Tag: European

Portugal v Commission T-733/15: ECFI 28 Mar 2017

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

Citations:

ECLI:EU:T:2017:225, [2017] EUECJ T-733/15

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581156

Tranca, Reiter and Opria: ECJ 22 Mar 2017

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

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2017:228, [2017] EUECJ C-124/16

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581055

Pula Parking doo v Sven Klaus Tederahn: ECJ 9 Mar 2017

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’

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2017:193, [2017] EUECJ C-551/15

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.580719

Euro Park Service v Ministre des Finances et des Comptes publics: ECJ 8 Mar 2017

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

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2017:177, [2017] EUECJ C-14/16

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.580701

France v Commission T-366/13: ECFI 1 Mar 2017

ECJ (Judgment) State aid – Maritime cabotage – Aid implemented by France in favor of the Societe Nationale Maritime Corse Mediterranee (SNCM) and Compagnie Meridionale de Navigation – Service of general economic interest – Compensation for a complementary service Basis to cover peak periods during the tourist season – Decision declaring aid to be incompatible with the internal market – Concept of State aid – Advantage – Altmark judgment

Citations:

ECLI:EU:T:2017:135, [2017] EUECJ T-366/13

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European, Transport

Updated: 09 February 2022; Ref: scu.579675

Glencore Cereales France v Etablissement national des produits de l’agriculture et de la mer: ECJ 2 Mar 2017

ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 – Protection of the European Union’s financial interests – Article 3 – Regulation (EEC) No 3665/87 – Article 11 – Recovery of an export refund unduly granted – Regulation (EEC) No 3002/92 – Article 5a – Security wrongly released – Interest due – Limitation period – Point from which time begins to run – Interruption of the period – Maximum limit – Longer period – Whether applicable

Citations:

C-584/15, [2017] EUECJ C-584/15, ECLI:EU:C:2017:160

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 09 February 2022; Ref: scu.579676

Menini and Rampanelli v Banco Popolare – Societa Cooperativa: ECJ 16 Feb 2017

ECJ (Advocate Generals Opinion) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Appeal against an order for payment – Directive 2008/52/EC – Mediation in civil and commercial matters – Article 1(2) – Scope – Directive 2013/11/EU – Alternative dispute resolution for consumer disputes – Article 1 – Obligation on the consumer to use a mediation procedure before referring the matter to a judicial body – Article 2 – Scope – Article 8(b) – Mandatory assistance of a lawyer – Article 9(2)(a) – Penalties for withdrawal from a mediation procedure

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2017:132, [2017] EUECJ C-75/16 – O

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 09 February 2022; Ref: scu.579662

Jingao Solar and Others v Council T-157/14: ECFI 28 Feb 2017

(Judgment) Dumping – Imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (cells) originating in or consigned from China – Definitive anti-dumping duty – Undertakings – Action for annulment – Interest in bringing proceedings – Admissibility -Exporting country – Scope of the investigation – Sampling – Normal value – Definition of the product concerned – Time limit for the adoption of a decision on a market economy treatment claim – Temporal application of new provisions – Injury – Causal link

Citations:

T-157/14, [2017] EUECJ T-157/14

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 09 February 2022; Ref: scu.579656

Commission v Czech Republic (Freedom of Movement for Workers – Judgment) French Text: ECJ 15 Mar 2018

State failure – Article 49 TFEU – Freedom of establishment – Notaries – Condition of nationality – Article 51 TFEU – Participation in the exercise of public authority

Citations:

C-575/16, [2018] EUECJ C-575/16, ECLI:EU:C:2018:186

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Legal Professions

Updated: 06 February 2022; Ref: scu.606489

Cali Esprou (Environment – Packaging and Packaging Waste – Judgment): ECJ 15 Mar 2018

Reference for a preliminary ruling ? Directive 94/62/EC ? Packaging and packaging waste ? Recovery and recycling of waste ? National environmental fund contribution ? National marketing of packaged products and their packaging, without alteration ? ‘Polluter-pays’ principle ? Status of polluter

Citations:

C-104/17, [2018] EUECJ C-104/17, ECLI:EU:C:2018:188

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Environment

Updated: 06 February 2022; Ref: scu.606486

Reunion Europeenne Sa and Others v Spliethoff’s Bevrachtingskantoor Bv and Another: ECJ 27 Oct 1998

