parties now disputed whether on an assignment the dispute was to be resolved under Portuguese law.
Held: Recognition in the United Kingdom of measures . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 July 2021; Ref: scu.567327

Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp and Others v British Telecommunications Plc: ChD 28 Jul 2011

The claimant rights holders sought an order to require the defendant broadband internet provider to deny access to its users to websites which were said to facilitate the distribution of infringing copies of their films. An earlier judgment had found against the web-site, but it had disappeared an re-appeared with a different name and offshore.
Held: An injunction was granted. The defendant had proclaimed its ability to prevent other abuse of its systems. It could not now deny it. The claimant Studios had established sufficient title to the works to claim the injunction under section 97A of the 1988 Act. Any non-infringing use of the site had been minimal. It was unlikely that the plaintiffs would seek ever greater numbers of orders, but would concentrate on the worse infringers by volume. It remained possible that the blocking arrangements would be side-stepped by some users, but it did not follow that the order would be ineffective.
Arnold J justified leaving the ISPs to pay the costs of implementation on two grounds. The first was essentially a consideration of commercial equity: ‘The studios are enforcing their legal and proprietary rights as copyright owners and exclusive licensees . . BT is a commercial enterprise which makes a profit from the provision of the services which the operators and users of [the target website] use to infringe the studios’ copyright. As such, the costs of implementing the order can be regarded as a cost of carrying on that business.’
Arnold J
[2011] EWHC 1981 (Ch), [2011] RPC 28
Bailii
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 97A, European Parliament and Council Directive 2000/31/EC of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market, Electronic Commerce (EC Directive) Regulations 2002, SI 2002/2013, Copyright and Related Rights Regulations 2003 SI 2003/2498, Intellectual Property (Enforcement, etc.) Regulations 2006, SI 2006/1028
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation and Another v Newzbin Ltd ChD 29-Mar-2010
The defendant operated a web-site providing a search facility of the Usenet news system which allowed its users to locate copies of films online for downloading. The claimant said this was an infringement of its copyrights.
Held: The defendant . .
Cited – EMI Records (Ireland) Ltd v UPC Communications Ireland Ltd 10-Nov-2010
(High Court of Ireland) The court considered claims for copyright infringement in music distributed over the Internet.
Held: Charleton J described and assessed three different potential technical solutions. . .
Cited – Litster and Others v Forth Dry Dock and Engineering Co Ltd HL 16-Mar-1989
The twelve applicants had been unfairly dismissed by the transferor immediately before the transfer, and for a reason connected with the transfer under section 8(1). The question was whether the liability for unfair dismissal compensation . .
Cited – Marleasing SA v La Comercial Internacional de Alimentacion SA ECJ 13-Nov-1990
Sympathetic construction of national legislation
LMA OVIEDO sought a declaration that the contracts setting up Commercial International were void (a nullity) since they had been drawn up in order to defraud creditors. Commercial International relied on an EC . .
Cited – Revenue and Customs v IDT Card Services Ireland Ltd CA 27-Jan-2006
Under the Marleasing principle, or principle of conforming interpretation, the domestic court of a member state must interpret its national law so far as possible in the light of the wording and purpose of the Directive in question. However this . .
Cited – Pfeiffer v Deutsches Rotes Kreuz, Kreisverband Waldshut eV (1) ECJ 5-Oct-2004
pfeiffer_deutchesrotesreuzECJ102004
ECJ Reference for a preliminary ruling: Arbeitsgericht Lorrach – Germany. Social policy – Protection of the health and safety of workers – Directive 93/104/EC – Scope – Emergency workers in attendance in . .
Cited – Van Dusen v Kritz 1936
Section 2(2) of the 1911 Act, which provided that ‘Copyright in a work shall also be deemed to be infringed by any person who . . (c) by way of trade exhibits in public . . any work which to his knowledge infringes copyright.’ The plaintiff owned . .
Cited – Infabrics Ltd v Jaytex Shirt Co Ltd 1978
Section 5(2) of the 1956 Act provided that ‘Copyright in a . . work is infringed by any person who . . imports an article . . if to his knowledge the making of that article constituted an infringement of that copyright, or would have constituted . .
Cited – RCA Corporation v Custom Cleared Sales Pty Ltd 1978
(Court of Appeal of New South Wales) The court considered the knowledge to be established for copyright infringement saying, ‘the knowledge which has to be proved is actual but not constructive’. . .
Cited – Hoover plc v George Hulme (Stockport) Ltd 1982
Section 5(3) of the 1956 Act provided that ‘Copyright in a . . work is infringed by any person who . . (a) sells, lets for hire, or by way of trade offers or exposes for sale or hire any article . . if to his knowledge the making of that article . .
Cited – Kaschke v Gray and Another QBD 23-Jul-2010
The claimant sought damages in defamation saying that the defendants had published a web page which falsely associated her with a terrorist gang in the 1970s. The defendants now sought a strike out of her claim as an abuse saying that a similar . .
Cited – Bunt v Tilley and others QBD 10-Mar-2006
bunt_tilleyQBD2006
The claimant sought damages in defamation in respect of statements made on internet bulletin boards. He pursued the operators of the bulletin boards, and the court now considered the liability of the Internet Service Providers whose systems had . .
Cited – Sociedad General De Autores Y Editores De Espana (SGAE) v Rafael Hoteles SA ECJ 7-Dec-2006
ECJ (Law Relating To Undertakings) Copyright and related rights in the nformation society – Directive 2001/29/EC – Article 3 – Concept of communication to the public – Works communicated by means of television . .
Cited – Albert v Hoffnung and Co Ltd 1921
(Court of Appeal of New South Wales) ‘Knowledge’ means . . notice of facts such as would suggest to a reasonable man that a breach of copyright law was being committed.’ . .
Cited – Sillitoe v McGraw-Hill Book Co 1983
The defendants had imported and distributed a series of ‘study notes’ for students which the plaintiffs alleged infringed the copyrights in the works under discussion.
Held: The defendants had been ‘fixed with knowledge’ 14 days after letters . .
Cited – Columbia Pictures Industries Inc v Robinson ChD 1986
The plaintiff had obtained an Anton Piller order against a defendant whose business consisted almost entirely in the manufacture and sale of pirated videos.
Held: The injunction had been obtained for an improper purpose and without full . .
Cited – ETK v News Group Newspapers Ltd CA 19-Apr-2011
The claimant appealed against refusal of an injunction to restrain the defendant newspaper from publishing his name in connection with a forthcoming article. The claimant had had an affair with a co-worker. Both were married. The relationship ended, . .
Cited – Independiente Ltd and others v Music Trading On-Line (HK) Ltd and others ChD 13-Mar-2003
The claimants claimed damages for the sale by the defendants in the UK of CD’s manufactured for sale only in the far East. The defendants challenged the right of a claimant phonographic society to have the right to sue on behalf of its members.
Cited – Phonographic Performance Limited v Maitra and Others CA 3-Feb-1998
An injunction without time limit should normally be granted immediately where there was clear infringement and a threat of continued infringement. Copyrights can sometimes typically be identified only by reference to the trade marks under which the . .
Cited – Totalise Plc v The Motley Fool Limited and Interative Investor Limited (2) CA 19-Dec-2001
The respondent operated a web site which contained a chat room. Defamatory remarks were made by a third party through the chat room, and the claimant sought details of the identity of the poster. The respondent refused to do so without a court . .
Cited – British Telecommunications Plc and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills Admn 20-Apr-2011
bt_ssbisAdmn11
The claimant sought judicial review of legislative provisions requiring Internet Service Providers to become involved in regulation of copyright infringements by its subscribers. They asserted that the Act and proposed Order were contrary to . .

