Category: European

Umbro International Ltd v Revenue and Customs: ChD 12 Mar 2009

The taxpayer sought repayment of overpaid customs duty. It said that a company had acted as its buying agent for sports goods, which excluded buying commission from the price paid when calculating the duty.

Judges:

Proudman J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 438 (Ch), [2009] STC 1345

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Council Regulation (EEC) 2913/92

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Customs and Excise, European

Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.317987

Mobilx Ltd v HM Revenue and Customs: ChD 3 Feb 2009

Judges:

Floyd J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 133 (Ch), [2009] BTC 5206, [2009] STI 1663, [2009] STC 1107, [2009] BVC 205

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Mobilx Ltd (In Administration) v Revenue and Customs VDT 20-May-2008
VDT VALUE ADDED TAX – input tax – right to deduct – dealer in mobile phones and computer chips – Commissioners contending that all chains of transactions in period of three months could be traced back to . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Mobilx Ltd and Others v HM Revenue and Customs; Blue Sphere Global Ltd v Same and similar CA 12-May-2010
Each company sought repayment of input VAT. HMRC refused, saying that the transactions were the end-product of a fraud on it, and that even if the taxpayer did not know that a fraud was involved, it should have been aware that one was and acted . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT, European

Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.280429

Kabel Deutschland Vertrieb Und Service v Niedersachsische Landesmedienanstalt fur privaten Rundfunk (Industrial Policy): ECJ 22 Dec 2008

ECJ Directive 2002/22/EC Article 31(1) – Reasonable ‘must carry’ obligations – National law requiring analogue cable network operators to provide access to their cable networks to all television programmes allowed to be broadcast terrestrially – Principle of proportionality

Citations:

C-336/07, [2008] EUECJ C-336/07

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 2002/22/EC 31(1)

European, Media

Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.279999

Vincenzo Manfredi v Lloyd Adriatico Assicurazioni SpA etc: ECJ 13 Jul 2006

ECJ Article 81 EC- Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Accidents caused by motor vehicles, vessels and mopeds – Compulsory civil liability insurance – Increase in premiums – Effect on trade between Member States – Right of third parties to claim compensation for harm suffered – National courts and tribunals having jurisdiction – Limitation period – Punitive damages.

Citations:

C-296/04, [2006] EUECJ C-296/04

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.243109

Hassan v Council and Commission: ECFI 12 Jul 2006

ECJ Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures taken against persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaeda network and the Taliban – Competence of the Community – Freezing of funds – Fundamental rights – Jus cogens – Review by the Court – Action for annulment and damages.

Citations:

T-49/04, [2006] EUECJ T-49/04

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Criminal Practice, Human Rights

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.243089

Franz Egenberger GmbH Molkerei und Trockenwerk v Bundesanstalt fur Landwirtschaft und Ernahrung, intervening party: Fonterra (Logistics) Ltd: ECJ 11 Jul 2006

ECJ Milk and milk products – Regulation (EC) No 2535/2001 – New Zealand butter – Import licence procedures – Inward Monitoring Arrangement (IMA 1) certificate.

Citations:

C-313/04, [2006] EUECJ C-313/04

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills SC 25-Feb-2015
Appeal about the distribution of European Structural Funds among the regions of the United Kingdom. It arises out of the complaint of a number of local authorities in Merseyside and South Yorkshire about the way in which it is proposed to distribute . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Agriculture

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.243088

Sonia Chacon Navas v Eurest Colectividades SAs (Social Policy): ECJ 11 Jul 2006

ECJ Directive 2000/78/EC – Equal treatment in employment and occupation – Concept of disability.
The concept of disability should be given a uniform and autonomous meaning throughout the EU. The court defined the concept as follows: ‘Directive 2000/78 aims to combat certain types of discrimination as regards employment and occupation. In that context, the concept of ‘disability’ must be understood as referring to a limitation which results in particular from physical, mental or psychological impairments and which hinders the participation of the person concerned in professional life.
However, by using the concept of ‘disability’ in Article 1 of that directive, the legislature deliberately chose a term which differs from ‘sickness’. The two concepts cannot therefore simply be treated as being the same.
Recital 16 in the preamble to Directive 2000/78 states that the ‘provision of measures to accommodate the needs of disabled people at the workplace plays an important role in combating discrimination on grounds of disability’. The importance which the Community legislature attaches to measures for adapting the workplace to the disability demonstrates that it envisaged situations in which participation in professional life is hindered over a long period of time. In order for the limitation to fall within the concept of ‘disability’, it must therefore be probable that it will last for a long time.’ As to the implications of this for the obligation to make reasonable adjustments: ‘In accordance with Article 5 of Directive 2000/78, reasonable accommodation is to be provided in order to guarantee compliance with the principle of equal treatment in relation to persons with disabilities. That provision states that this means that employers are to take appropriate measures, where needed in a particular case, to enable a person with a disability to have access to, participate in, or advance in employment, unless such measures would impose a disproportionate burden on the employer. ‘

Citations:

C-13/05, [2006] EUECJ C-13/05, Times 09-Aug-2006, [2007] All ER (EC) 59, [2007] ICR 1, [2006] IRLR 706, [2006] ECR I-6467, [2006] 3 CMLR 40

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 2000/78/EC

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – Paterson v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis EAT 23-Jul-2007
EAT PART TIME WORKERS
A police officer was found by the Tribunal to be significantly disadvantaged compared with his peers when carrying out examinations for promotion. Nonetheless, the Tribunal held that he . .
Cited – Sobhi v Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis (Disability Discrimination : Disability) EAT 2-May-2013
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Disability
A woman who suffered from dissociative amnesia, which had made her forget that she had a previous conviction, and who was reprimanded for failing to disclose it . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Discrimination

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.243085

Adeneler and Others v Ellinikos Organismos Galaktos: ECJ 4 Jul 2006

A Directive was belatedly transposed into national law and after the date by which it ought to have been implemented. The question arose whether the obligation to interpret national law in accordance with the Directive existed from the date the Directive was published, or the date by which it had to be transposed into national law, or when the domestic legislation was actually passed.
Held: In that situation it was from the time when it ought to have been transposed. Until that time there was a more limited obligation not to interpret domestic law in a manner which might seriously compromise, after the period for transposition has expired, attainment of the objective pursued by the Directive.
‘More specifically, recourse to fixed-term employment contracts solely on the basis of a general provision of statute or secondary legislation, unlinked to what the activity in question specifically comprises, does not permit objective and transparent criteria to be identified in order to verify whether the renewal of such contracts actually responds to a genuine need, is appropriate for achieving the objective pursued and is necessary for that purpose.’

Judges:

V Skouris, P

Citations:

C-212/04, [2006] EUECJ C-212/04, [2006] ECR I-6057, [2007] All ER (EC) 82, [2006] IRLR 716, [2006] 3 CMLR 30

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – English v Thomas Sanderson Ltd CA 19-Dec-2008
The claimant appealed dismissal of his claim for harrassment and sex discrimination. Though heterosexual, he had been subject to persistent jokes that he was homosexual. The court first asked whether the alleged conduct was ‘on the grounds of sexual . .
Cited – Paterson v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis EAT 23-Jul-2007
EAT PART TIME WORKERS
A police officer was found by the Tribunal to be significantly disadvantaged compared with his peers when carrying out examinations for promotion. Nonetheless, the Tribunal held that he . .
Cited – Duncombe and Others v Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families CA 14-Dec-2009
The court considered the workings of fixed term employment contracts under which the claimants taught in Europe. The Secretary of State argued that the contracts validly limited the claimants’ employment to nine years. The claimants said the 2002 . .
Distinguished – Duncombe and Others v Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families SC 29-Mar-2011
The government operated European Schools catering for children of staff of the European Community. The school staff challenged as unlawful, the contracts restricting their terms of employment with the schools to a maximum of nine years.
Held: . .
Cited – Hughes v The Corps of Commissionaires Management Ltd CA 8-Sep-2011
The employee security guard appealed against a finding that his employer had allowed rest breaks as allowed under the Regulations. He worked a continuous shift during which he was allowed to use a rest area, but he remained on call.
Held: The . .
Cited – O’Brien v Ministry of Justice SC 6-Feb-2013
The appellant, a part time recorder challenged his exclusion from pension arrangements.
Held: The appeal was allowed. No objective justification has been shown for departing from the basic principle of remunerating part-timers pro rata . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.243014

Xunta de Galicia: ECJ 21 Jul 2005

ECJ (Judgment) State aid – Article 93(3) of the EC Treaty (now Article 88(3) EC) – Scheme of aid to shipbuilding and ship conversion falling outside the scope of Directive 90/684/EEC – Failure to give prior notification – Article 92(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 87(1) EC) – Concept of State aid – Effect on trade between Member States.