French consignees of a shipment of peaches sued in France the Australian issuers of the bill of laiding under which the goods were carried (a contract claim) and the Dutch carriers and master of the ship in which they were carried (tort claims).
Held: There was no jurisdiction under Article 6(1) because none of the defendants were domiciled in France. After referring to Kalfelis: ‘It follows that two claims in one action for compensation directed against different defendants and based in one instance on contractual liability and in the other on liability in tort or delict cannot be regarded as connected.’
Europa An action by which the consignee of goods found to be damaged on completion of a transport operation by sea and then by land, or by which his insurer who has been subrogated to his rights after compensating him, seeks redress for the damage suffered, relying on the bill of lading covering the maritime transport, not against the person who issued that document on his headed paper but against the person whom the plaintiff considers to be the actual maritime carrier, does not fall within the scope of matters relating to a contract within the meaning of Article 5, point 1, of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters, as amended by the Convention of 9 October 1978 on the Accession of the Kingdom of Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, by the Convention of 25 October 1982 on the Accession of the Hellenic Republic and by the Convention of 26 May 1989 on the Accession of the Kingdom of Spain and the Portuguese Republic, since the bill of lading in question does not disclose any contractual relationship freely entered into between the consignee and the defendant. Such an action is, however, a matter relating to tort, delict or quasi-delict within the meaning of Article 5, point 3, of that Convention, since that concept covers all actions which seek to establish the liability of a defendant and are not related to matters of contract within the meaning of Article 5, point 1. As regards determining the `place where the harmful event occurred’ within the meaning of Article 5, point 3, the place where the consignee, on completion of a transport operation by sea and then by land, merely discovered the existence of the damage to the goods delivered to him cannot serve to determine that place. Whilst it is true that the abovementioned concept may cover both the place where the damage occurred and the place of the event giving rise to it, the place where the damage arose can, in the circumstances described, only be the place where the maritime carrier was to deliver the goods. Article 6, point 1, of the Convention of 27 September 1968 must be interpreted as meaning that a defendant domiciled in a Contracting State cannot, on the basis of that provision, be sued in another Contracting State before a court seised of an action against a co-defendant not domiciled in a Contracting State on the ground that the dispute is indivisible rather than merely displaying a connection. The objective of legal certainty pursued by the Convention would not be attained if the fact that a court in a Contracting State had accepted jurisdiction as regards one of the defendants not domiciled in a Contracting State made it possible to bring another defendant, domiciled in a Contracting State, before that same court in cases other than those envisaged by the Convention, thereby depriving him of the benefit of the protective rules laid down by it.

Citations:

Times 16-Nov-1998, C-51/97, [1998] ECR I-6511, [1998] EUECJ C-51/97

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Brussels Convention on Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters 1968

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – Mazur Media Limited and Another v Mazur Media Gmbh in Others ChD 8-Jul-2004
Proceedings were brought in England. The respondents sought a stay, saying the company was subject to insolvency proceedings in Germany.
Held: Our domestic insolvency law was not applicable to foreign proceedings, and so could not be used to . .
Cited – Shahar v Tsitsekkos and others ChD 17-Nov-2004
The defendant wished to make a claim against another party outside the jurisdiction and was granted permission to serve documents which were headed ‘defence and counterclaim’. The proposed defendant argued that such a document could be served in . .
Cited – Casio Computer Co Ltd v Sayo and others CA 11-Apr-2001
The court was asked whether a constructive trust claim based on dishonest assistance is a matter ‘relating to tort, delict or quasi delict’ for the purpose of Article 5(3) of the Brussels Convention?
Held: A constructive trust claim based upon . .
Cited – AMT Futures Ltd v Marzillier and Others SC 1-Mar-2017
AMT entered into many financial services agreements providing for exclusive EW jurisdiction. It now sought to restrain the defendant German lawyers from encouraging litigation in Germany saying that induced breaches of the contracts. It also sought . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Transport, Jurisdiction

Updated: 03 February 2022; Ref: scu.88750

Universal Music International Holding BV v Schilling and others: ECJ 16 Jun 2016

ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Judicial cooperation in civil matters – Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 – Special jurisdiction – Article 5(3) – Tort, delict or quasi-delict – Harmful event – Lawyer’s negligence in drafting the contract – Place where the harmful event occurred

Citations:

C-12/15, [2016] EUECJ C-12/15, ECLI:EU:C:2016:449

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 5(3)

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – AMT Futures Ltd v Marzillier and Others SC 1-Mar-2017
AMT entered into many financial services agreements providing for exclusive EW jurisdiction. It now sought to restrain the defendant German lawyers from encouraging litigation in Germany saying that induced breaches of the contracts. It also sought . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence

Updated: 03 February 2022; Ref: scu.565636

Novar v EUIPO: ECFI 17 Feb 2017

ECJ (Judgment) Non-contractual liability – Proof of the existence, validity and scope of protection of the earlier mark – International registration designating the European Union – Decision rejecting the opposition in the absence of proof of the earlier right – Rule 19(2)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 – Revision of the decision – Article 62(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 – Damage consisting in the lawyers’ fees – Causal link

Citations:

ECLI:EU:T:2017:99, [2017] EUECJ T-726/14

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 31 January 2022; Ref: scu.575274

Newby Foods Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Food Standards Agency: CA 25 May 2017

Appeal by the Food Standards Agency against a decision in which he allowed in part a claim for judicial review by Newby Foods Limited and held, inter alia, that certain chicken and pork products manufactured by Newby should not be classified as mechanically separated meat.