Cited by:
Main Judgment – Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation and Others v British Telecommunications Plc (2) ChD 26-Oct-2011
The claimant copyright holder sought an order requiring the defendant to restrain access to a website which they said infringed its copyrights.
Held: The court set out the terms of the order made. . .
Cited – Dramatico Entertainment Ltd and Others v British Sky Broadcasting Ltd and Others ChD 20-Feb-2012
The claimants, music copyright holders, sought an injunction against the defendant Internet Service Providers to require them to restrain access to a file-sharing website (TPB).
Held: The website was infringing the copyright of the claimants. . .
Cited – Dramatico Entertainment Ltd and Others v British Sky Broadcasting Ltd and Others ChD 2-May-2012
The claimant record companies sought injunctions to prevent the defendant broadband suppliers allowing access to a website which provided facilties to those wishing to swap materials which infringed the claimants’ copyrights in music.
Held: . .
Cited – Cartier International Ag and Others v British Telecommunications Plc and Another SC 13-Jun-2018
The respondent ISP companies had been injuncted to stop the transmission of websites which infringed the trade mark rights of the claimants. The ISPs now appealed from the element of the order that they pay the claimants’ costs of implementing the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 July 2021; Ref: scu.442270

Google France and Google v Louis Vuitton Malletier (Intellectual Property): ECJ 23 Mar 2010

ECJ Trade marks Internet Search engine – Keyword advertising – Display, on the basis of keywords corresponding to trade marks, of links to sites of competitors of the proprietors of those marks or to sites offering imitation goods – Directive 89/104/EEC Article 5 Regulation (EC) No 40/94 Article 9 Liability of the search engine operator Directive 2000/31/EC (‘Directive on electronic commerce’)
[2010] EUECJ C-237/08, C-237/08, [2010] ECR 1-0000
Bailii
Directive 89/104/EEC 5, Regulation (EC) No 40/94 9, Directive 2000/31/EC
European
Citing:
See Also – Google France and Google v Louis Vuitton Malletier (Intellectual Property) ECJ 22-Sep-2009
ECJ (Opinion of Advocate General Maduro) The court considered the alleged misuse of trade marks as keywords for internet searches. . .

Cited by:
Cited – British Telecommunications Plc and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills Admn 20-Apr-2011
bt_ssbisAdmn11
The claimant sought judicial review of legislative provisions requiring Internet Service Providers to become involved in regulation of copyright infringements by its subscribers. They asserted that the Act and proposed Order were contrary to . .
Cited – Cartier International Ag and Others v British Telecommunications Plc and Another SC 13-Jun-2018
The respondent ISP companies had been injuncted to stop the transmission of websites which infringed the trade mark rights of the claimants. The ISPs now appealed from the element of the order that they pay the claimants’ costs of implementing the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 July 2021; Ref: scu.434913

LM v Commission: ECFI 6 Jul 2016

ECJ (Judgment) Appeal – Public service – Officials – Survivor’s pension – Articles 18 and 27 of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations – Article 25 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights – Right of the divorced spouse of a deceased official – Maintenance borne by the deceased official
ECLI: EU: T: 2016 392, [2016] EUECJ T-560/15
Bailii
European

Updated: 29 July 2021; Ref: scu.566588

Tommy Hilfiger Licensing And Others v Delta Center a.s: ECJ 7 Jul 2016

ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Approximation of laws – Directive 2004/48/EC – Enforcement of intellectual property rights – Notion of ‘intermediary whose services are being used by a third party to infringe an intellectual property right’ – Tenant of market halls subletting sales points – Possibility of an injunction against that tenant – Article 11
C-494/15, [2016] EUECJ C-494/15, ECLI:EU:C:2016:528
Bailii
Directive 2004/48/EC
European
Cited by:
Cited – Cartier International Ag and Others v British Telecommunications Plc and Another SC 13-Jun-2018
The respondent ISP companies had been injuncted to stop the transmission of websites which infringed the trade mark rights of the claimants. The ISPs now appealed from the element of the order that they pay the claimants’ costs of implementing the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 July 2021; Ref: scu.566732