Citations:

C-71/04

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.229667

HL v Commission: ECJ 20 Jul 2016

ECJ Judgment – Civil service – Officials – Article 45 of the Staff Regulations – 2014 promotion exercise – General implementing provisions for Article 45 of the Staff Regulations – List of officials proposed for promotion by the Directors-General and heads of service – Omission of the applicant’s name – Possibility of challenging before the Joint Promotion Committee the list of officials proposed for promotion – Consideration of the comparative merits of the officials eligible for promotion – Opinions adopted by a joint body – Obligation to state grounds

Citations:

F-112/15, [2016] EUECJ F-112/15

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Employment

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.567326

Barroso Truta And Others v Court Of Justice Of The European Union: ECJ 20 Jul 2016

(Judgment) Civil service – Contract staff – Pensions – Article 11 (2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations – Transfer to the Union pension scheme of previously acquired pension rights under national schemes – Proposals for a subsidy of annuities made by the AHCC – Invitation to contact the administration for explanations and to discuss the appropriateness of making the transfers – Acceptance by the transfer agents of their national pension rights without prior consultation with the AHCC – Character transfer order – Subsequent discovery of the ‘minimum subsistence’ rule – fourth paragraph of Article 77of the Staff Regulations – Duty of care – Insufficient provision of information provided by AHCC when forwarding annuity bonus proposals – Claim for damages – Failure to comply with the requirements of the pre-litigation procedure – Inadmissibility

Citations:

F-126/15, [2016] EUECJ F-126/15

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Employment

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.567320

HC v Commission: ECJ 20 Jul 2016

ECJ (Judgment) Public service – Temporary staff – Succession commitments under various statutes to several EU institutions – Interruption by a period of unemployment – continue Affiliation to the Joint Sickness Insurance Scheme of the Union – New commitment – Article 13 of CEOS – medical examination prior to hiring – Article 32 of the CEOS – No declaration by the person concerned an illness which he was already affected – Discovery later by AHCC – retroactive application of a medical reserve a time five – Dispute – Referral to the invalidity Committee – Duty of loyalty – AHCC’s decision to deprive any recruiter from the institution for a period of six years

Judges:

S. Van Raepenbusch, P

Citations:

F-132/15, [2016] EUECJ F-132/15

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Employment

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.567324

GY v Commission: ECJ 20 Jul 2016

ECJ (Judgment) Public service – Open competition – Notice of competition EPSO / AD / 293/14 – Insufficient number of points to the test of’ talent evaluator ‘- Non-admission to the assessment center – Rejection of the application for review

Citations:

F-123/15, [2016] EUECJ F-123/15

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Employment

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.567322

Adriaen and Others v Commission: ECJ 20 Jul 2016

(Judgment) Civil service – Officials – Article 45 of the Staff Regulations – 2014 promotion exercise – General implementing provisions for Article 45 of the Staff Regulations – Lists of officials proposed for promotion by the Directors-General and heads of service – Omission of the applicants’ names – Possibility of challenging before the Joint Promotion Committee the list of officials proposed for promotion – Consideration of the comparative merits of the officials eligible for promotion – Opinions adopted by a joint body – Obligation to state grounds

Citations:

F-113/15, [2016] EUECJ F-113/15

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Employment

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.567317

Maschek v Magistratsdirektion der Stadt Wien – Personalstelle Wiener Stadtwerke: ECJ 20 Jul 2016

ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Social policy – Directive 2003/88/EC – Article 7 – Right to paid annual – Retirement at the request of the party concerned – Worker failing to use up all his entitlement to annual paid leave before the termination of his work relations – National legislation excluding allowance in lieu of paid annual leave not taken – Sick leave – Public servants

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2016:576, [2016] EUECJ C-341/15

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 2003/88/EC 7

Jurisdiction:

European

Employment

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.567413

Viiniverla Oy v Sosiaali-ja terveysalan lupa-ja valvontavirasto: ECJ 21 Jan 2016

ECJ Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Protection of geographical indications of spirit drinks – Regulation (EC) No 110/2008 – Article 16(b) – Evocation – Cider spirits produced in Finland and placed on the market as ‘Verlados’ – Protected geographical indication ‘Calvados’

Citations:

C-75/15, [2016] EUECJ C-75/15, ECLI:EU:C:2016:35

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EC) No 110/2008

Jurisdiction:

European

Intellectual Property

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.559494

Etablissement national des produits de l’agriculture et de la mer v Sodiaal International: ECJ 3 Sep 2015

ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Protection of the European Union’s financial interests – Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 – Article 3 – Recovery of Community aid – Administrative penalty – Administrative measures – Limitation period

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2015:541, C-383/14, [2015] EUECJ C-383/14

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.551990

Energie Est Lda, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change and Another: Admn 10 Oct 2013

The claimant, producer of a novel form of solar power production, complained thet the defendant’s scheme to support solar power production was unlawful under European law in that it refused support to the claimant’s products.
Held: The claim failed. The MCS has to strike a balance on the one hand between the application of its standards and methodology in support of consumer confidence, and on the other avoiding the risk of discouraging innovation and competition. This is not a straightforward task, and I do not think that the evidence supports a valid criticism at the present time. If it did, the position may well in my view be different. In the result, the claimant has not made good its

Judges:

Blair J

Citations:

[2013] EWHC 3026 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Utilities, European

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.516357

Van Der Helder And Another v College Voor Zorgverzekeringen: ECJ 10 Oct 2013

ECJ (Opinion) Social security – Sickness insurance – Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 – Title III, Chapter 1 – Article 28(2)(b) – Pensioner entitled to benefits in kind under the legislation of two or more Member States – Legislation to which the pensioner has been subject for the longest period of time – Notion of ‘pensions’

Judges:

Wahl AG

Citations:

C-321/12, [2013] EUECJ C-321/12

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Opinion – Van Der Helder And Another v College Voor Zorgverzekeringen ECJ 10-Oct-2013
ECJ Social security – Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 – Article 28(2)(b) – Sickness insurance benefits – Entitlement to an old-age pension in several Member States – Residence in another Member State – Provision of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.516585

Alokpa and Moudoulou v Ministre Du Travail, De L’Emploi Et De L’Immigration: ECJ 10 Oct 2013

ECJ Citizenship of the Union – Articles 20 TFEU and 21 TFEU – Directive 2004/38/EC – Right of residence of a third-country national who is a direct relative in the ascending line of Union citizens who are minor children – Union citizens born in a Member State other than that of which they are nationals and who have not made use of their right of freedom of movement – Fundamental rights

Citations:

