Citations:
C-886/19, [2020] EUECJ C-886/19P_CO
Links:
Jurisdiction:
European
European
Updated: 25 March 2022; Ref: scu.654918
C-886/19, [2020] EUECJ C-886/19P_CO
European
Updated: 25 March 2022; Ref: scu.654918
C-612/18, [2020] EUECJ C-612/18P
European
Updated: 25 March 2022; Ref: scu.654858
T-44/19, [2020] EUECJ T-44/19
European
Updated: 25 March 2022; Ref: scu.654780
C-858/19, [2020] EUECJ C-858/19_P
European
Updated: 25 March 2022; Ref: scu.654806
C-902/19, [2020] EUECJ C-902/19P_CO
European
Updated: 25 March 2022; Ref: scu.654878
T-20/20, [2020] EUECJ T-20/20_CO
European
Updated: 25 March 2022; Ref: scu.654896
T-111/14, [2020] EUECJ T-111/14DEP_CO
European
Updated: 25 March 2022; Ref: scu.654943
T-293/18, [2020] EUECJ T-293/18_CO
European
Updated: 25 March 2022; Ref: scu.654713
T-598/18, [2020] EUECJ T-598/18
European
Updated: 25 March 2022; Ref: scu.654694
Quantitative restrictions and measures having equivalent effect.
R-54/71, [1971] EUECJ R-54/71, [1971] ECR 1107
European
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.214153
C-217/15, [2017] EUECJ C-217/15
European
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581777
C-464/16, [2017] EUECJ C-464/16 – CO
European
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581778
T-344/15, [2017] EUECJ T-344/15
European
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581767
T-361/14, [2017] EUECJ T-361/14
European
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581769
C-610/16, [2017] EUECJ C-610/16 – CO
European
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581768
T-39/16, [2017] EUECJ T-39/16
European
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581776
C-668/15, [2017] EUECJ C-668/15
European
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581772
T-594/15, [2017] EUECJ T-594/15
European
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581775
C-391/15, [2017] EUECJ C-391/15
European
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581774
T-178/16, [2017] EUECJ T-178/16
European
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581779
T-238/16, [2017] EUECJ T-238/16
European
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581763
C-592/15, [2017] EUECJ C-592/15
European
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581750
T-35/15, [2017] EUECJ T-35/15
European
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581753
C-376/15, [2017] EUECJ C-376/15
European
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581758
T-291/16, [2017] EUECJ T-291/16
European
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581754
C-638/15, [2017] EUECJ C-638/15
European
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581762
C-544/15, [2017] EUECJ C-544/15
European
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581766
C-58/16, [2017] EUECJ C-58/16
European
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581760
C-153/16, [2017] EUECJ C-153/16
European
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581761
C-298/15, [2017] EUECJ C-298/15
European
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581757
C-28/16, [2017] EUECJ C-28/16 – O
European
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581749
T-49/16, [2017] EUECJ T-49/16
European
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581756
C-337/15, [2017] EUECJ C-337/15
European
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581765
T-219/16, [2017] EUECJ T-219/16
European
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581752
C-488/15, [2017] EUECJ C-488/15
European
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581759
C-598/14, [2017] EUECJ C-598/14
European
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581764
The Court was asked whether section 32(4) of the Act, which provides in certain circumstances for an automatic stay of proceedings in respect of journalistic materials (amongst others), is incompatible with EU law.
Held: The sub section forms an important part of the protection of the rights of freedom of expression. A greater need is to be shown to allow prior restraint of a journalists publicatuon, and therefore there was nothing in section 32(4) which failed to give effect to the Directive. The claim was to be stayed.
Popplewell J
[2017] EWHC 695 (QB), [2017] WLR(D) 251
Data Protection Act 1988 32(4), Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Directive 95/46/EC
England and Wales
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581697
This appeal is concerned with the interaction of trade mark rights and the EU rules about the free movement of goods.
