Каталог правовых документов (cjeu_case)

104 314 документов
10181

Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 18 September 2024.#Safran Aircraft Engines v European Commission.#Award of grants in the field of defence – EDF – Funding of development actions – Call for proposals ‘EDF 2021-ENERENV-D-PES: Alternative propulsion and energy systems for next generation air combat systems’ – Rejection of the applicant’s proposal – Obligation to state reasons – Principle of sound administration – Equal treatment – Legal certainty – Transparency – Manifest error of assessment.#Case T-617/22.

cjeu_case ·
10182

Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 18 September 2024.#Safran Aircraft Engines v European Commission.#Award of grants in the field of defence – EDF – Funding of development actions – Call for proposals ‘EDF‑2021-ENERENV-D-PES: Alternative propulsion and energy systems for next generation air combat systems’ – Rejection of the applicant’s proposal – Obligation to state reasons – Principle of sound administration – Equal treatment – Legal certainty – Transparency – Manifest error of assessment.#Case T-617/22.

cjeu_case ·
10183

Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 18 September 2024.#Andrey Anatolyevich Kozitsyn v Council of the European Union.#Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures adopted in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine – Freezing of funds – Restrictions on admission to the territory of the Member States – Lists of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources and subject to restrictions on admission to the territory of the Member States – Inclusion and maintenance of the applicant’s name on such a list – Concept of ‘leading businesspersons’ – Concept of ‘businessperson involved in economic sectors providing a substantial source of revenue to the Government of the Russian Federation’ – Article 2(1)(g) of Decision 2014/145/CFSP – Article 3(1)(g) of Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 – Plea of illegality – Rights of the defence – Right to effective judicial protection – Error of assessment – Right to property – Freedom to conduct a business.#Joined Cases T-607/22 and T-731/22.

cjeu_case ·
10184

Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 18 September 2024.#Andrey Anatolyevich Kozitsyn v Council of the European Union.#Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures adopted in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine – Freezing of funds – Restrictions on admission to the territory of the Member States – Lists of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources and subject to restrictions on admission to the territory of the Member States – Inclusion and maintenance of the applicant’s name on such a list – Concept of ‘leading businesspersons’ – Concept of ‘businessperson involved in economic sectors providing a substantial source of revenue to the Government of the Russian Federation’ – Article 2(1)(g) of Decision 2014/145/CFSP – Article 3(1)(g) of Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 – Plea of illegality – Rights of the defence – Right to effective judicial protection – Error of assessment – Right to property – Freedom to conduct a business.#Joined Cases T-607/22 and T-731/22.

cjeu_case ·
10185

Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 18 September 2024.#Belarusian Potash Company AAT v Council of the European Union.#Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures in view of the situation in Belarus and the involvement of Belarus in the Russian aggression against Ukraine – Freezing of funds – Lists of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources – Inclusion of the applicant’s name on the list – Support for the regime – Financial support – Benefiting from the regime – Error of assessment.#Case T-534/22.

cjeu_case ·
10186

Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 18 September 2024.#Belarusian Potash Company AAT v Council of the European Union.#Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures in view of the situation in Belarus and the involvement of Belarus in the Russian aggression against Ukraine – Freezing of funds – Lists of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources – Inclusion of the applicant’s name on the list – Support for the regime – Financial support – Benefiting from the regime – Error of assessment.#Case T-534/22.

cjeu_case ·
10187

Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 18 September 2024.#Belaruskali AAT v Council of the European Union.#Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures in view of the situation in Belarus and the involvement of Belarus in the Russian aggression against Ukraine – Freezing of funds – List of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources – Inclusion of the applicant’s name on the list – Support for the regime – Financial support – State-owned undertaking – Benefitting from the regime – Repression of civil society – Error of assessment.#Case T-528/22.