C-86/12, [2013] EUECJ C-86/12, ECLI:EU:C:2013:645

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 2004/38/EC

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – Agyarko and Ikuga, Regina (on The Applications of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 22-Feb-2017
Applications were made by foreign nationals, residing unlawfully in the UK, for leave to remain as the partners of British citizens with whom they had formed relationships during their unlawful residence, relying primarily on the duty imposed on the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.516571

Ministeriet For Forskning, Innovation Og Videregaende Uddannelser v Manova A/S: ECJ 10 Oct 2013

ECJ Request for a preliminary ruling – Public procurement – Directive 2004/18/EC – Principle of equal treatment – Restricted procedure – Contract notice – Requirement for a copy of the most recent published balance sheet to be enclosed with the application – Copies of balance sheets not enclosed with some candidates’ applications – Right of the contracting authority to ask those candidates to provide copies of those balance sheets after the deadline for filing applications

Citations:

C-336/12, [2013] EUECJ C-336/12

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 2004/18/EC

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.516988

Franz Wilhelm Langguth Erben Gmbh and Co. Kg v Office For Harmonisation In The Internal Market: ECFI 20 Feb 2013

ECJ Community trade mark – Application for the Community figurative mark MEDINET – Earlier national and international figurative marks MEDINET – Claim of seniority of the earlier national and international marks – Earlier marks in colour and Community trade mark applied for not designating any specific colour – Signs not identical – Article 34 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 – Obligation to state reasons – Article 75 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 – Expediency of oral proceedings – Article 77 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009

Judges:

S. Papasavvas, P

Citations:

T-378/11, [2013] EUECJ T-378/11

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EC) No 207/2009

Jurisdiction:

European

Intellectual Property

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.471212

Budejovicky Budvar v OHMI- Anheuser-Busch (Bud): ECFI 16 Dec 2008

Europa Community trade mark Opposition proceedings Applications for Community word and figurative marks BUD Appellations ‘bud’ Relative grounds for refusal Article 8(4) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94.

Citations:

T-309/06, [2008] EUECJ T-309/06

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94

European, Intellectual Property

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.279128

Bavaria and Bavaria Italia SrL v Bayerischer Brauerbund eV: ECJ 18 Dec 2008

ECJ Opinion – Validity of Regulations (EEC) No 2081/92 and (EC) No 1347/2001 Admissibility – Protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs – Geographical indication ‘Bayerisches Bier’ Trade mark ‘Bavaria’ Procedural and substantive requirements of registration – Co-existence between trade mark and protected geographical indication.

Judges:

Mazak AG

Citations:

C-343/07, [2008] EUECJ C-343/07 – O

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Opinion – Bavaria and Bavaria Italia SrL v Bayerischer Brauerbund eV ECJ 2-Jul-2009
ECJ Reference for a preliminary ruling Assessment of validity Admissibility Regulations (EEC) No 2081/92 and (EC) No 1347/2001 – Validity – Generic name Coexistence of a trade mark and a protected geographical . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Agriculture, Intellectual Property

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.279122

Gambazzi v DaimlerChrysler Canada Inc v CIBC Mellon Trust Company: ECJ 18 Dec 2008

ECJ Opinion – Brussels Convention Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments Grounds for refusal – Violation of public order of the requested State – Exclusion of the defendant from the proceedings because of a breach of a court order

Judges:

Juliane Kokott AG

Citations:

C-394/07, [2008] EUECJ C-394/07 – O

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Opinion – Gambazzi v DaimlerChrysler Canada Inc v CIBC Mellon Trust Company ECJ 2-Apr-2009
ECJ Brussels Convention Recognition and enforcement of judgments – Grounds for refusal Infringement of public policy in the State in which enforcement is sought Exclusion of the defendant from the proceedings . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.279132

Royal Bank of Scotland v The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (Taxation): ECJ 18 Dec 2008

ECJ Sixth VAT Directive Deduction of input tax Goods and services used for both taxable and exempt transactions Deductible proportion Calculation Methods laid down in the third subparagraph of Article 17(5) – Obligation to apply the rounding up rule in the second subparagraph of Article 19(1).

Citations:

C-488/07, [2008] EUECJ C-488/07

Links:

Bailii

European, VAT

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.279136

Budejovicky Budvar v OHMI – Anheuser-Busch (Bud): ECFI 16 Dec 2008

ECFI Community trade mark Opposition proceedings Applications for Community word and figurative marks BUD Appellations ‘bud’ Relative grounds for refusal Article 8(4) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94.

Citations:

T-225/06, [2008] EUECJ T-225/06, [2013] EUECJ T-225/06

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

European, Intellectual Property

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.279125

Centrum Voor Gelijkheid Van Kansen En Voor Racismebestrijding v Firma Feryn NV: ECJ 10 Jul 2008

The company declared that it would not employ immigrants to work on certain customers’ houses, saying that the customers would be reluctant to allow access. The Centrum, an anti racist organisation said this was in breach of the Directive, and appealed rejection of its claim.
Held: Such an advertisement would clearly dissuade applicants for employment and therefore was direct discrimination. It was not necessary to show that particular applicants had been dissuaded. The company could bring evidence if it existed to show at its actual recruitment practice was not discriminatory.

Citations:

[2008] EUECJ C-54/07, Times 16-Jul-2008, C-54/07, [2008] ICR 1390

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Council Directive 2000/43/EC of June 29, 2000

Citing:

Opinion – Centrum Voor Gelijkheid Van Kansen En Voor Racismebestrijding v Firma Feryn NV ECJ 12-Mar-2008
(Social Policy) (Opinion) The defendant company had advertised for workers, but said it was unwilling to employ Morrocans.
Advocate General Maduro expressed the opinion that the Directive must be understood in the framework of a wider policy to . .

Cited by:

Cited – Jivraj v Hashwani SC 27-Jul-2011
The parties had a joint venture agreement which provided that any dispute was to be referred to an arbitrator from the Ismaili community. The claimant said that this method of appointment became void as a discriminatory provision under the 2003 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Discrimination

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.279112

Gomez-Limon v Instituto Nacional de la Seguridad Social (INSS): ECJ 4 Dec 2008

ECJ Opinion – Principle of equality of treatment of men and women in matters of social security. Calculation of the amount of an invalidity pension – Parental leave.

Citations:

C-537/07, [2008] EUECJ C-537/07 – O

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Opinion – Gomez-Limon v Instituto Nacional de la Seguridad Social (INSS) ECJ 16-Jul-2009
ECJ Social Policy – Directive 96/34/EC – Framework agreement on parental leave – Entitlements acquired or being acquired at the start of the leave – Continued receipt of social security benefits during the leave . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Discrimination, Benefits

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.278686

Louca v Public Prosecutor In Bielefel, Germany: Admn 27 Nov 2008

The defendant objected to the extradition order, saying that the European arrest warrant relied on did not disclose other warrants issued for the same offences.
Held: The Act required the warrant to be validated by the issuing national court. It was not required that it include reference to earlier warrants. The Act should be read to comply with the Framework decision. The case of Jaso should not be followed.

Judges:

Dyson LJ, Pitchford J, Gross J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 2907 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii, Times

Statutes:

Extradition Act 2003 2, Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA (OJ 2002 No L190/1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Incorrectly decided – Jaso and others v Central Criminal Court No.2 Madrid Admn 14-Dec-2007
The Madrid Court had issued European Arrest Warrants against the three appellants on charges of membership of a criminal organisation and terrorism. The appellants had unsuccessfully challenged extradition before the District Judge on a large number . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Louca v A German Judicial Authority SC 19-Nov-2009
The defendant resisted extradition saying that the European Arrest Warrant was defective in not revealing the existence of two earlier such warrants. He said that absence of such information would hinder a court which was concerned as to possible . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Extradition, European

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.278306

Commission v Greece C-489/06: ECJ 20 Nov 2008

(Law Relating To Undertakings) Opinion – Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations Free movement of goods Directives 93/36/EEC and 93/42/EEC Hospital purchase of medical devices bearing the CE marking Protective measures Public supply contract

Citations:

C-489/06, [2008] EUECJ C-489/06 – O

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Opinion – Commission v Greece C-489/06 ECJ 19-Mar-2009
Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations Directives 93/36/EEC and 93/42/EEC Public contracts Procedures for the award of public supply contracts Hospital supplies . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.278355

Harman International Industries v OHMI Becker (Barbara Becker): ECFI 2 Dec 2008

ECJ Community trade mark Opposition proceedings Application for the Community word mark Barbara Becker Earlier Community word mark BECKER Relative ground for refusal Likelihood of confusion Similarity of the signs Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94.