LBI HF v Kepler Capital Markets SA: ECJ 24 Oct 2013

ECJ Request for a preliminary ruling – Reorganisation and winding-up of credit institutions – Directive 2001/24/EC – Articles 3, 9 and 32 – National legislative act conferring on reorganisation measures the effects of winding-up proceedings – Legislative measure prohibiting or suspending any legal proceedings against a credit institution after the entry into force of a moratorium
The Court referred to the purpose of the Reorganisation Directive: ‘At the outset, it must be borne in mind that, as is apparent from recital 6 in its preamble, Directive 2001/24 seeks to establish mutual recognition by the member states of the measures taken by each of them to restore to viability the credit institutions which it has authorised. That objective, and that of guaranteeing equal treatment of creditors, laid down in recital 16 to that directive, require that the reorganisation and winding-up measures taken by the authorities of the home member state have, in all the other member states, the effects which the law of the home member state confers on them.’
The Directive established: ‘a system of mutual recognition of national reorganisation and winding-up measures, without seeking to harmonise national legislation on that subject.’
T von Danwitz P
C-85/12, [2013] EUECJ C-85/12
Bailii
Directive 2001/24/EC
European
Cited by:
Cited – Goldman Sachs International v Novo Banco SA SC 4-Jul-2018
A banking facility was provided under a contract applying English law and jurisdiction. The parties now disputed whether on an assignment the dispute was to be resolved under Portuguese law.
Held: Recognition in the United Kingdom of measures . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 July 2021; Ref: scu.516986

Cartier International Ag and Others v British Telecommunications Plc and Another: SC 13 Jun 2018

The respondent ISP companies had been injuncted to stop the transmission of websites which infringed the trade mark rights of the claimants. The ISPs now appealed from the element of the order that they pay the claimants’ costs of implementing the website-blocking order.
Held: The appeal succeeded as to the costs of compliance with the injunction. The European Directives made no reference to the costs of compliance with such orders, and the issue was one of English Law which would by default ask as to the legal distribution of risks as found by the court. There was no basis for the claimant to look beyond the infringers for their costs, and the rights holders should indemnify the ISP for the costs of compliance. As to the litigation costs, the ISPs had chosen to make this a test case, and took the associated responsibility.
Lord Mance, Lord Kerr, Lord Sumption, Lord Reed, Lord Hodge
UKSC 2016/0159, [2018] UKSC 28, [2018] ECC 29, [2018] EMLR 22, [2018] 4 All ER 373, [2018] ECDR 16, [2018] ETMR 32, [2018] 1 WLR 3259, [2018] Bus LR 1417, [2018] WLR(D) 354, [2018] RPC 11
Bailii, WLRD, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summary, SC Summary Video, SC 2018 Jan 30 am Video, SC 2018 Jan 30 pm
E-Commerce Directive 2000/31/EC, Information Security Directive 2001/29/EC, Enforcement Directive 2004/48/EC
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Cartier International Ag and Others v British Sky Broadcasting Ltd and Others CA 6-Jul-2016
Appeals by five English internet service providers against orders which required them to block or attempt to block access by their customers to certain websites which were advertising and selling counterfeit copies of the respondents’ goods in . .
Cited – Upmann v Elkan CA 5-Jun-1871
The defendant freight forwarding agent was innocently in possession of consignments of counterfeit cigars in transit to Germany through a London dock. The action was not for discovery, but for an order restraining the forwarder from releasing the . .
Cited – Singularis Holdings Ltd v Pricewaterhousecoopers PC 10-Nov-2014
(Bermuda) Liquidators of two companies sought information from the companies’ former auditors, and in particular their working papers. . .
Cited – The Rugby Football Union v Consolidated Information Services Ltd SC 21-Nov-2012
The Union challenged the right of the respondent to resell tickets to international rugby matches. The tickets were subject to a condition rendering it void on any resale at above face value. They said that the respondent had advertised tickets in . .
Cited – Norwich Pharmacal Co and others v Customs and Excise Commissioners HL 26-Jun-1973
Innocent third Party May still have duty to assist
The plaintiffs sought discovery from the defendants of documents received by them innocently in the exercise of their statutory functions. They sought to identify people who had been importing drugs unlawfully manufactured in breach of their . .
Cited – Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp and Others v British Telecommunications Plc ChD 28-Jul-2011
The claimant rights holders sought an order to require the defendant broadband internet provider to deny access to its users to websites which were said to facilitate the distribution of infringing copies of their films. An earlier judgment had . .
Cited – Banker’s Trust v Shapira CA 1980
Enforcement through innocent third party bank
Two forged cheques, each for USD500,000, had been presented by two men and as a result USD1,000,000 had been transferred to accounts in their names. The plaintiff sought to trace assets through the banks involved.
Held: The court approved the . .
Cited – British Steel Corporation v Granada Television Ltd HL 7-May-1980
The defendant had broadcast a TV programme using material confidential to the plaintiff, who now sought disclosure of the identity of the presumed thief.
Held: (Lord Salmon dissenting) The courts have never recognised a public interest right . .
Cited – Clipper Maritime Co Ltd v Mineralimportexport 1981
Innocent third parties, such as port authorities required by a freezing order to detain a vessel in port, are entitled to an indemnity. . .
Cited – Z Ltd v A-Z and AA-LL CA 1982
The plaintiffs, an overseas company with an office in London had been defrauded here. They sought and obtained Mareva injunctions against defendants and against six clearing banks. The banks sought clarification of their duties.
Held: The . .
Cited – Tommy Hilfiger Licensing And Others v Delta Center a.s ECJ 7-Jul-2016
ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Approximation of laws – Directive 2004/48/EC – Enforcement of intellectual property rights – Notion of ‘intermediary whose services are being used by a third . .
Cited – Totalise Plc v The Motley Fool Limited and Interative Investor Limited (2) CA 19-Dec-2001
The respondent operated a web site which contained a chat room. Defamatory remarks were made by a third party through the chat room, and the claimant sought details of the identity of the poster. The respondent refused to do so without a court . .
Cited – UPC Telekabel Wien v Constantin Film Verleih GmbH ECJ 27-Mar-2014
ECJ Request for a preliminary ruling – Approximation of laws – Copyright and related rights – Information society – Directive 2001/29/EC – Website making cinematographic works available to the public without the . .
Cited – Ashworth Security Hospital v MGN Limited HL 27-Jun-2002
Order for Journalist to Disclose Sources
The newspaper published details of the medical records of Ian Brady, a prisoner and patient of the applicant. The applicant sought an order requiring the defendant newspaper to disclose the identity of the source of material which appeared to have . .
Cited – Belgische Vereniging van Auteurs, Componisten en Uitgevers CVBA (SABAM) v Netlog NV ECJ 16-Feb-2012
ECJ Information society – Copyright – Internet – Hosting service provider – Processing of information stored on an online social networking platform – Introducing a system for filtering that information in order . .
Cited – L’Oreal SA, Lancome parfums et beaute and Cie, Laboratoire Garnier and Cie, L’Oreal (UK) Limited v eBay International AG, eBay Europe SARL, eBay (UK) Limited ECJ 12-Jul-2011
ECJ Grand Chamber – Trade marks – Internet – Offer for sale, on an online marketplace targeted at consumers in the European Union, of trade-marked goods intended, by the proprietor, for sale in third States – . .
Cited – Miller Brewing Co v Ruhl Enterprises Ltd and another ; Miller Brewing Co v Mersey Docks and Harbour Co amd Others ChD 23-May-2003
The claimant obtained an interim injunction in respect of alleged infringement of its trade marks in beers brewed under licence by the respondents. They said the beers produced were of inferior quality, and threatened the brand. The grant of such . .
Cited – Scarlet Extended Sa v Societe Belge Des Auteurs Compositeurs Et Editeurs (SABAM) ECJ 14-Apr-2011
ECJ Opinion – Information Society – Intellectual property rights – Directive 2004/48/EC – Copyright and related rights – Directive 2001/29/EC – Illegal downloading on the Internet – Peer to peer through software . .
Cited – Google France and Google v Louis Vuitton Malletier (Intellectual Property) ECJ 23-Mar-2010
ECJ Trade marks Internet Search engine – Keyword advertising – Display, on the basis of keywords corresponding to trade marks, of links to sites of competitors of the proprietors of those marks or to sites . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 July 2021; Ref: scu.617855