Vos Ch, Kitchin, Floyd LJJ
[2017] EWCA Civ 226
England and Wales
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581429
The court considered the compatibility of Stamp Duty Reserve Tax with Community law.
Marcus Smith J
[2017] EWHC 677 (Ch)
England and Wales
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581334
T-117/15, [2017] EUECJ T-117/15
European
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581154
T-152/12, [2017] EUECJ T-152/12 – CO
European
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581149
C-515/16, [2017] EUECJ C-515/16 – CO
European
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581153
T-299/13, [2017] EUECJ T-299/13 – CO
European
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581151
ECJ (Judgment) Failure to comply with a judgment of the Court of Justice on the ground that a Member State has failed to fulfill its obligations’ – Opposition – Decision on the winding-up of the penalty payment – Repeal of the national measure at issue – Date of cessation of default
ECLI:EU:T:2017:225, [2017] EUECJ T-733/15
European
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581156
ECJ (Justice and Home Affairs Justice and Home Affairs Approximation of Laws – Judgment) References for a preliminary ruling – Judicial cooperation in criminal matters – Directive 2012/13/EU – Right to information in criminal proceedings – Right to be informed about the charge – Service of a penalty order – Procedures – Mandatory appointment of person authorised to accept service – Non-resident accused person with no fixed place of residence – Period for lodging an objection running from service on the person authorised to accept service
ECLI:EU:C:2017:228, [2017] EUECJ C-124/16
European
Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581055
ECJ (Area of Freedom, Security and Justice : Judicial Cooperation In Civil Matters Area of Freedom, Security and Justice : Judicial Cooperation In Civil Matters – Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Judicial cooperation in civil matters – Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 – Temporal and material scope- Civil and commercial matters – Enforcement proceedings relating to the recovery of an unpaid public parking debt – Included – Concept of ‘court’ – Notary who has issued a writ of execution based on an ‘authentic document’
ECLI:EU:C:2017:193, [2017] EUECJ C-551/15
European
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.580719
ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Direct taxation – Companies of different Member States – Common system of taxation – Merger by acquisition – Prior approval of the tax authority – Directive 90/434/EEC – Article 11(1)(a) – Tax evasion or avoidance – Freedom of establishment
ECLI:EU:C:2017:177, [2017] EUECJ C-14/16
European
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.580701
T-128/19, [2020] EUECJ T-128/19_CO
European
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.654695
T-653/18, [2020] EUECJ T-653/18
European
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.654845
T-120/14, [2020] EUECJ T-120/14DEP_CO
European
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.654920
C-688/18, [2020] EUECJ C-688/18
European
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.654825
T-180/19, [2020] EUECJ T-180/19_CO
European
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.654851
T-353/19, [2020] EUECJ T-353/19
European
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.654886
T-654/18, [2020] EUECJ T-654/18
European
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.654846
The court considered a country guidance determination.
Lord Neiberger MR, Maurice Kay LJ VP, Richards J
[2011] EWCA Civ 1536
England and Wales
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.449985
T-734/17, [2020] EUECJ T-734/17
European
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.654947
T-121/14, [2020] EUECJ T-121/14DEP_CO
European
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.654921
T-835/17, [2020] EUECJ T-835/17
European
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.654880
C-217/19, [2020] EUECJ C-217/19
European
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.654969
T-547/18, [2020] EUECJ T-547/18
European
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.654936
C-29/19, [2020] EUECJ C-29/19
European
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.654678
T-60/19, [2020] EUECJ T-60/19_CO
European
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.654872
C-25/19, [2020] EUECJ C-25/19
European
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.654770
T-80/19, [2020] EUECJ T-80/19
European
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.654876
C-670/19, [2020] EUECJ C-670/19_CO
European
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.654778
C-558/18, [2020] EUECJ C-558/18
European
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.654906
T-914/16, [2020] EUECJ T-914/16DEP_CO
European
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.654725
T-751/18, [2020] EUECJ T-751/18_CO
European
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.654688
C-605/19, [2020] EUECJ C-605/19P(R)_CO
European
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.654697
This appeal is concerned with the lawfulness of statutory restrictions on data protection rights, in the context of immigration. By paragraph 4 of Schedule 2 to the Data Protection Act 2018 (‘DPA 2018’) Parliament enacted ‘the Immigration Exemption’. This disapplies some data protection rights where their application would be likely to prejudice immigration control.