Citations:

T-212/07, [2008] EUECJ T-212/07

Links:

Bailii

European, Intellectual Property

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.278370

Turco and Kingdom of Sweden (supported by Denmark, Finland and The Netherlands) v Council of the European Union (supported by Commission of the European Communities and United Kingdom): ECJ 1 Jul 2008

ECJ Appeals Access to documents of the institutions Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 Legal opinion.

Citations:

Times 04-Jul-2008, [2008] EUECJ C-52/05, C-52/05P, C-39/05P

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

See Also – Sweden and Turco v Council and Others (Law Governing The Institutions) ECJ 29-Nov-2007
Where a member state submitted documents to a Community institution requesting that such docments be not disclosed to a third party, that request was to be treated as the beginning of a process of the institution asking whether they should not be . .

Cited by:

Cited – Office of Communications v The Information Commissioner SC 27-Jan-2010
The parties disputed the publication of materials relating to the exact placement of mobile phone masts. The operators wanted the information excepted from disclosure for fear of criminal acts and also said that disclosure would breach their . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.278298

Commission v Poland (Industrial Policy): ECJ 13 Nov 2008

ECJ Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations Electronic communications Networks and services Directive 2002/19/EC (Access Directive) Article 4(1) and the first subparagraph of Article 5(1) Incorrect transposition.

Judges:

CWA Timmermans, P

Citations:

[2008] ECR I-8403, C-227/07, [2008] EUECJ C-227/07

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 2002/19/EC

Cited by:

Cited – British Telecommunications Plc v Telefonica O2 UK Ltd SC 9-Jul-2014
The parties disputed the termination charges which BT was entitled to charge to mobile network operators for putting calls from the latter’s networks through to BT fixed lines with associated 08 numbers. BT had introduced new tariff charges.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Utilities

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.277859

Tv 2/Danmark v Commission (State Aid) T-309/04: ECFI 22 Oct 2008

Europa State aid Measures implemented by the Danish authorities for the public broadcaster TV2 to finance its public service remit – Measures classified as State aid partly compatible and partly incompatible with the common market – Actions for annulment – Admissibility Interest in bringing proceedings Rights of the defence – Public broadcasting service – Definition and financing – State resources – Obligation to state the reasons on which the decision is based – Obligation to examine.

Citations:

[2008] EUECJ T-309/04

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.277130

Tv 2/Danmark v Commission (State Aid): ECFI 22 Oct 2008

Europa State aid Measures implemented by the Danish authorities for the public broadcaster TV2 to finance its public service remit – Measures classified as State aid partly compatible and partly incompatible with the common market – Actions for annulment – Admissibility Interest in bringing proceedings Rights of the defence – Public broadcasting service – Definition and financing – State resources – Obligation to state the reasons on which the decision is based – Obligation to examine.

Citations:

T-317/04, [2008] EUECJ T-317/04

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.277131

Tv 2/Danmark v Commission (State Aid) T-329/04: ECFI 22 Oct 2008

Europa State aid Measures implemented by the Danish authorities for the public broadcaster TV2 to finance its public service remit Measures classified as State aid partly compatible and partly incompatible with the common market Actions for annulment Admissibility Interest in bringing proceedings Rights of the defence Public broadcasting service Definition and financing State resources Obligation to state the reasons on which the decision is based Obligation to examine.

Citations:

[2008] EUECJ T-329/04

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.277132

Mayer Parry Recycling Ltd v The Environment Agency: ChD 9 Nov 1998

Whether materials were a waste, requiring waste management licenses and procedures, was determined by whether any further process of reclamation or recycling was required. Materials used without further processing were not waste materials under the Act.

Citations:

Times 03-Dec-1998, Gazette 10-Feb-1999, [1998] EWHC Ch 286

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Waste Management Licensing Regulations 1994 (1994/1056)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Environment, Licensing, European

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.162965

Duke v GEC Reliance Systems Limited: HL 2 Jan 1988

The court was asked about the differential in retirement ages between men and women in private sector employment, and whether it constituted sex discrimination.
Held: Section 2(4) of the 1972 Act did not allow a British Court to distort the meaning of a British Statute in order to enforce a Community Directive which does not have direct effect. Schemes which concerned differential retirement ages for men and women were covered by the exemption.
Lord Templeman was content to rely on pre-enacting documents as a guide to Parliament’s intention.

Judges:

Lord Templeman

Citations:

[1988] ICR 447, [1988] AC 618, [1988] 2 WLR 359, [1988] 1 All ER 626, [1987] UKHL 10, [1988] IRLR 118

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Communities Act 1972 2(4), Sex Discrimination Act 1975 6(4)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Duke v GEC Reliance Systems Limited CA 16-Feb-1987
The court was said to have failed to have proper regard to a European Directive.
The court discussed the meaning of the phrase ‘per incuriam’: ‘I have always understood that the doctrine of per incuriam only applies where another division of . .
At EAT – Duke v Reliance Systems Limited EAT 1982
The EAT was asked whether a policy in regard to a retiring age had been communicated to employees or whether there was evidence of any universal practice to that effect. Browne-Wilkinson J said: ‘[T]here was no evidence that the employers’ policy of . .

Cited by:

Cited – Albion Automotive Ltd v Walker and 21 others EAT 12-Oct-2001
The employees claimed enhanced redundancy payments. The employers said no contractual obligation existed to make any such payments. The employees said that all previous redundancies had been under such terms, and that it had become a term of their . .
Cited – Pickstone v Freemans Plc HL 30-Jun-1988
The claimant sought equal pay with other, male, warehouse operatives who were doing work of equal value but for more money. The Court of Appeal had held that since other men were also employed on the same terms both as to pay and work, her claim . .
Cited – Attridge Law (A Firm of Solicitors) v Coleman and Law EAT 20-Dec-2006
The claimant asserted associative disability discrimination. She was the carer for her disabled son.
Held: To succeed the claimant would have to show that associative discrimination was prohibited by the directive and that the 1995 Act could . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Discrimination, European

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.181217

Nunez Torreiro (Approximation of Laws Approximation of Laws): ECJ 20 Dec 2017

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Compulsory insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles – Directive 2009/103/EC – Article 3, first paragraph – Concept of ‘use of vehicles’ – National legislation excluding the driving of motor vehicles on roads and terrain that are not ‘suitable for use by motor vehicles’, with the exception of those which, though not suitable, are nonetheless ‘ordinarily so used’

Citations:

C-334/16, [2017] EUECJ C-334/16, ECLI:EU:C:2017:1007

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Road Traffic, Insurance

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.602101

JT v EUIPO – Carrasco Pirard (Quilapayasn) (Judgment) French Text: ECFI 11 Dec 2017

European Union mark – Opposition procedure – Application for a mark of the figurative European Union QUILAPAYUN – Relative ground for refusal – Well-known mark – Article 8 (2) (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207 / 2009 [renumbered as Article 8 (2) (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001] – Proprietor of the mark

Citations:

ECLI: EU: T: 2017: 885, [2017] EUECJ T-249/15

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Intellectual Property

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.601075

OJSC Rosneft Oil Company, Regina (on The Application of) v HM Treasury and Others: Admn 27 Nov 2014

Challenge to UK secondary legislation giving effect to the sanctions imposed by the EU by Council Regulation (EU) No. 833/2014 amended by Regulation 960/2014. The sanctions are imposed as the result of the Russian Federation’s actions in Ukraine. The challenge is also to guidance given by the second and third defendants, the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, and the Financial Conduct Authority concerning the interpretation of certain terms in the EU Regulation. The application for interim relief concerns the part of the secondary legislation prohibiting or restricting the supply of sensitive equipment and technology and services for types of oil exploration by Russian entities or entities operating in Russia.