Briantex and Di Domenico v Commission: ECJ 9 Nov 1989

Non-contractual liability for incorrect information.
1. Where the liability of the Community is incurred by the act of one of its institutions, it is represented before the Court by the institution or institutions accused of the act giving rise to liability. However, it does not follow that the fact of bringing an action directly against the institution accused of the act in question renders the application inadmissible; such an application must be deemed to be directed against the Community represented by that institution.
2. The Community can incur non-contractual liability and the right to have any damage suffered made good can be enforced only if there was an unlawful act on the part of one of the Community institutions, real damage was suffered, and there was a causal link between the act and the damage.
C-353/88, [1989] EUECJ C-353/88
Bailii
European

Updated: 28 July 2021; Ref: scu.134988

Fuller and Thaler Asset Management v OHIM (Behavioural Indexing) (Intellectual Property): ECFI 12 Apr 2011

ECFI Community trade mark – Applications for Community word marks BEHAVIOURAL INDEXING and BEHAVIOURAL INDEX – Absolute ground for refusal – Descriptive character – Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009.
T-383/09, [2011] EUECJ T-383/09
Bailii
European

Updated: 28 July 2021; Ref: scu.432714

Painer v Standard Verlags Gmbh (Area of Freedom, Security And Justice): ECJ 12 Apr 2011

ECJ Regulation No 44/2001 – Article 6(1) – Jurisdiction for related actions – Directives 93/98/EEC and 2006/116/EC – Article 6 – Eligibility for protection of photos – Directive 2001/29 – Article 2 – Reproduction -Use of a portrait photo as a template for the production of a photo-fit – Article 5(3)(d) – Exceptions and limitations for quotations – Article 5(3)(e) – Exceptions and limitations for the purposes of public security.
The CJEU said at that an intellectual creation is the author’s own ‘if it reflects the author’s personality’ and: ‘That is the case if the author was able to express his creative abilities in the production of the work by making free and creative choices.’
[2011] EUECJ C-145/10, C-145/10, [2011] EUECJ C-145/10
Bailii, Bailii
Regulation No 44/2001
European

Updated: 28 July 2021; Ref: scu.432715

Catinis v Commission: ECFI 21 May 2014

ECJ (Judgment of The Court of First Instance) Access to documents – Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 – Documents relating to an OLAF investigation concerning the implementation of a project for the modernisation of infrastructure in Syria – Access refused – Exception concerning the protection of the purpose of inspections, investigations and audits
T-447/11, [2014] EUECJ T-447/11
Bailii
Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001
European

Updated: 27 July 2021; Ref: scu.525829

Melt Water v OHIM (Nueva): ECFI 21 May 2014

ECJ (Judgment Of The Court Of First Instance) Community trade mark – Application for a Community figurative mark NUEVA – Article 60 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 – Failure to comply with the obligation to pay the appeal fee within the period prescribed – Ambiguity in a language version – Uniform interpretation – Unforeseeable circumstances or force majeure – Excusable error – Obligations of care and diligence
[2014] EUECJ T-61/13
Bailii
European