Judges:

Lloyd Jones, Beatson, Moylan LJJ

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 400

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

EU Regulation No. 853/2004

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Newby Foods Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Food Standards Agency Admn 16-Jul-2013
. .
See Also – Newby Foods Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Food Standards Agency (No 2) Admn 26-Jul-2013
. .
See Also – Newby Foods Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Food Standards Agency (No 4) Admn 22-Nov-2013
The claimant sought an order to allow it to continue to produce meat products for sale and an associated costs award. . .
See Also – Newby Foods Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Food Standards Agency and Others Admn 24-Oct-2013
. .
See Also – Newby Foods Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Food Standards Agency (No 7) Admn 7-May-2014
. .
See Also – Newby Foods Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Food Standards Agency and Another Admn 21-May-2014
. .
See Also – Newby Foods Ltd v Food Standards Agency ECJ 16-Oct-2014
ECJ Judgment – Protection of health – Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 – Hygiene rules for food of animal origin – Annex I, points 1.14 and 1.15 – Concepts of ‘mechanically separated meat’ and ‘meat preparations’ – . .
See Also – Newby Foods Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Food Standards Agency Admn 23-Mar-2016
Application of principles identified by ECJ on reference as to to the process of separating fresh meat from flesh bearing bones of pork and from chicken carcasses carried out by Newby. . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Newby Foods Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Food Standards Agency SC 3-Apr-2019
The parties disputed the classification and labelling of mechanically separated meats (‘MSM’) under EU law. The ECJ had imposed a moratorium on certain products. Newby challenged that unsuccessfully, but now Newby appealed to the Supreme Court on . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer, European

Updated: 29 January 2022; Ref: scu.584529

Mamoli Robinetteria v Commission: ECJ 26 Jan 2017

ECJ (Judgment) Appeals – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Belgian, German, French, Italian, Dutch and Austrian markets for sanitary installations for bathrooms – Coordination of sales prices and exchange of sensitive commercial information – Leniency program – Regulation (EC) No 1 / 2003 – Article 23 (2) – Ceiling of 10% of turnover – Exercise of unlimited jurisdiction

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2017:50, [2017] EUECJ C-619/13

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EC) No 1/2003

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 29 January 2022; Ref: scu.573811

Villeroy and Boch, Austria v Commission: ECJ 26 Jan 2017

ECJ (Judgment) Appeal – Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Bathroom fittings and fixtures markets of Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Austria – Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area – Price coordination and exchange of sensitive business information – Single infringement – Proof – Fines – Unlimited jurisdiction – Reasonable time – Proportionality

Citations:

C-626/13, [2017] EUECJ C-626/13

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 29 January 2022; Ref: scu.573821

Masco and Others v Commission: ECJ 26 Jan 2017

(Judgment) Appeal – Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Bathroom fittings and fixtures markets of Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Austria – Coordination of selling prices and exchange of sensitive business information — Single and continuous infringement – Obligation to state reasons

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2017:63, [2017] EUECJ C-614/13

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 29 January 2022; Ref: scu.573812

Maxcom v Chin Haur Indonesia: ECJ 26 Jan 2017

ECJ (Judgment) Appeal – Dumping – Implementing Regulation (EU) No 501/2013 – Imports of bicycles consigned from Indonesia, Malaysia, Sri Lanka and Tunisia – Extension to such imports of the definitive anti-dumping duty imposed on imports of bicycles originating in China – Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 – Article 13 – Circumvention – Article 18 – Lack of cooperation – Evidence – Body of consistent evidence – Contradictory reasoning – Inadequate statement of reasons – Breach of procedural rights

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2017:62, [2017] EUECJ C-247/15

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 29 January 2022; Ref: scu.573813

Forgital Italy v Council: ECJ 14 Jul 2015

ECJ Appeal – Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Action for annulment – Fourth subparagraph of Article 263 TFEU – Right to bring proceedings – Locus standi – Customs rules amending the conditions Of tariff suspension – Possible to bring proceedings before the national courts

Citations:

C-84/14, [2015] EUECJ C-84/14

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

TFEU 263

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 29 January 2022; Ref: scu.573767

Sjelle Autogenbrug I/S v Skatteministeriet: ECJ 18 Jan 2017

ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Taxation – Value added tax — Directive 2006/112/EC – Special scheme for taxing the profit margin – Concept of ‘second-hand goods’ – Sales of parts removed from end-of-life vehicles