Citations:

[2014] EWHC 4002 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

European

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.542561

McCarthy and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 28 Nov 2012

‘This case raises important issues regarding the power of the UK Government to control, and prevent abuse of, its own borders and the scope of the powers granted to it by the Frontiers Protocol and Article 35 of the Citizens Directive.’

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 3368 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

European

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.467197

Bouygues and Bouygues Telecom v Commission: ECJ 8 Oct 2008

ECJ Appeal Article 87, paragraph 1, EC Directive 97/13/EC State aid Decision No 128/1999/EC Licensing UMTS retroactive reduction of royalties Decision finding the absence of State aid derived Exception the nature and the Accountability system economy in Article 88 State, paragraphs 2 and 3, CE serious difficulties

Judges:

Tristenjak AG

Citations:

C-431/07, [2008] EUECJ C-431/07 – O

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Opinion – Bouygues and Bouygues Telecom v Commission ECJ 2-Apr-2009
ECJ Appeals – State aid Article 88(2) EC – Conditions for initiation of the formal investigation procedure – Serious difficulties – Criteria for establishing the existence of State aid – State resources – . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.276792

ER v Wetteraukreis: ECJ 25 Sep 2008

ECJ (External Relations) EEC-Turkey Association Agreement Decision No 1/80 of the Association Council Article 7, first paragraph, second indent Right of residence of the adult child of a Turkish worker Absence of paid employment Conditions governing the loss of acquired rights.

Citations:

C-453/07, [2008] EUECJ C-453/07

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.276459

Incorporated Trustees of The National Council For Ageing v Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform: ECJ 23 Sep 2008

Europa Council Directive 2000/78/EC Article 6(1) Age discrimination – Compulsory retirement National legislation permitting employers to dismiss employees aged 65 and over if the reason of dismissal is retirement Justification.

Citations:

C-388/07, [2008] EUECJ C-388/07 – O

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Council Directive 2000/78/EC, Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006 (SI 1031 No 2006)

Citing:

At First Instance – The Incorporated Trustees of the National Council on Aging (Age Concern England), Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Admn 24-Jul-2007
Age Concern challenged the implimentation of the European Directive as regards the prohibition of age discrimination. . .

Cited by:

Opinion – Incorporated Trustees of The National Council For Ageing v Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform ECJ 5-Mar-2009
(Third Chamber) The trustees complained that the respondent had failed to implement the Directive, in that there remained, for example, rules allowing employers to have fixed retirement ages.
Held: The complaint failed. The Directive allowed . .
ECJ Opinion – Age UK, Regina (On the Application of) v Attorney General Admn 25-Sep-2009
Age UK challenged the implementation by the UK of the Directive insofar as it established a default retirement age (DRA) at 65.
Held: The claim failed. The decision to adopt a DRA was not a disproportionate way of giving effect to the social . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Discrimination

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.276439

Von Chamier-Glisczinski v Deutsche Angestellten-Krankenkasse: ECJ 11 Sep 2008

ECJ Opinion – Social security for migrant workers benefits in case of dependency benefits in kind Article 19, paragraph 1 of Regulation No 1408/71 Citizenship of the Union

Judges:

Mengozzi AG

Citations:

C-208/07, [2008] EUECJ C-208/07 – O

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

See Also – Von Chamier-Glisczinski v Deutsche Angestellten-Krankenkasse ECJ 16-Jul-2009
ECJ Social security – Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 Title III, Chapter 1 Articles 18 EC, 39 EC and 49 EC – Benefits in kind intended to cover the risk of reliance on care Residence in a Member State other than the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Benefits

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.276396

Doughty v Rolls Royce Plc: CA 19 Dec 1991

The claimants sought to assert their rights under the Equal Treatment Directive, whoch had not been implemented. She had been made to retire at 60, but said that had she been a man she would not have had to retire until she reached 65 years old. She had succeeded at the Industrial Tribunal, but failed at the EAT.
Held: The court was being asked: ‘did the act of the respondent company in denying to the appellant the opportunity to continue in service for a further five years amount to reliance by the United Kingdom upon its own failure to bring English law into conformity with the Equal Treatment Directive?’ All the shares of the company were in the ownership of the government.
Mustill LJ said: ‘European legislation of the present kind does not have direct effect on individuals, in the sense of creating causes of action on which they can sue or be sued in the courts of the member state. Nevertheless, if the domestic law falls short of what is required by the Directive the member state is in breach of its treaty obligation to give effect to it. Thus, if the individual asserts before his domestic court a right or immunity vis-a-vis the member state which is not available under the domestic law, but which would have been available if the member state had brought its domestic law into line with the Directive, then the individual is entitled to have his case adjudged as if the member state had performed its obligation: i.e. in accordance with the terms of the Directive.’

Judges:

Mustill, Butler-Sloss LJJ, Sir John Megaw

Citations:

[1991] EWCA Civ 15, [1992] ICR 538, [1992] IRLR 126, [1992] 1 CMLR 1045

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Council Directive 1976 EEC/76/207, Sex Discrimination Act 1975 6(4)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Foster v British Gas plc HL 1991
The House was asked for a preliminary ruling before a referral of the case to the ECJ as to whether the applicants could rely as against the British Gas Corporation on an unimplemented Council Directive. Although the gas industry had been privatised . .
Cited – Becker v Finanzamt Muenster-Innenstadt ECJ 19-Jan-1982
ECJ It would be incompatible with the binding effect which article 189 of the EEC treaty ascribes to directives to exclude in principle the possibility of the obligation imposed by it being relied upon by persons . .
Cited – M H Marshall v Southampton And South West Hampshire Area Health Authority (Teaching) ECJ 26-Feb-1986
ECJ The court considered the measure of compensation in a successful claim for sex discrimination arising from the health authority’s provision of an earlier compulsory retirement age for women compared with that . .
Cited – Johnston v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary ECJ 15-May-1986
The principles of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights must be taken into consideration in community law. The principle of effective judicial control laid down in article 6 of Council Directive 76/207, a principle which . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Discrimination, European, Constitutional

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.276298

Allianz Spa (Anciennement Riunione Adriatica Di Sicurta) v West Tankers Inc (Judgments Convention/Enforcement of Judgments) (‘the Front Comor’): ECJ 4 Sep 2008

Europa (Opinion) Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 Scope Arbitration Order restraining a person from commencing or continuing proceedings before the national courts of another Member State instead of before an arbitral body (anti-suit injunction).
The court discussed the principal of mutual trust: ‘Having regard to the principle of mutual trust referred to above, the court has stated that the court of the state addressed is never in a better position than the court of the state of origin to determine whether the latter has jurisdiction. Accordingly, Regulation 44/2001, apart from a few limited exceptions, does not authorise the jurisdiction of a court of a member state to be reviewed by a court in another member state ( Allianz SpA, at para 29 and the case law cited). Therefore, article 31(3) of the CMR can be applied in the European Union only if it enables the objectives of the free movement of judgments in civil and commercial matters and of mutual trust in the administration of justice in the European Union to be achieved under conditions at least as favourable as those resulting from the application of Regulation 44/2001.’