Updated: 27 July 2021; Ref: scu.525839

FNV Kunsten Informatie En Media v Staat der Nederlanden: ECJ 11 Sep 2014

ECJ Advocate General’s Opinion – Collective labour agreement – Contracts for professional services – Minimum fees – Competition – Article 101 TFEU – Prevention of social dumping – ‘Albany exception’
A Dutch union negotiated terms for the minimum remuneration of self-employed musicians when engaged as substitutes to play in Dutch orchestras. But were the terms anti-competitive under EU law? Not (so held the CJEU) if the musicians were ‘false self-employed’, being a concept which seems to equate to that of a limb (b) worker. The court held: ‘a service provider can lose his status of an independent trader . . if he does not determine independently his own conduct on the market, but is entirely dependent on his principal, because he does not bear any of the . . commercial risks arising out of the latter’s activity and operates as an auxiliary within the principal’s undertaking . .
It follows that the status of ‘worker’ within the meaning of EU law is not affected by the fact that a person has been hired as a self-employed person under national law, for tax, administrative or organisational reasons, as long as that person acts under the direction of his employer as regards, in particular, his freedom to choose the time, place and content of his work . . , does not share in the employer’s commercial risks . . and, for the duration of that relationship, forms an integral part of that employer’s undertaking, so forming an economic unit with that undertaking . .’
Wahl AG
C-413/13, [2014] EUECJ C-413/13 – O, [2014] EUECJ C-413/13
Bailii, Bailii
European
Cited by:
Cited – Pimlico Plumbers Ltd and Another v Smith SC 13-Jun-2018
The parties disputed whether Mr Smith had been an employee of or worker with the company so as to bring associated rights into play. The contract required the worker to provide an alternate worker to cover if necessary.
Held: The company’s . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 27 July 2021; Ref: scu.536713

Aubriet (Freedom of Movement for Persons – Equal Treatment – Financial Aid for Higher Education Studies – Judgment): ECJ 10 Jul 2019

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Freedom of movement for persons – Equal treatment – Social advantages – Regulation (EU) No 492/2011 – Article 7(2) – Financial aid for higher education studies – Non-resident students – Condition connected with the period of their parents’ working time on national territory – Minimum period of five years – Reference period of seven years – Method of calculation of the reference period – Date of the application for financial aid – Indirect discrimination – Justification – Proportionality
ECLI:EU:C:2019:582, [2019] EUECJ C-410/18
Bailii
European

Updated: 27 July 2021; Ref: scu.665075

Ackermann Saatzucht And Others v Parliament And Council (Judgment): ECJ 24 Nov 2016

Appeal – Action for annulment – Fourth paragraph of Article 263 TFEU – Right to bring an action – Locus standi – Act of individual concern to natural or legal persons by reason of ‘certain attributes which are peculiar to them’ – Regulation (EU) No 511/2014 – Measures concerning compliance by users in the Union with the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilisation – Regulation (EC) No 2100/94 – Limitation of the effects of Community plant variety rights – Breeders’ exemption
C-408/15, [2016] EUECJ C-408/15, ECLI:EU:C:2016:893
Bailii
European

Updated: 26 July 2021; Ref: scu.571862

Menelaus v Ohmi – Garcia Mahiques (Vigor): ECFI 18 Nov 2015

ECJ Judgment – Community trade mark – Invalidity proceedings – Community word mark VIGOR – Earlier Community figurative mark and earlier international figurative mark VIGAR – Admissibility of evidence of use submitted on a CD-ROM – Taking into account of additional evidence which was not submitted within the time-limit set – Genuine use of the earlier marks – Articles 15 and 57(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 – Form differing in elements which do not alter the distinctive character
T-361/13, [2015] EUECJ T-361/13
Bailii
European

Updated: 26 July 2021; Ref: scu.554862

Research Engineering and Manufacturing v OHMI – Nedschroef Holding (Trilobular) ): ECFI 18 Nov 2015

ECJ Judgment – Community trade mark – Invalidity proceedings – Community word mark TRILOBULAR – Absolute ground for refusal – Descriptive character – Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 – Article 52(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009
ECLI:EU:T:2015:858, T-558/14, [2015] EUECJ T-558/14
Bailii
European

Updated: 26 July 2021; Ref: scu.554870

Mustang v OHMI- Dubek (Mustang): ECFI 18 Nov 2015

ECJ Judgment – Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Figurative Community trade mark Mustang – Earlier national word and figurative marks MUSTANG – No risk of damage to the repute of the earlier marks – Article 8, paragraph 5 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009
ECLI:EU:T:2015:862, T-606/13, [2015] EUECJ T-606/13
Bailii
Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 5
European

Updated: 26 July 2021; Ref: scu.554863

Liu v OHMI – DSN Marketing (Etui D’Ordinateur Portable): ECFI 18 Nov 2015

Judgment – Community design – Invalidity proceedings – Registered Community design representing a case for a portable computer – Identical earlier designs – Ground for invalidity – Lack of novelty within the meaning of Article 5(1) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 – Disclosure of earlier designs prior to the priority date – Article 7(1) and (2) of Regulation No 6/2002
ECLI:EU:T:2015:868, T-813/14, [2015] EUECJ T-813/14
Bailii
Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 591)
European

Updated: 26 July 2021; Ref: scu.554859

Synergy Hellas v Commission: ECFI 18 Nov 2015

ECJ Judgment – Arbitration clause – Sixth and Seventh Framework Programmes for research, technological development and demonstration – Early termination of contract – Legitimate expectations – Proportionality – Good faith – Non-contractual liability – Reclassification of the action – Coexistence requests contractual indemnity and extra – Early Warning System (SAP) – Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law conferring rights on individuals – Causal Link
ECLI:EU:T:2015:860, T-106/13, [2015] EUECJ T-106/13
Bailii
European

Updated: 26 July 2021; Ref: scu.554872

Nu Air Compressors And Tools v Commission: ECFI 18 Nov 2015

ECJ Judgment – Dumping – Imports of certain compressors originating in China – Partial refusal to refund the anti-dumping duties paid – Determination of the export price – Deduction of anti-dumping duties – Adjustment of the temporal effects of an annulment
ECLI:EU:T:2015:867, T-76/12, [2015] EUECJ T-76/12
Bailii
European