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2017:20, [2017] EUECJ C-471/15

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

European

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.573265

Plaumann v Commission EEC: ECJ 21 Dec 1962

ECJ The declaration of the federal minister of finance set out above and produced by the applicant in fact removes the foundation from the statement in the second paragraph of the grounds of the order of 31 August 1962. This statement must accordingly be disregarded for the purpose of the decision on the present application.
1. The applicant has stated that it would be impossible to pass on to its customers the excess customs duty which it would have to pay if its application were dismissed . This is contested by the defendant.
Having regard to the relatively small increase in the selling price of clementines in this event, and taking account of commercial practices and the behaviour of consumers in shopping at the end of the year – circumstances which it may be assumed are known to the court – the arguments of the applicant do not appear to be sufficiently convincing.
2. The applicant has further stated that during the period in which it alleges the interim measure would have its effects, that is to say, from 21 to 31 december 1962, it would still take approximately one sixth of its total imports of clementines since 31 august 1962. It has further argued that the additional costs which this increase in customs duties would involve in respect of imports made during the last eleven days of the year 1962 would amount to some 7000 dm. This claim is disputed by the defendant.
It is not necessary to go into the question whether the applicant’s arguments are correct, for if they were, quite apart from the considerations mentioned at 1. Above, the interim measure asked for by the applicant would procure for it only a relatively small benefit.
3. As already set out in the order of 31 august 1962, to which reference is made, the interim measure asked for would on the contrary have far-reaching legal effects and could be justified only by wholly exceptional circumstances and if it were highly likely that the applicant would otherwise suffer serious damage, but it has not been proved that this would be so.
4. There is a further point to be made . The defendant, as it did in its observations on the first application, even now insists, in support of its conclusions for the dismissal of the application for the adoption of the interim measure, that it is improbable that the main application will be found to be either admissible or well-founded.
This argument misconceives the purely protective nature of interim measures, which would in any event apply in the present case. The application for the adoption of an interim measure is not intended to prejudge the decision in the main action and the arguments on inadmissibility or absence of grounds in the main action are irrelevant and must be dismissed.

Citations:

[1962] EUECJ C-25/62R

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Citing:

Order – Plaumann v Commission EEC (Order) ECJ 31-Aug-1962
ECJ (Order) The applicant bases its application on the claim that, even if in the main action the court were to annul the refusal of the commission to grant to the federal republic of germany an import quota for . .

Cited by:

See Also – Plaumann v Commission EEC ECJ 15-Jul-1963
ECJ (Judgment) 1. A measure must be considered as a decision if it refers to a particular person and binds that person alone.
2. The words and the natural meaning of the second paragraph of article 173 of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.566771

David Baxendale Ltd v Revenue and Customs: CA 31 Jul 2009

The court was asked as to the correct VAT treatment to be applied to the sale to members of the public of what is described as the LighterLife weight loss programme. The taxpayer appealed against a finding that services of dietary products and counselling support were in law one supply.
Held: The appeal failed.

Judges:

Lord Justice Patten

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 831, [2009] STI 2348, [2009] BVC 663, [2009] STC 2578

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

At FTTTx – David Baxendale Ltd v Revenue and Customs VDT 30-Jul-2008
VDT VAT – Supply of services – Whether supplied for consideration – Dietary foodpacks supplied together with counselling support, payment made for foodpacks – Whether consideration given for counselling support – . .
At ChD – HM Revenue and Customs v David Baxendale Ltd ChD 5-Feb-2009
The taxpayer provided slimming schemes in two parts, counselling support and supplies of dietary products. The parties disputed the treatement of the services for VAT purposes. The revenue argued there was one service, and the taxpayer that there . .

Cited by:

At CA – Baxendale Ltd and Another v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 4-Jul-2013
FTTTx PROCEDURE – striking out of proceedings – whether appellants’ case had a reasonable prospect of succeeding – abuse of process – whether Court of Appeal decision in David Baxendale was per incuriam or . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT, European, Constitutional

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.368592

Totel Ltd v Revenue and Customs: CA 20 Dec 2016

Claim that the UK’s VAT prepayments rule infringes European law.

Arden, Irwin, Henderson LJJ
[2016] EWCA Civ 1310, [2016] WLR(D) 689, [2017] BVC 3, [2017] STC 540, [2017] 1 WLR 2313
Bailii, WLRD
England and Wales
Cited by:
At CA – Totel Ltd v Revenue and Customs SC 26-Jul-2018
The taxpayer challenged the ‘pay first’ rule under VAT which required them, before challenging a VAT assessment, first to deposit the VAT said to be due under the assessment.
Held: The appeal failed. There had not been shown any true . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT, European

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572744

Lauzikas v The Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 16 Dec 2016

The claimant, an EU citizen, challenged the Home Secretary’s service upon him of a notice preventing him from working in the United Kingdom while he was on bail awaiting the resolution of an earlier claim for judicial review and determination of his appeal against a decision by the Home Secretary to deport him.
Held: The claim for judicial review was refused.