Citations:

C-185/07, [2008] EUECJ C-185/07 – O, [2008] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 661

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Citing:

At House of Lords – West Tankers Inc v Ras Riunione Adriatica Di Sicurta Spa and others (The Front Comor) HL 21-Feb-2007
A ship had foundered, and the owners disputed their insurance claim. The policy provided for arbitration in London, and one party sought an order to prevent the other commencing proceedings in another EU state in breach of the arbitration agreement. . .
At High Court – West Tankers Inc v Ras Riunione Adriatica Di Sicurta Spa and Another (‘The Front Comor’) ComC 21-Mar-2005
Appeal against anti-suit order. The court ordered that since the question of whether an anti-suit injunction could be made to restrain proceedings abroad had been decided in Through Transport, that issue could go straight to the House of Lords. . .

Cited by:

Opinion – Allianz Spa (Anciennement Riunione Adriatica Di Sicurta) v West Tankers Inc (‘the Front Comor’) ECJ 10-Feb-2009
ECJ (Judgment) A West Tankers ship damaged a jetty in Syracuse. An agreement provided for an arbitration in London. The insurers having paid out brought a subrogated action in Italy. West Tankers sought an order . .
Cited – British American Tobacco Denmark A/S v Kazemier Bv SC 28-Oct-2015
One container loaded with cigarettes was allegedly hi-jacked in Belgium en route between Switzerland and The Netherlands in September 2011, while another allegedly lost 756 of its original 1386 cartons while parked overnight contrary to express . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Jurisdiction

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.273206

Crane (T/A Indigital Satelite Services) v Sky In-Home Ltd and Another: CA 3 Jul 2008

Arden LJ considered the principles to be applied when considering whether a party to civil litigation should be allowed to appeal a trial judge’s decision on the basis that a claim, which could have been brought before him but was not, would have succeeded if it had been so brought. She concluded: ‘CPR 52.8 provides that an appellant’s notice may not be amended without the permission of the court. When the court gives its permission, it must take into account the overriding objective in the CPR, which is to deal with cases justly. An application to amend a notice of appeal raises special considerations which do not apply to an application to amend a pleading prior to a trial. In the case of a pleading the court will (subject to any prejudice to the parties or to the administration of justice) readily give permission to amend so that the real dispute between the parties can be adjudicated upon. But on appeal the position is different. The simple fact is that there has already been a trial, and the significance of that is that the parties will have had an opportunity to put forward their cases, and incurred costs, and there will have been a decision. These points were powerfully put by May LJ in Jones v MBNA:
Civil trials are conducted on the basis that the court decides the factual and legal issues which the parties bring before the court. Normally each party should bring before the court the whole relevant case that he wishes to advance. He may choose to confine his claim or defence to some only of the theoretical ways in which the case might be put. If he does so, the court will decide the issues which are raised and normally will not decide issues which are not raised. Normally a party cannot raise in subsequent proceedings claims or issues which could and should have been raised in the first proceedings. Equally, a party cannot, in my judgment, normally seek to appeal a trial judge’s decision on the basis that a claim, which could have been brought before the trial judge, but was not, would have succeeded if it had been so brought. The justice of this as a general principle is, in my view, obvious. It is not merely a matter of efficiency, expediency and cost, but of substantial justice. Parties to litigation are entitled to know where they stand. The parties are entitled, and the court requires, to know what the issues are. Upon this depends a variety of decisions, including, by the parties, what evidence to call, how much effort and money it is appropriate to invest in the case, and generally how to conduct the case; and, by the court, what case management and administrative decisions and directions to make and give, and the substantive decisions in the case itself. Litigation should be resolved once and for all, and it is not, generally speaking, just if a party who successfully contested a case advanced on one basis should be expected to face on appeal, not a challenge to the original decision, but a new case advanced on a different basis. There may be exceptional cases in which the court would not apply the general principle which I have expressed. But in my view this is not such a case.’
The court must examine each application on its own facts in the light of the guidance to be found in the authorities. On that, the starting point is a passage from the speech of Lord Hershell in The Tasmania: ‘My Lords, I think that a point such as this, not taken at the trial, and presented for the first time in the Court of Appeal, ought to be most jealously scrutinised. The conduct of a cause at the trial is governed by, and the questions asked of the witnesses are directed to, the points then suggested. And it is obvious that no care is exercised in the elucidation of facts not material to them’.
It appears to me that under these circumstances a Court of Appeal ought only to decide in favour of an appellant on a ground there put forward for the first time, if it be satisfied beyond doubt, first, that it has before it all the facts bearing upon the new contention, as completely as would have been the case if the controversy had arisen at the trial; and next, that no satisfactory explanation could have been offered by those whose conduct is impugned if an opportunity for explanation had been afforded them when in the witness box.
Lord Hershell was there dealing with the situation where a party seeks to raise a new case by asserting that an accident happened in a different way from that which was suggested at trial. The passage stresses the importance of ensuring that the other party is not put at risk of prejudice. In his judgment in Jones v MBNA (a case under the CPR: see [27] of the judgment), Peter Gibson LJ helpfully elaborated the point, and expressed the view that it would be difficult to see how the court could ever, consistently with the overriding objective, allow a new point to be taken on appeal if further evidence might have been produced at trial on it or if the new point requires an evaluation by the appeal court of evidence which might be affected by seeing the witnesses.
38. It is not in dispute that to withdraw a concession or take a point not argued in the lower court requires the leave of this court. In general the court expects each party to advance his whole case at the trial. In the interests of fairness to the other party this court should be slow to allow new points, which were available to be taken at the trial but were not taken, to be advanced for the first time in this court. That consideration is the weightier if further evidence might have been adduced at the trial, had the point been taken then, or if the decision on the point requires an evaluation of all the evidence and could be affected by the impression which the trial judge receives from seeing and hearing the witnesses. Indeed it is hard to see how, if those circumstances obtained, this court, having regard to the overriding objective of dealing with cases justly, could allow that new point to be taken.
There is further useful guidance in this passage for the purposes of the present case. Peter Gibson LJ adopted the approach that, before allowing a new case to be raised on appeal, he had to be satisfied that, if the new case had been raised at trial, the other party would not have altered the way it conducted the case. Likewise, in this case, in my judgment the court has to be satisfied that SHS will not be at risk of prejudice if the new point is allowed because it might have adduced other evidence at trial, or otherwise conduct the case differently. It should consider for itself, as best it can, what factual issues are likely to be raised by the new case. Moreover, in circumstances such as the present, where there has been no disclosure relative to the new way in which the appellant seeks to put his case and virtually no opportunity to consider the matter, I do not consider that the court can reasonably expect the party against whom the amendment is sought to be made to be specific about the evidence he would have adduced had the point been raised earlier. If there is any area of doubt, the benefit of it must be given to the party against whom the amendment is sought. It is the party who should have raised the point at trial who should bare any risk of prejudice.
The circumstances in which a party may seek to raise a new point on appeal are no doubt many and various, and the court will no doubt have to consider each case individually. However, the principle that permission to raise a new point should not be given lightly is likely to apply in every case, save where there is a point of law which does not involve any further evidence and which involves little variation in the case which the party has already had to meet (see Pittalis v Grant [1989] QB 605).’

Judges:

Arden LJ, Dyson LJ

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 978

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Commercial Agents (Council Directive) Regulations 1993 (SI 1993 No. 3053)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Crane T/A Indigital Satellite Services v Sky In-Home Service Ltd and Another ChD 26-Jan-2007
The Directive’s substantive provisions were modelled primarily on the provisions of German domestic law. . .
Cited – Pittalis v Grant CA 1989
A point was raised for the first time on appeal.
Held: Though an appellate court could exclude a pure question of law which had not been raised at first instance from being raised on appeal, the usual practice was to allow it to be taken where . .
Cited – Jones v MBNA International Bank CA 30-Jun-2000
. .