Updated: 26 July 2021; Ref: scu.554866

Comitato – Venezia Vuole Vivere v Commission (State Aid): ECJ 9 Jun 2011

Appeals – Actions for annulment – Admissibility – Locus standi – Interest in bringing an action – Objection of lis alibi pendens – State aid – Multisectoral aid scheme – Reductions in social security contributions – Decision 2000/394/EC – Compensatory nature – Whether intra-Community trade affected – Impact on competition – Extent of control – Burden of proof – Duty to state reasons – Article 87(2)(b) and (3)(b) to (d) EC – Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 – Articles 14 and 15
[2011] EUECJ C-73/09
Bailii
European
Citing:
See Also – Comitato – Venezia Vuole Vivere v Commission (State Aid) ECJ 16-Dec-2010
Appeal – Article 87 EC – multisectoral aid scheme – reductions in social charges in favor of undertakings established in the territory of Venice and Chioggia – decision declaring the aid incompatible with the common market and ordering the recovery . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 26 July 2021; Ref: scu.666174

Poniskaitis v Commission F-121/13: ECJ 1 Aug 2016

(Order) Public service – Officials – Pensions – Article 11, paragraph 2 of Annex VIII thereto – Transfer to the EU pension scheme of pension rights acquired under other schemes – Decision recognition rate subsidy annuities applying the new CEO on Articles 11 and 12 of Annex VIII thereto – Article 81 of the Rules of procedure – Action manifestly unfounded
[2016] EUECJ F-121/13 – CO, ECLI:EU:F:2016:188
Bailii
European

Updated: 25 July 2021; Ref: scu.569017

Poniskaitis v Commission F-133/14: ECJ 1 Aug 2016

(Order) Public service – Officials – Pensions – Article 11, paragraph 2 of Annex VIII thereto – Transfer to the EU pension scheme of pension rights acquired under other schemes – Decision recognition rate subsidy annuities applying the new CEO on Articles 11 and 12 of Annex VIII thereto – Article 81 of the Rules of procedure – Action manifestly unfounded
[2016] EUECJ F-133/14 – CO, ECLI:EU:F:2016:187
Bailii
European

Updated: 25 July 2021; Ref: scu.569018

Simon v Commission: ECJ 1 Aug 2016

(Order) Public service – Officials – Pensions – Article 11, paragraph 2 of Annex VIII thereto – Transfer to the EU pension scheme of pension rights acquired under other schemes – Decision recognition rate subsidy annuities applying the new CEO on Articles 11 and 12 of Annex VIII thereto – Article 81 of the Rules of procedure – Action manifestly unfounded
F-28/15, [2016] EUECJ F-28/15 – CO, ECLI:EU:F:2016:190
Bailii
European

Updated: 25 July 2021; Ref: scu.569020

Cat v Commission F-117/14: ECJ 1 Aug 2016

ECJ (Order) Public service – Contract staff – Pensions – Article 11, paragraph 2 of Annex VIII thereto – Transfer to the EU pension scheme of pension rights acquired under other schemes – Decision recognition bonus annuities applying the new CEO on Articles 11 and 12 of Annex VIII thereto – Article 81 of the Rules of procedure – Action manifestly unfounded
[2016] EUECJ F-117/14 – CO, ECLI:EU:F:2016:193
Bailii
European

Updated: 25 July 2021; Ref: scu.569012

Sajewicz-Swiackiewcz v Commission: ECJ 1 Aug 2016

(Order) Public service – Officials – Pensions – Article 11, paragraph 2 of Annex VIII thereto – Transfer to the EU pension scheme of pension rights acquired under other schemes – Decision recognition rate subsidy annuities applying the new CEO on Articles 11 and 12 of Annex VIII thereto – Article 81 of the Rules of procedure – Action manifestly unfounded
F-39/13, [2016] EUECJ F-39/13 – CO, ECLI:EU:F:2016:189
Bailii
European

Updated: 25 July 2021; Ref: scu.569019

Berel And Others (Customs Union): ECJ 16 Dec 2010

Opinion – Customs Union – Distribution of import duties – Representation – Solidarity – Possibility of relying on the delivery of a customs debt granted to a joint debtor
V Trstenjak AG
C-78/10, [2010] EUECJ C-78/10
Bailii
European
Cited by:
Opinion – Berel And Others (Customs Union) ECJ 17-Feb-2011
ECJ Community Customs Code – Articles 213, 233 and 239 – Joint and several liability of several debtors for the same customs debt – Remission of import duties – Extinction of the customs debt – No possibility for . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 July 2021; Ref: scu.427667

Donner (Free Movement Of Goods): ECJ 29 Mar 2012

ECJ Opinion – Free movement of goods – Industrial and commercial property – Sale of goods copyright protected in the Member State of the buyer but not in the Member State of the seller – Penal sanction imposed on a person involved in sale and delivery – Distance sales contracts – Distribution of copies of works – Directive 2001/29
Jaaskinen AG
C-5/11, [2012] EUECJ C-5/11
Bailii
European
Cited by:
Opinion – Donner (Free Movement Of Goods) ECJ 21-Jun-2012
ECJ Free movement of goods – Industrial and commercial property – Sale of reproductions of works in a Member State in which the copyright on those works is not protected – Transport of those goods to another . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 July 2021; Ref: scu.460884

YouQ v OHMI – Apple Corps (Beatle): ECFI 29 Mar 2012

ECFI Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for Community figurative mark BEATLE – Earlier national and Community word and figurative marks BEATLES and THE BEATLES – Relative ground for refusal – Article 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 – Reputation – Unfair advantage taken of the distinctive character or reputation of the earlier marks
L Truchot P
T-369/10, [2011] EUECJ T-369/10
Bailii
European