Thirlwall DBE J
[2016] EWHC 3215 (Admin), [2016] WLR(D) 681
Bailii, WLRD
England and Wales

Immigration, European

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572719

Vervloet and Others v Ministerraad: ECJ 21 Dec 2016

Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – State aid – Aid implemented by the Kingdom of Belgium in favor of the financial cooperative societies of the ARCO group – Deposit insurance schemes – Directive 94/19 / EC – Scope of application – Guarantee scheme protecting The shareholdings of associates, natural persons, of cooperative companies active in the financial sector – Excluded – Articles 107 and 108 TFEU – Commission decision declaring aid incompatible with the internal market

C-76/15, [2016] EUECJ C-76/15
Bailii
European

European

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572621

Vieira De Azevedo and Others: ECJ 15 Dec 2016

ECJ Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles and enforcement of the obligation to insure against such liability – Directive 2000/26/EC – Article 4(5) – Insurance undertaking – Claims representative – Sufficient powers of representation – Notifications of proceedings before the courts

ECLI:EU:C:2016:957, [2016] EUECJ C-558/15
Bailii
European

European

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572622

TDC A/S v Teleklagenaevnet, Erhvervs-og Vaekstministeriet: ECJ 21 Dec 2016

ECJ Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Electronic communications networks and services – Directive 2002/22 / EC – Universal service – Articles 12 and 13 – Calculation of the cost of universal service obligations – Article 32 – Compensation of costs relating to compulsory additional services – Direct effect – Article 107 (1) and Article 108 (3) TFEU – Maritime safety and emergency services in Denmark and Greenland – National legislation – Submission of an application for compensation for the costs of additional mandatory services – Three months – Principles of equivalence and effectiveness

C-327/15, [2016] EUECJ C-327/15
Bailii
European

European

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572616

Ucar and Kilic v Land Berlin: ECJ 21 Dec 2016

Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – EEC-Turkey Association Agreement – Decision No 1/80 – Article 7, first paragraph – Right of residence of members of the family of a Turkish worker belonging to the regular employment market of a Member State Member – Conditions – Absence of necessity for the Turkish worker to belong to the regular employment market during the first three years of the family member’s stay

C-508/15, [2016] EUECJ C-508/15
Bailii
European

European

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572620

Depesme and Kerrou v Ministre de l’Enseignement superieur et de la Recherche: ECJ 15 Dec 2016

ECJ Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Freedom of movement of persons – Worker’s rights – Equal treatment – Social advantages – Financial aid for the pursuit of higher education studies – Requirement of a parent-child relationship – Concept of ‘child’ – Child of a spouse or registered partner – Contribution towards the maintenance of that child

ECLI:EU:C:2016:955, [2016] EUECJ C-401/15
Bailii
European

European

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572578

Hungary v Commission – C-644/15: ECJ 15 Dec 2016

ECJ Judgment – Appeal – Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 – Common organization of the markets in the agricultural sector – Fruit and vegetables sector – Article 103e – National financial aid to producer organizations in the fruit and vegetables sector – EC) No 1580/2007 – Article 97 – Commission Decision on the reimbursement by the European Union of national financial aid granted by Hungary to producer organizations

ECLI:EU:C:2016:956, [2016] EUECJ C-644/15
Bailii
European

European

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572585

Council v Belgium, Front Polisario and Others: ECJ 21 Dec 2016

ECJ Judgment – Appeal – External relations – Agreement between the European Union and the Kingdom of Morocco concerning liberalization measures in agriculture and fisheries – Decision approving the conclusion of an international agreement – Action for annulment – Admissibility – Quality for Act – Territorial application of the Agreement – Interpretation of the Agreement – Principle of self-determination – Principle of the relative effect of the treatie

C-104/16, [2016] EUECJ C-104/16
Bailii
European

European

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572576

Petraitis v Commission: ECJ 24 Nov 2016

ECJ (Order) Appeal – Article 181 of the Procedural Rules of Court – failure to act – Lack of commitment by the European Commission infringement proceedings against a Member State – Request for injunctions against the Commission – manifest inadmissibility

ECLI:EU:C:2016:904, [2016] EUECJ C-137/16 – CO
Bailii
European

European

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572314

Re Portman Insurance Plc: ChD 23 Nov 2016

Part 8 claim form for certification under Article 25(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2157/2001 on the Statute for a European Company (SE) (‘the SE Regulation’), which came into effect on 8 October 2001, conclusively attesting to the completion of pre-merger acts and formalities.

