Catalogue des documents juridiques (cjeu_case)

104 315 documents
24561

Case C-454/20: Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 23 March 2022 — (request for a preliminary ruling from the Rayonen sad Lukovit — Bulgaria) — Criminal proceedings against AZ (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 53(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Transport — Directive 1999/37/EC — Registration documents for vehicles — Directive 2014/45/EU — Periodic roadworthiness tests for motor vehicles — Article 49 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Principles of legality and proportionality of criminal offences and penalties — Driving a motor vehicle which is not duly registered — Penalties — No implementation of EU law — Clear lack of jurisdiction of the Court)

cjeu_case ·
24570

Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 22 March 2022.#Bálint Krátky v European Parliament and Others.#Appeal – Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Consumer protection – Consumer contracts – Mortgage loan indexed to a foreign currency – Alleged failure by the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission to adopt the measures referred to in Article 169(2)(b) TFEU – Actions for damages – Causal link – None – Appeal manifestly unfounded.#Case C-503/21 P.

cjeu_case ·
24571

Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 22 March 2022.#Bálint Krátky v European Parliament and Others.#Appeal – Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Consumer protection – Consumer contracts – Mortgage loan indexed to a foreign currency – Alleged failure by the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission to adopt the measures referred to in Article 169(2)(b) TFEU – Actions for damages – Causal link – None – Appeal manifestly unfounded.#Case C-503/21 P.

cjeu_case ·
24572

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 22 March 2022.#Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde v Nordzucker AG and Others.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Competition – Article 101 TFEU – Cartel prosecuted by two national competition authorities – Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Article 50 – Non bis in idem principle – Existence of the same offence – Article 52(1) – Limitations to the non bis in idem principle – Conditions – Pursuit of an objective of general interest – Proportionality.#Case C-151/20.

cjeu_case ·
24573

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 22 March 2022.#Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde v Nordzucker AG and Others.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Competition – Article 101 TFEU – Cartel prosecuted by two national competition authorities – Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Article 50 – Non bis in idem principle – Existence of the same offence – Article 52(1) – Limitations to the non bis in idem principle – Conditions – Pursuit of an objective of general interest – Proportionality.#Case C-151/20.

cjeu_case ·
24574

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 22 March 2022.#bpost SA v Autorité belge de la concurrence.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Competition – Postal services – Tariff system adopted by a universal service provider – Fine imposed by a national postal regulator – Fine imposed by a national competition authority – Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Article 50 – Non bis in idem principle – Existence of the same offence – Article 52(1) – Limitations to the non bis in idem principle – Duplication of proceedings and penalties – Conditions – Pursuit of an objective of general interest – Proportionality.#Case C-117/20.

cjeu_case ·
24575

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 22 March 2022.#bpost SA v Autorité belge de la concurrence.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d'appel de Bruxelles.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Competition – Postal services – Tariff system adopted by a universal service provider – Fine imposed by a national postal regulator – Fine imposed by a national competition authority – Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Article 50 – Non bis in idem principle – Existence of the same offence – Article 52(1) – Limitations to the non bis in idem principle – Duplication of proceedings and penalties – Conditions – Pursuit of an objective of general interest – Proportionality.#Case C-117/20.

cjeu_case ·
24576

Case C-151/20: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 22 March 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof — Austria) — Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde v Nordzucker AG, Südzucker AG, Agrana Zucker GmbH (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Competition — Article 101 TFEU — Cartel prosecuted by two national competition authorities — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 50 — Non bis in idem principle — Existence of the same offence — Article 52(1) — Limitations to the non bis in idem principle — Conditions — Pursuit of an objective of general interest — Proportionality)

cjeu_case ·
24577

Case C-117/20: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 22 March 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Bruxelles — Belgium) — bpost SA v Autorité belge de la concurrence (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Competition — Postal services — Tariff system adopted by a universal service provider — Fine imposed by a national postal regulator — Fine imposed by a national competition authority — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 50 — Non bis in idem principle — Existence of the same offence — Article 52(1) — Limitations to the non bis in idem principle — Duplication of proceedings and penalties — Conditions — Pursuit of an objective of general interest — Proportionality)

cjeu_case ·
24578

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 22 March 2022.#M.F. v J.M.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 267 TFEU – Interpretation sought by the referring court necessary to enable it to give judgment – Concept – Disciplinary proceedings brought against a judge of an ordinary court – Designation of the disciplinary court having jurisdiction to hear those proceedings by the President of the Disciplinary Chamber of the Sąd Najwyższy (Supreme Court, Poland) – Civil action for a declaration that a service relationship does not exist between the President of that disciplinary chamber and the Supreme Court – Lack of jurisdiction of the referring court to review the validity of the appointment of a Supreme Court judge and inadmissibility of such an action under national law – Inadmissibility of the request for a preliminary ruling.#Case C-508/19.

cjeu_case ·
24579

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 22 March 2022.#M.F. v J.M.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Najwyższy.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 267 TFEU – Interpretation sought by the referring court necessary to enable it to give judgment – Concept – Disciplinary proceedings brought against a judge of an ordinary court – Designation of the disciplinary court having jurisdiction to hear those proceedings by the President of the Disciplinary Chamber of the Sąd Najwyższy (Supreme Court, Poland) – Civil action for a declaration that a service relationship does not exist between the President of that disciplinary chamber and the Supreme Court – Lack of jurisdiction of the referring court to review the validity of the appointment of a Supreme Court judge and inadmissibility of such an action under national law – Inadmissibility of the request for a preliminary ruling.#Case C-508/19.

cjeu_case ·
24580

Case C-508/19: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 22 March 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Najwyższy — Poland) — M.F. v J.M. (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 267 TFEU — Interpretation sought by the referring court necessary to enable it to give judgment — Concept — Disciplinary proceedings brought against a judge of an ordinary court — Designation of the disciplinary court having jurisdiction to hear those proceedings by the President of the Disciplinary Chamber of the Sąd Najwyższy (Supreme Court, Poland) — Civil action for a declaration that a service relationship does not exist between the President of that disciplinary chamber and the Supreme Court — Lack of jurisdiction of the referring court to review the validity of the appointment of a Supreme Court judge and inadmissibility of such an action under national law — Inadmissibility of the request for a preliminary ruling)

cjeu_case ·