Updated: 25 July 2021; Ref: scu.452642

Animali and Others v Commission: ECJ 1 Aug 2016

(Order) Public service – Officials – Pensions – Article 11, paragraph 2 of Annex VIII thereto – Transfer to the EU pension scheme of pension rights acquired under other schemes – Decision recognition rate subsidy annuities applying the new CEO on Articles 11 and 12 of Annex VIII thereto – Article 81 of the Rules of procedure – Action manifestly unfounded
F-23/13, [2016] EUECJ F-23/13 – CO, ECLI:EU:F:2016:192
Bailii
European

Updated: 25 July 2021; Ref: scu.569010

Bundesanstalt fur Landwirtschaft und Ernahrung v Pfeifer and Langen: ECJ 29 Mar 2012

ECJ Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 – Protection of the European Union’s financial interests – Articles 3 and 4 – Administrative measures – Recovery of wrongly obtained advantages – Default and compensatory interest due under national law – Application of the limitation rules in Regulation No 2988/95 to the recovery of default interest – Start of the limitation period – Concept of suspension – Concept of interruption
Bonichot P
[2012] EUECJ C-564/10, C-564/10
Bailii
European
Citing:
See Also – Bundesanstalt fur Landwirtschaft und Ernahrung v Pfeifer and Langen ECJ 26-Jan-2012
(Opinion) Protection of the financial interests of the European Union – Limitation period for claims of interest due under national law in addition to reimbursement of amounts of aid wrongly received – Interpretation and applicability of Article 3 . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 July 2021; Ref: scu.460436

Bouvret And Others v Commission: ECJ 1 Aug 2016

ECJ (Order) Public service – Officials – Pensions – Article 11, paragraph 2 of Annex VIII thereto – Transfer to the EU pension scheme of pension rights acquired under national pension schemes – Decision recognition bonus annuities applying the new CEO on Articles 11 and 12 of Annex VIII thereto – Article 81 of the Rules of procedure – Action manifestly unfounded
F-112/12, [2016] EUECJ F-112/12 – CO, ECLI:EU:F:2016:191
Bailii
European

Updated: 25 July 2021; Ref: scu.569011

Comitato – Venezia Vuole Vivere v Commission (State Aid): ECJ 16 Dec 2010

Appeal – Article 87 EC – multisectoral aid scheme – reductions in social charges in favor of undertakings established in the territory of Venice and Chioggia – decision declaring the aid incompatible with the common market and ordering the recovery of the aid paid – admissibility – lis pendens – standing – individual affectation – organization of professional associations – interest in bringing proceedings – Article 87 (1) EC – concept of State aid – advantage – measure compensating for structural disadvantages – effect on intra-Community trade and impact on competition – scope of the control of a multisectoral aid scheme – procedural obligations – obligation to state reasons – compatibility with the common market – Article 87 (3) (c) – Article 87 (3),under d) – Regulation No 659/1999 – Article 14 – classification as new aid or existing aid – Article 15 – principles of legal certainty, protection of legitimate expectations, equal treatment and proportionality
C-73/09, [2010] EUECJ C-73/09
Bailii
European
Cited by:
See Also – Comitato – Venezia Vuole Vivere v Commission (State Aid) ECJ 9-Jun-2011
Appeals – Actions for annulment – Admissibility – Locus standi – Interest in bringing an action – Objection of lis alibi pendens – State aid – Multisectoral aid scheme – Reductions in social security contributions – Decision 2000/394/EC – . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 July 2021; Ref: scu.427675

Crest Nicholson Plc v Office of Fair Trading: Admn 24 Jul 2009

The company challenged as unfair its treatment by the respondent in imposing fines for anti-competive behaviour. The claimant was successor of the company who had misbehaved, but the claimant no longer operated in the area and had no employees from that era. It said that the respondent had resiled on a leniency agreement as to its treatment. The respondent had investigated systems of co-ordinated cover pricing in quotations for public works, and found that the volume of material was too large to process properly. It made a fast track offer intended to result in a reduced penalty.
Held: The OFT had acted unfairly in not acknowledging the difference in the position of the claimant Seeking ‘blind admissions to what are said to be infringements of the law is in breach of the principle of fairness.’ ‘Undertaking’ in competition law is an economic concept which is not equivalent to a traditional corporate entity. An undertaking may include a group of companies so long as that group of companies acts as a single economic unit.
‘the OFT must comply with the principle of equal treatment in all steps leading up to the imposition of a penalty’
Cranston J
[2009] EWHC 1875 (Admin)
Bailii
Competition Act 1998 (Office of Fair Trading’s Rules) Order 2004, Competition Act 1998
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Akzo Nobel and Others v Commission (Competition) ECFI 12-Dec-2007
ECJ Competition Cartels in the vitamin products sector Choline chloride (Vitamin B4) Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area Attributability . .
Cited – Itochu v Commission (Competition) ECFI 30-Apr-2009
ECJ Competition Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Market for video games consoles and games cartridges compatible with Nintendo games consoles – Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC – . .
Cited – Office of Communications and Another v Floe Telecom Ltd CA 15-Jun-2006
The Competition Appeal Tribunal had remitted a matter to the Office of Fair Trading and had set a time limit for the Commisioner to complete his investigation. The Office appealed.
Held: It was not within the CAT’s power, under either the . .
Cited – Automec SRL v Commission ECFI 18-Sep-1992
Europa Among the civil-law consequences which an infringement of the prohibition laid down in Article 85(1) of the Treaty may have, only one is expressly provided for in Article 85(2), namely the nullity of the . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Doody and Others HL 25-Jun-1993
A mandatory lifer is to be permitted to suggest the period of actual sentence to be served. The Home Secretary must give reasons for refusing a lifer’s release. What fairness requires in any particular case is ‘essentially an intuitive judgment’, . .