Jones Reg
[2016] EWHC 2994 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales

Company, European

Updated: 26 January 2022; Ref: scu.571986

Ognyanov: ECJ 8 Nov 2016

ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Judicial cooperation in criminal matters – Framework Decision 2008/909/JHA – Article 17 – Law governing the enforcement of a sentence – Interpretation of a national rule of the executing State providing for reduction of a custodial sentence on account of work carried out by the sentenced person while detained in the issuing State – Legal effects of framework decisions – Obligation to interpret national law in conformity with EU law)

ECLI:EU:C:2016:835, [2016] EUECJ C-554/14, [2016] WLR(D) 580
Bailii, WLRD
European

European

Updated: 25 January 2022; Ref: scu.571279

The Football Association Premier League Ltd v Luxton: CA 9 Nov 2016

The defendant pub owner appealed against judgment given for copyright infringement. He had been relaying externally sourced TV of football matches. The images included the claimant’s logo, for which judgment was given. The defendant appealed under European law.
Held: The agreements under which the programme rights were distributed did not breach EU law. The appeal failed.

Tomlinson, Floyd LJJ
[2016] EWCA Civ 1097
Bailii
TFEU 56 101
England and Wales

Intellectual Property, European

Updated: 25 January 2022; Ref: scu.571223

Crown Equipment (Suzhou) And Crown Gabelstapler v Council (Judgment): ECFI 18 Oct 2016

Dumping ? Importation of hand pallet trucks and their essential parts originating in China ? Definitive anti-dumping duty ? Action for annulment ? Direct concern ? Individual concern ? Admissibility ? Determination of normal value ? Article 2(7)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 ? ‘Lesser duty’ rule ? Article 9(4) of Regulation No 1225/2009 ? Obligation to state reasons

T-351/13, [2016] EUECJ T-351/13, ECLI:EU:T:2016:616
Bailii
European

Customs and Excise

Updated: 25 January 2022; Ref: scu.570129

Eveready Battery Company V Euipo – Hussain And Others (Power Edge) (Judgment): ECFI 18 Oct 2016

EU trade mark ? Opposition proceedings ? Application for the EU figurative mark POWER EDGE ? Earlier EU word mark EDGE ? Relative ground for refusal ? Likelihood of confusion ? Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 ? Genuine use of the earlier mark ? Article 15(1) and 42(2) of Regulation No 207/2009

T-824/14, [2016] EUECJ T-824/14, ECLI:EU:T:2016:614
Bailii
European

Intellectual Property

Updated: 25 January 2022; Ref: scu.570130

Commission v Italy (Judgment): ECJ 11 Oct 2016

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Directive 2004/80/EC – Article 12(2) – National compensation schemes for victims of violent intentional crime guaranteeing fair and appropriate compensation – National scheme not covering all violent intentional crimes committed on the national territory

C-601/14, [2016] EUECJ C-601/14
Bailii
European

Personal Injury

Updated: 25 January 2022; Ref: scu.570128

Jaber v Council: ECFI 26 Oct 2016

ECJ Judgment – Common Foreign and Security Policy – Restrictive measures against Syria – Freezing of funds – Cancellation of prior acts by a judgment of the Court – New actions include the applicant’s name in the list – Action for annulment – Article 76 d) of the Rules of procedure – Content of the application – Admissibility – Obligation to state reasons – Burden of proof – Right to property – corporate Freedom

ECLI: EU: T: 2016 629, [2016] EUECJ T-154/15
Bailii
European

European

Updated: 24 January 2022; Ref: scu.570587

EMA v Pari Pharma: ECJ 18 Oct 2016

ECJ Order – Appeal – Order for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure challenged before the General Court – Change in circumstances – Access to documents – Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 – Documents held by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) submitted as part of an application for authorisation to place a medicinal product on the market – Decision to grant a third party access to the documents

ECLI:EU:C:2016:775, [2016] EUECJ C-406/16 – CO
Bailii
European

European

Updated: 24 January 2022; Ref: scu.570582

Kaddour v Council: ECFI 26 Oct 2016

ECJ Judgment – Common Foreign and Security Policy – Restrictive measures against Syria – Freezing of funds – Cancellation of prior acts by a judgment of the Court – New actions include the applicant’s name in the list – Action for annulment – Article 76 d) of the Rules of procedure – Content of the application – Admissibility – Obligation to state reasons – Burden of proof – Right to property – corporate Freedom