Lord Justice Underhill
(Vice-President of the Court of Appeal (Civil Division))
Lord Justice Singh
And
Lord Justice Warby
[2021] EWCA Civ 800, [2021] 1 WLR 3611, [2021] WLR(D) 303
Data Protection Act 2018, General Data Protection Regulation, Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union
England and Wales
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.662794
ECJ Judgment Of The Court – Appeal – Dumping – Regulation (EC) No 172/2008 – Imports of ferro-silicon originating in China, Egypt, Kazakhstan, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Russia – Partial interim review – Regulation (EC) No 384/96 – Article 3(7) – Known factors – Injury to the European Union industry – Causal link
C-10/12, [2013] EUECJ C-10/12
European
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.519492
ECJ Judgment – Public service – Officials – Promotion year 2013 – Decision not to promote the applicant – Article 45, paragraph 1, of the Statute – Comparison of merits
F-81/14, [2015] EUECJ F-81/14, ECLI:EU:F:2015:125
European
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.554135
ECFI Commercial Policy – Dumping – Imports of silico-manganese originating in China and Kazakhstan – Action for annulment – Export price – Comparison between export price and normal value – Calculation of the undercutting margin – Non-contractual liability
Czucz R P
T-107/08, [2011] EUECJ T-107/08
European
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.449372
The plaintiff complained that the respondent had described its drink ‘Babycham’ as a champagne perry, which it said was a misuse of the appellation ‘champagne’.
Held: The court considered the effect of European legislation on the law of England and Wales. Lord Denning MR said: ‘But when we come to matters with a European element, the treaty is like an incoming tide. It flows into the estuaries and up the rivers. It cannot be held back. Parliament has decreed that the treaty is henceforward to be part of our law. It is equal in force to any statute.’ Community instruments are not expressed against the background of English canons of construction and should not be so construed.
Lord Denning MR
[1974] 1 Ch 401, [1974] 3 WLR 202, [1974] 2 All ER 1226
England and Wales
Mentioned – 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 . .
Cited – Regina v Her Majesty’s Treasury, Ex parte Smedley CA 19-Dec-1984
The applicant sought, as a taxpayer, to object to the proposed payment of andpound;121m to the European Community without an Appropriation Act, but under an Order in Council. The claim was that a draft Order in Council laid by the Treasury before . .
Cited – James Buchanan and Company Ltd v Babco Forwarding and Shipping (UK) Ltd CA 2-Dec-1976
A trailer full of whisky had been stolen. Four fifths of its retail value was excise duty. Because it was to have been exported, duty had not been paid. On the theft the owners had had to pay the duty. The owners sued the carriers for the loss, but . .
Cited – Vehicle Inspectorate v Bruce Cook Road Planing Ltd and Another Admn 18-Feb-1998
The transport of road maintenance vehicles from one site to another was not itself part of highway maintenance and a tachograph was required. . .
Cited – Vodafone v Revenue and Customs SCIT 24-May-2005
. .
Cited – Vehicle and Operator Services Agency v Jones (Nell) Admn 5-Oct-2005
The Agency appealed against dismissal of its allegation that the defendant had wrongfully withdrawn his tachograph record. He had lifted the top of the tachograph which had the effect if disengaging the marker without actually removing the record . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.200469
Lord Hodge, Deputy President, Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lord Briggs, Lord Leggatt, Lord Burrows
[2021] UKSC 44, [2021] WLR(D) 536, [2022] ICR 146, 2021 SLT 1453, 2021 GWD 34-443, 2021 SCLR 655
Scotland
Updated: 11 February 2022; Ref: scu.668489