Cited by:
Cited – Gallaher Group Ltd and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Competition and Markets Authority SC 16-May-2018
Extent and consequences of duties of ‘equal treatment’ or ‘fairness’, said to have been owed by the Office of Fair Trading to those subject to investigation under the Competition Act 1998. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 July 2021; Ref: scu.361461

Commissioners of the European Communities v Assidoman Kraft Produncts Ab and Others: ECJ 14 Sep 1999

Wood Pulp II

A decision of the Commission imposing penalties against several business concerns was challenged successfully by some of those penalised. Others who had not made the challenge applied to have the decision annulled for themselves also. The court said that the benefit of the setting aside of the decision was taken only by those who had challenged it. The scope of the annulment could not extend beyond that applied for.
GC Rodriguez Iglesias, P
Times 19-Oct-1999, [1999] All ER (EC) 737, [1999] EUECJ C-310/97P, [1999] ECR I-5363
Bailii
European
Citing:
See Also – AssiDoman Kraft Products and others v Commission ECFI 10-Jul-1997
ECJ Competition – Consequences of partial annulment by the Court of Justice of a decision relating to a proceeding under Article 85 of the Treaty – Effects of the judgment on persons to whom the decision was . .

Cited by:
Cited – Deutsche Bahn Ag and Others v Morgan Advanced Materials Plc SC 9-Apr-2014
The Court was asked whether claims against MAM for losses suffered by reason of a cartel infringing article 81(1) TEC (now article 101 TFEU) were time-barred, and also as to substantive questions about the nature of the decisions of the European . .
Cited – Gallaher Group Ltd and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Competition and Markets Authority SC 16-May-2018
Extent and consequences of duties of ‘equal treatment’ or ‘fairness’, said to have been owed by the Office of Fair Trading to those subject to investigation under the Competition Act 1998. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 July 2021; Ref: scu.79406

Venezuela v Council (Affectation D’Un Etat Tiers) (Appeal – Restrictive Measures Taken With Regard To The Situation In Venezuela – Judgment): ECJ 22 Jun 2021

Appeal – Common foreign and security policy (CFSP) – Restrictive measures taken with regard to the situation in Venezuela – Action for annulment brought by a third State – Admissibility – Fourth paragraph of Article 263 TFEU – Locus standi – Condition that the applicant must be directly concerned by the measure that forms the subject matter of the action – Concept of a ‘legal person’ – Interest in bringing proceedings – Regulatory act which does not entail implementing measures
C-872/19, [2021] EUECJ C-872/19P
Bailii
European

Updated: 25 July 2021; Ref: scu.664356

Mega Brands v EUIPO – Diset (Magnext): ECFI 1 Jun 2016

ECJ (Judgment) European Union trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for European Union word mark MAGNEXT – Earlier national word mark MAGNET 4 – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Similarity of the signs – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009
T-292/12, [2016] EUECJ T-292/12
Bailii
Regulation (EC) No 207/2009
European

Updated: 23 July 2021; Ref: scu.564914

Hungary v Commission: ECFI 1 Jun 2016

ECJ (Judgment (Extracts)) Common agricultural policy – Direct payments – Additional criteria for ecological focus area with short rotation coppice – Article 45(8) of the Delegated Regulation (EU) No 639/2014 – Article 46(9)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1307/2013 – Misuse of power – Legal certainty – Non-discrimination – Legitimate expectations – Right to property – Obligation to state reasons
T-662/14, [2016] EUECJ T-662/14
Bailii
Delegated Regulation (EU) No 639/2014 46(9)(a)
European

Updated: 23 July 2021; Ref: scu.564913

Grupo Bimbo v EUIPO (Forme D’Une Barre Avec Quatre Cercles): ECFI 1 Jun 2016

ECJ (Judgment) Mark of the European Union – trade mark of three-dimensional EU – Shape of a bar with four circles – Absolute ground for refusal – Lack of distinctive character – Article 7, paragraph 1 b) of Regulation ( EC) No 207/2009 – Rights of the defense – Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 – Obligation to state reasons’
T-240/15, [2016] EUECJ T-240/15
Bailii
European

Updated: 23 July 2021; Ref: scu.564912

Test Claimants In The Franked Investment Income Group Litigation v Revenue and Customs: SC 23 Jul 2021

Compatibility of a UK corporate taxation regime with principles of EU law and HMRC’s liability to a taxpayer who has overpaid tax on the basis of incompatible UK legislation.
Lord Reed, President, Lord Hodge, Deputy President, Lord Briggs, Lord Sales, Lord Hamblen
[2021] UKSC 31
Bailii, Bailii Press Summary, Bailii Issues and Facts
England and Wales

Updated: 23 July 2021; Ref: scu.666157

Puigdemont I Casamajo and Comin I Oliveres v Parliament: ECJ 20 Dec 2019

Appeal – Application for interim measures – Institutional law – Members of the European Parliament – Act concerning the election of the representatives of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage – Article 12 – Verification of credentials – Decision of the Parliament to take note of the list of elected candidates notified by the national authorities and exclude the appellants owing to their lack of compliance with a formality imposed by national law – Action for annulment – Prima facie case
ECLI:EU:C:2019:1149, [2019] EUECJ C-646/19P(R)_CO
Bailii
European

Updated: 23 July 2021; Ref: scu.665515

An Taire Talmhaiochta Bia Agus Mara, Eire Agus An Tard-Aighne (Community Code Relating To Veterinary Medicinal Product – Obligation To Provide Information In All The Official Languag: ECJ 14 Jan 2021

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Directive 2001/82/EC – Language requirements with regard to the packaging and labelling of veterinary products – Discretion of national courts to refuse relief – Direct effect – Primacy – Procedural autonomy – Effective judicial protection
C-64/20, [2021] EUECJ C-64/20_O, ECLI:EU:C:2021:14, [2021] EUECJ C-64/20
Bailii, Bailii
European

Updated: 22 July 2021; Ref: scu.663915