T-155/15, [2016] EUECJ T-155/15
Bailii
European

European

Updated: 24 January 2022; Ref: scu.570588

Restivo (EEA – Prisoner Transfer) Italy: UTIAC 9 Sep 2016

UTIAC The European Framework Decision 2008/909/JHA has replaced the framework previously set out in the Council of Europe Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons, itself supplemented by the Protocol of 18 December 1997, to provide the framework within which a request may be made to another Member State for the transfer of an EEA national sentenced in the United Kingdom to serve that sentence in his own country. In the United Kingdom context, it is a precondition for making a transfer request that there be in place a deportation order. A decision to make a deportation order is not a decision to transfer a serving prisoner to another Member State to serve his prison there and so in any appeal against a decision to make a deportation order the Tribunal is not concerned with whether there is any legal impediment to such a transfer taking place.
Where the personal conduct of a person represents a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat affecting one of the fundamental interests of society, the fact that such threat is managed while that person serves his or her prison sentence is not itself material to the assessment of the threat he or she poses. The threat exists, whether or not it cannot generate further offending simply because the person concerned, being imprisoned, has significantly less opportunity to commit further criminal offences.

[2016] UKUT 449 (IAC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Immigration, European

Updated: 24 January 2022; Ref: scu.570466

TMD Gesellschaft fur transfusionsmedizinische Dienste mbH v Finanzamt Kassel II – Hofgeismar: ECJ 5 Oct 2016

ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Taxation – Value added tax – Directive 2006/112/EC – Exemptions for certain activities in the public interest – Article 132(1)(d) – Supplies of human organs, blood and milk – Scope – Plasma of human blood transformed and used for industrial purposes

C-412/15, [2016] EUECJ C-412/15
Bailii
European

European

Updated: 23 January 2022; Ref: scu.569912

Commission v Portugal C-583/15: ECJ 5 Oct 2016

(Judgment) Failure to fulfill obligations – Transport policy – Regulation (EC) No 1071/2009 – Road transport operator – Simplification and administrative cooperation – Article 16, paragraphs 1 and 5 – national electronic register of road transport undertakings – Interconnecting registers national electronic

C-583/15, [2016] EUECJ C-583/15
Bailii
European

European

Updated: 23 January 2022; Ref: scu.569905

Alpex Pharma v EUIPO – Astex Pharmaceuticals (Astex): ECFI 30 Sep 2016

No real use of Earlier mark

ECJ (Judgment) EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU word mark ASTEX – Earlier EU word mark ALPEX – No genuine use of the earlier mark – Article 42(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 – Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 – Article 76(1) of Regulation No 207/2009

M. van der Woude, P
T-355/15, [2016] EUECJ T-355/15, ECLI:EU:T:2016:591
Bailii
European

European, Intellectual Property

Updated: 23 January 2022; Ref: scu.569900

Lidl Stiftung v EUIPO – Horno Del Espinar (Castello): ECFI 4 Oct 2016

ECJ (Judgment) EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the EU word mark Castello – Earlier national and EU figurative marks Castello – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009

ECLI:EU:T:2016:594, [2016] EUECJ T-549/14
Bailii
Regulation (EC) No 207/2009
European

European, Intellectual Property

Updated: 23 January 2022; Ref: scu.569910

F Hoffmann-La Roche AG v Accord Healthcare OU: ECJ 5 Oct 2016

ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Industrial and commercial property – Patent – Supplementary protection certificate – Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 – Article 21(2) – Transitional provisions – Certificate granted in accordance with the national legislation of a Member State prior to its accession to the European Union – Interpretation of Article 21(2) – Duration of validity of the certificate – Validity of Article 21(2) – Adjustment to secondary legislation resulting directly from the Act of Accession – Lack of jurisdiction of the Court

C-572/15, [2016] EUECJ C-572/15
Bailii
European

European, Intellectual Property

Updated: 23 January 2022; Ref: scu.569908

Danfoss And Sauer-Danfoss: ECJ 20 Oct 2011

ECJ Indirect taxes – Excise duties on mineral oils – Incompatibility with European Union law – Non-repayment of excise duty to purchasers of goods to whom the excise duty has been passed on

[2011] EUECJ C-94/10, ECLI:EU:C:2011:674
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Danfoss And Sauer-Danfoss ECJ 24-Mar-2011
ECJ Indirect taxation – Excise duty levied in breach of national law of the Union – Impact of tax by the taxpayer on its customers – Requests for refund and / or damages against the Crown by the person who has . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Taxes – Other

Updated: 23 January 2022; Ref: scu.569891

Universal Protein Supplements v EUIPO (Representation D’Un Culturiste): ECFI 29 Sep 2016

ECJ (Judgment) EU trade mark – Application for registration of an EU figurative mark representing a body-builder – Absolute grounds for refusal – Descriptive character – Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009