Cited by:

Cited – McKeown v British Horseracing Authority QBD 12-Mar-2010
The jockey claimant challenged disciplinary proceedings brought against him by the defendant authority.
Held: The findings were upheld in part but remitted for consideration of giving the claimant opportunity to challenge certain evidence. . .
Cited – Rossetti Marketing Ltd v Diamond Sofa Company Ltd and Another QBD 3-Oct-2011
The claimants sought compensation under the 1993 Rules. The defendants denied that the claimants were agents within the rules, since they also acted as agents for other furniture makers.
Held: Whether a party is a commercial agent within the . .
Cited – Deer v University of Oxford CA 6-Feb-2015
The claimant had previously succeeded in a claim of sex discrimination against the University, her former employer. She now appealed against rejection of her claims alleging later victimisation.
Held: Two appeals succeed, and those matters . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Agency, European

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.273157

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 neutrality infringed in law or in practice – Whether defence of due diligence by UK possible – Linneweber [2008] STC 1069 ECJ applied – EC 6th Directive (77/388/EEC) Art 13B(f) – VATA 1944 Sch 9, Grp 4, Item 1, Note (1)(d) and (3) – Interim decision.

Citations:

[2008] UKVAT V20777

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Gaming Act 1968

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – 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 . .

Cited by:

At VDT (2) – 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 VDT (2) – 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] . .
At VDT (2) – 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 . .
At VDT (2) – 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 . .
At VDT (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 VDT (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 VDT (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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT, European

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.273028

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 making supplies to same players under both section 14 and 21 – Whether infringement of fiscal neutrality requires competition between supplies as well as different treatment of similar supplies – Linneweber [2005] ECR I-1131 applied – EC 6th Directive (77/388/EEC) Art 13B(f) – VATA 1994 Sch 9, Grp 4, Item 1 Note (4) – Appeal allowed in principle

Citations:

[2008] UKVAT V20688

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Gaming Act 1968

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See Also – 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 VDT(1) – 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 VDT(1) – 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] . .
At VDT (1) – 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 . .
At VDT (1) – 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 . .
At VDT (1) – 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 VDT (1) – 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 VDT (1) – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT, European

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.272943

Thames Water Utilities Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) v Bromley Magistrates Court: Admn 28 Jul 2008

Whether escapes of waste water from a public sewerage system are ‘Directive waste’ within the scope of the Waste Framework Directive, and thus subject to the enforcement authority of the Environment Agency under section 33 of the 1990 Act.

Judges:

Carnwath LJ, Bean J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 1763 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Environmental Protection Act 1990 33

Utilities, Environment, European

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.272301

Afton Chemicals Ltd v Revenue and Customs: Excs 4 May 2007

Excise Duty – Whether additives to motor fuel produced from ‘mineral products’ are subject to Excise Duty, as motor fuel, under the 1992 and 2003 Community Directives – whether such additives could be taxed under the UK domestic legislation if the 2003 Directive itself did not require imposition of Excise Duty – whether we should refer any of the points in dispute to the European Court of Justice for guidance or whether we should reach our own decisions on any or all of the points in contention – Appeal Dismissed

Citations:

[2007] UKVAT-Excise E01041

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Afton Chemical v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (Taxation) ECJ 18-Dec-2008
CJEU Directive 92/81/EEC Excise duty on mineral oils Article 2(2) and (3) and Article 8(1)(a) Directive 2003/96/EC Taxation of energy products and electricity Article 2(2), (3) and (4)(b) Scope Fuel additives . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Customs and Excise, European

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.272118

Robledillo Nunez v Fondo de Garantia Salarial: ECJ 21 Feb 2008

Europa (Fogasa) – Social policy Protection of workers in the event of insolvency of the employer – Directive 80/987/EEC amended by Directive 2002/74/EC First paragraph of Article 3 and Article 10(a) – Compensation for unfair dismissal agreed under an extra’judicial conciliation procedure – Payment guaranteed by the guarantee institution – Payment conditional upon the adoption of a judicial decision – Principles of equality and non’discrimination.

Citations:

C-498/06, [2008] EUECJ C-498/06

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 80/987/EEC

Jurisdiction:

European

Employment, Insolvency

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.265956

Giovanni De Cicco v Landesversicherungsanstalt Schwaben: ECJ 19 Dec 1968

ECJ 1. Procedure – references for preliminary ruling – jurisdiction of the court – limits – task of national courts or tribunals (EEC treaty, article 177) 2. Procedure – references for preliminary ruling – reference to the court by a national court or tribunal – conditions (EEC treaty, article 177) 3. Procedure – references for preliminary ruling – participation in proceedings – limits (statute of court of justice of the EEC, article 20) 4. Social security for migrant workers – wage – earners – assimilated workers – concept – craftsmen – insurance periods – concept (regulation no 3 of the council concerning social security for migrant workers) 5. Social security for migrant workers – regulation no 4 – annexes 7 and 9 – declaratory nature

Citations:

C-19/68, R-19/68, [1968] EUECJ R-19/68

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.214076

Visentin and others v Azienda di Stato per gli interventi nel mercato agricolo: ECJ 25 Mar 2004

ECJ Judgment – Agriculture – Common organisation of the markets – Milk and milk products – Additional levy on milk – Regulations (EEC) Nos 3590/92 and 536/93 – Reference quantities – Ex post correction

Citations:

C-495/00, [2004] EUECJ C-495/00

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Agriculture

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.195045

Cooperativa Lattepiu v Azienda di Stato per gli interventi nel mercato agricolo: ECJ 25 Mar 2004

ECJ Judgment – Agriculture – Common organisation of the markets – Milk and milk products – Additional levy on milk – Regulations (EEC) Nos 3950/92 and 536/93 – Reference quantities – Ex post correction – Notification of producers)

Citations:

C-231/00, [2004] EUECJ C-231/00, [2004] ECR I-2869

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Agriculture

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.195043

Azienda Agricola Ettore Ribaldi v Azienda di Stato per gli interventi nel mercato agricolo: ECJ 25 Mar 2004

ECJ Judgment – Agriculture – Common organisation of the markets – Milk and milk products – Additional levy on milk – Regulations (EEC) Nos 3950/92 and 536/93 – Reference quantities – Ex post correction – Notification of producers

Citations:

C-480/00, [2004] EUECJ C-480/00

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Agriculture

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.195044

Karner v Troostwijk GmbH: ECJ 25 Mar 2004

ECJ Free movement of goods – Article 28 EC – Measures having equivalent effect – Advertising restrictions – Reference to the commercial origin of goods products – Goods from an insolvent company – Directive 84/450/EEC – Fundamental rights – Freedom of expression – Principle of proportionality

Judges:

Timmermans AP

Citations:

C-71/02, [2004] ECR I-3025, [2004] CEC 327, [2004] EUECJ C-71/02, [2004] 2 CMLR 5, [2005] ETMR 59

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 84/450/EEC

Jurisdiction:

European

European, Media

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.195046

Industrias de Deshidratacion Agricola SA: ECJ 25 Mar 2004

ECJ Judgment – Regulations (EC) No 603/95 and No 785/95 – Dried fodder – Aid scheme – Conditions to be met by processing undertakings – Additional requirements imposed under national rules

Citations:

C-118/02, [2004] EUECJ C-118/02

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EC) No 603/95, Regulation (EC) No 785/95

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.195047

J B Leadbitter and Co Ltd v Devon County Council: ChD 1 May 2009

The claimant said that its tender had been wrongfully excluded from the defendant’s procurement process.