T-335/15, [2016] EUECJ T-335/15
Bailii
Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 7(1)(c)
European

European, Intellectual Property

Updated: 23 January 2022; Ref: scu.569644

United Kingdom v Commission T-437/14: ECFI 28 Sep 2016

ECJ (Judgment) EAGGF, Guarantee Section – EAGF and EAFRD – Expenditure excluded from financing – Integrated administration and control system – Reductions and exclusions where the rules on cross-compliance are not observed – Flat-rate financial correction imposed by the Commission in accordance with internal guidelines – Burden of proof – Interpretation of Annexe II to Regulation (EC) No 73/2009

T-437/14, [2016] EUECJ T-437/14
Bailii
European

European

Updated: 23 January 2022; Ref: scu.569643

Pinto Eliseu Baptista Lopes Canhoto v EUIPO – University College London (Citrus Saturday): ECFI 28 Sep 2016

ECJ (Judgment) EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU word mark CITRUS SATURDAY – Earlier national word mark CITRUS – Late submission of documents – Discretion conferred by Article 76(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 – Rule 19 and Rule 20(1) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95

ECLI:EU:T:2016:569, [2016] EUECJ T-400/15
Bailii
European

European

Updated: 23 January 2022; Ref: scu.569640

Satkirit Holdings v EUIPO – Advanced Mailing Solutions (Luvoworld): ECFI 27 Sep 2016

ECJ (Judgment) EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the EU word mark luvoworld – Earlier EU work mark luvo – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Similarity of the goods and services – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009

T-450/15, [2016] EUECJ T-450/15, ECLI:EU:T:2016:543
Bailii
Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 8(1)(b)
European

European, Intellectual Property

Updated: 23 January 2022; Ref: scu.569642

Essent Belgium NV v Vlaams Gewest: ECJ 29 Sep 2016

ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Regional legislation requiring the distribution, through the systems located in the region concerned, of electricity produced from renewable energy sources to be free of charge – Different treatment depending on the origin of the green electricity – Articles 28 EC and 30 EC – Free movement of goods – Directive 2001/77/EC – Articles 3 and 4 – National support mechanisms for the production of green energy – Directive 2003/54/EC – Articles 3 and 20 – Directive 96/92/EC – Articles 3 and 16 – Internal market in electricity – Access to distribution systems on non-discriminatory tariff conditions – Public service obligations – Lack of proportionality

C-492/14, [2016] EUECJ C-492/14
Bailii
European

European, Utilities

Updated: 23 January 2022; Ref: scu.569632

Klein v Commission: ECFI 28 Sep 2016

ECJ (Judgment) Non-contractual liability – Directive 93/42 / EEC – Harmonized Plan for the safety and protection of the health of patients, users and third parties for the use of medical devices – Article 8 – Notification of a decision prohibiting the placing on the market – No position taken by the Commission – Article 18 – undue CE Marking – Damage – sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law conferring rights on individuals – causation

ECLI:EU:T:2016:570, [2016] EUECJ T-309/10
Bailii
European

European, Personal Injury, Health Professions

Updated: 23 January 2022; Ref: scu.569635

Intesa Sanpaolo v EUIPO (Wave 2 Pay): ECFI 28 Sep 2016

ECJ (Judgment) Brand of the European Union – Request marks the verbal EU WAVE 2 WAVE TO PAY and PAY – Absolute grounds for refusal – Descriptive character – Lack of distinctive character – Article 7, paragraph 1 b) and c) and paragraph 2 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 – Obligation to state reasons – Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009

T-129/15, [2016] EUECJ T-129/15
Bailii
European

European, Intellectual Property

Updated: 23 January 2022; Ref: scu.569634

Satkirit Holdings v EUIPO – Advanced Mailing Solutions (Luvo): ECFI 27 Sep 2016

lipECJ (Judgment) EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the EU word mark luvo – Earlier EU work mark luvo – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Similarity of the goods and services – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009

T-449/15, [2016] EUECJ T-449/15, ECLI:EU:T:2016:544
Bailii
European

European, Intellectual Property

Updated: 23 January 2022; Ref: scu.569641

Kozmetika Afrodita v EUIPO – Nunez Martin and Machado Montesinos (Afrodita Cosmetics): ECFI 28 Sep 2016

ECJ Judgment – Brand of the European Union – Opposition proceedings – Application for figurative mark of the European Union AFRODITA COSMETICS – Earlier word National brands EXOTIC MUSK OIL AFRODITA MYSTIC Earlier figurative and MUSK OIL AFRODITA MYSTIC – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8, paragraph 1 b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009

T-575/15, [2016] EUECJ T-575/15
Bailii
Regulation (EC) No 207/2009
European

Intellectual Property

Updated: 23 January 2022; Ref: scu.569637