Judges:

David Richards J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 930 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004, Public Contracts Regulations 2006 (SI 2006 No 5)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Azam and Co v Legal Services Commission ChD 5-May-2010
The claimant solicitors had failed to submit their tender for a new contract in time. The respondent refused to accept the late submission. The claimant said that the respondent had not directly notified it of the deadline and so failed to meet its . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government, European

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.341803

Broomco (1984) Ltd v Customs and Excise: Cust 4 Jul 2002

Post-Clearance Demands – New Zealand butter – Cleared on basis of certificates by New Zealand authorities – Later dispute as to validity – Quota under Protocol 18 of Accession Treaty – Whether post-clearance recovery impliedly excluded – No – Current access under WTO agreements – No exclusion in principle of post – clearance recovery under WTO law.

Citations:

[2002] UKVAT-Customs C00169

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Customs and Excise, European

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.271359

Underwriting Members of Lloyd’s Syndicate 980 and others v Sinco Sa: ComC 29 Jul 2008

The claimants, insurers, relied upon an exclusive jurisdiction clause contained in a binder given to a Greek broker. It set England and Wales for any dispute. The insurers had terminated the binder alleging fraudulent conduct by the broker. A declaration and damages were sought, but proceedings had not served when the broker sued the insurers in Greece for ‘clientele compensation’ pursuant to statute and ‘financial and moral damages’. The insurers then amended their English claim to claim damages for breach of the exclusive jurisdiction clause and served the claim (as so amended) on the broker in Greece; the broker then sought a stay of the English proceedings.
Held: A stay was refused. The Greek claims were based on tort and statute while the English claims were for breach of the contract in the binder.

Judges:

Beatson J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 1842 (Comm), [2009] Lloyd’s Rep IR 365

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Council Regulation (EC) 44/2001

Cited by:

Cited – In re The Alexandros T SC 6-Nov-2013
The parties had disputed insurance claims after the foundering of the Alexandros T. After allegations of misbehaviour by the underwriters, the parties had settled the claims in a Tomlin Order. Five years later, however, the shipowners began . .
Cited – Starlight Shipping Co v Allianz Marine and Aviation Versicherungs Ag and Others CA 20-Dec-2012
The Alexander T, owned by the appellant and insured by the respondents was a total loss. The insurers resisted payment, the appellant came to allege improperly, and the parties had settled the claim on full payment under a Tomlin Order. The owners . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Jurisdiction, European

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.271239

Gysbrechts And Santurel Inter (Free Movement Of Goods): ECJ 17 Jul 2008

ECJ Articles 28 EC to 30 EC Directive 97/7/EC Consumer protection in distance contracts Period for withdrawal Prohibition on requiring from a consumer a deposit or payment before the end of the period for withdrawal

Citations:

C-205/07, [2008] EUECJ C-205/07

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

EC Directive 97/7/EC

European, Consumer

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.271123

Kozlowski (Police And Judicial Cooperation In Criminal Matters): ECJ 17 Jul 2008

ECJ Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters – Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA – European arrest warrant and surrender procedures between Member States – Article 4(6) – Ground for optional non-execution of a European arrest warrant – Interpretation of the terms ‘resident’ and ‘staying’ in the executing Member State.

Citations:

C-66/08, [2008] EUECJ C-66/08, [2009] QB 307

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Bucnys v Ministry of Justice SC 20-Nov-2013
The Court considered requests made by European Arrest Warrants for the surrender under Part 1 of the Extradition Act 2003 of three persons wanted to serve sentences imposed upon their conviction in other member states of the European Union. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.271127

Kip Europe And Others (Common Customs Tariff): ECJ 17 Jul 2008

ECJ Common Customs Tariff Combined Nomenclature Tariff classification Multi-function apparatus Apparatus combining the functions of laser printer and a digital electronic scanner module, with a copier function Heading 8471 Heading 9009

Citations:

C-363/07, [2008] EUECJ C-363/07

Links:

Bailii

European, Customs and Excise

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.271126

Netherlands v Commission (Environment And Consumers) French Text: ECJ 17 Jul 2008

ECJ Appeal – Article 95(5) EC Directive 98/69/EC – Measures to be taken against air pollution by emissions from motor vehicles Derogating national provision advancing the lowering of the Community limit on emissions of particulate matter produced by certain new diesel-powered vehicles Commission’s refusal – Specificity of the problem – Duties of care and to state reasons

Citations:

C-405/07, [2008] EUECJ C-405/07

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

EC Directive 98/69/EC 95(5)

European

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.271130

Metock And Others v Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform: ECJ 25 Jul 2008

ECJ Directive 2004/38/EC – Right of Union citizens and their family members to move and reside freely in the territory of a Member State – Family members who are nationals of non-member countries – Nationals of non-member countries who entered the host Member State before becoming spouses of Union citizens.
No impediment should be placed in the way of a European Union citizen which might realistically deter him from choosing to work, for example, in a city in another member state, as opposed to one in his state of origin.

Citations:

C-127/08, [2008] EUECJ C-127/08

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – Pedro v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions CA 14-Dec-2009
The claimant, an EU national, came to the UK to join her son. He had worked but became dependent on benefits. She sought payment of the State Pension.
Held: A refusal to pay the pension would dissuade workers from moving around within the EU, . .
Cited – HB (EEA Right To Reside, Metock) Algeria AIT 15-Sep-2008
AIT 1. The ruling of the European Court of Justice in Metock (Case C-127/08 judgment 25 July 2008, [2008] EUECJ C-127/08) establishes that a third-country national in the United Kingdom who is a family member of . .
Cited – Prix v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions SC 31-Oct-2012
The claimant had come from France to England, and worked as a teaching assistant. She set out on a course to train as a teacher but became pregnant, gave up the course, and eventually gave up work temporarily. Her claim to Income Support was refused . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.271129

Campoli v Commission (Staff Regulations): ECJ 17 Jul 2008

ECJ Appeal – Officials – Remuneration – Pension – Application of the correction coefficient calculated on the basis of the average cost of living in the country of residence – Transitional arrangements established by the regulation amending the Staff Regulations – Objection of illegality.

Citations:

C-71/07, [2008] EUECJ C-71/07

Links:

Bailii

European

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.271118

Athinaiki Techniki v Commission: ECJ 17 Jul 2008

ECJ Appeal – State aid – Aid granted by the Hellenic Republic to the Hyatt Regency consortium – Complaint – Decision to take no further action on the complaint – Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 – Articles 4, 13 and 20 – Concept of ‘act open to challenge’ for the purposes of Article 230 EC.

Citations:

C-521/06, [2008] EUECJ C-521/06

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EC) No 659/1999

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.271116

Flughafen Koln v Bonn (Taxation): ECJ 17 Jul 2008

ECJ Directive 2003/96/EC – Community framework for the taxation of energy products and electricity – Article 14(1)(a) – Exemption for energy products used to produce electricity – Option to impose taxation for reasons of environmental policy – Direct effect of the exemption.

Citations:

C-226/07, [2008] EUECJ C-226/07

Links:

Bailii

European, Utilities, Environment, Taxes – Other

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.271122

Alitalia v Commission: ECFI 9 Jul 2008

ECJ State aid Recapitalisation of Alitalia by the Italian authorities Decision declaring the aid compatible with the common market Decision taken following a judgment of the Court reversing an earlier ruling Admissibility Violation of Article 233 EC Violation of Articles 87 EC and 88 EC authorization conditions using motivational Obligation

Judges:

M. Vilaras, P

Citations:

T-301/01, [2008] EUECJ T-301/01

Links:

Bailii

European, Transport

Updated: 17 July 2022; Ref: scu.270873