cjeu_case ·
10188

Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 18 September 2024.#Belaruskali AAT v Council of the European Union.#Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures in view of the situation in Belarus and the involvement of Belarus in the Russian aggression against Ukraine – Freezing of funds – List of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources – Inclusion of the applicant’s name on the list – Support for the regime – Financial support – State-owned undertaking – Benefitting from the regime – Repression of civil society – Error of assessment.#Case T-528/22.

cjeu_case ·
10189

Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 18 September 2024.#Ivan Ivanovich Golovaty v Council of the European Union.#Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures in view of the situation in Belarus and the involvement of Belarus in the Russian aggression against Ukraine – Freezing of funds – Lists of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources – Inclusion of the applicant’s name on the list – Support for the regime – Financial support – Benefiting from the regime – Repression of civil society – Error of assessment.#Case T-521/22.

cjeu_case ·
10190

Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 18 September 2024.#Ivan Ivanovich Golovaty v Council of the European Union.#Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures in view of the situation in Belarus and the involvement of Belarus in the Russian aggression against Ukraine – Freezing of funds – Lists of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources – Inclusion of the applicant’s name on the list – Support for the regime – Financial support – Benefiting from the regime – Repression of civil society – Error of assessment.#Case T-521/22.

cjeu_case ·
10191

Case T-617/22: Judgment of the General Court of 18 September 2024 – Safran Aircraft Engines v Commission (Award of grants in the field of defence – EDF – Funding of development actions – Call for proposals EDF-2021-ENERENV-D-PES: Alternative propulsion and energy systems for next generation air combat systems – Rejection of the applicant’s proposal – Obligation to state reasons – Principle of sound administration – Equal treatment – Legal certainty – Transparency – Manifest error of assessment)

cjeu_case ·
10192

Joined Cases T-607/22 and T-731/22: Judgment of the General Court of 18 September 2024 – Kozitsyn v Council (Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures adopted in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine – Freezing of funds – Restrictions on admission to the territory of the Member States – Lists of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources and subject to restrictions on admission to the territory of the Member States – Inclusion and maintenance of the applicant’s name on such a list – Concept of leading businesspersons – Concept of businessperson involved in economic sectors providing a substantial source of revenue to the Government of the Russian Federation – Article 2(1)(g) of Decision 2014/145/CFSP – Article 3(1)(g) of Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 – Plea of illegality – Rights of the defence – Right to effective judicial protection – Error of assessment – Right to property – Freedom to conduct a business)

cjeu_case ·
10193

Case T-534/22: Judgment of the General Court of 18 September 2024 – Belarusian Potash Company v Council (Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures in view of the situation in Belarus and the involvement of Belarus in the Russian aggression against Ukraine – Freezing of funds – Lists of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources – Inclusion of the applicant’s name on the list – Support for the regime – Financial support – Benefiting from the regime – Error of assessment)

cjeu_case ·
10194

Case T-528/22: Judgment of the General Court of 18 September 2024 – Belaruskali v Council (Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures in view of the situation in Belarus and the involvement of Belarus in the Russian aggression against Ukraine – Freezing of funds – List of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources – Inclusion of the applicant’s name on the list – Support for the regime – Financial support – State-owned undertaking – Benefitting from the regime – Repression of civil society – Error of assessment)

cjeu_case ·
10195

Case T-521/22: Judgment of the General Court of 18 September 2024 – Golovaty v Council (Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures in view of the situation in Belarus and the involvement of Belarus in the Russian aggression against Ukraine – Freezing of funds – Lists of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources – Inclusion of the applicant’s name on the list – Support for the regime – Financial support – Benefiting from the regime – Repression of civil society – Error of assessment)

cjeu_case ·
10196

Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber, Extended Composition) of 18 September 2024.#Qualcomm, Inc. v European Commission.#Competition – Abuse of dominant position – Market for UMTS baseband chipsets – Decision finding an infringement of Article 102 TFEU and Article 54 of the EEA Agreement – Predatory pricing – Competence of the author of the act – Rights of the defence – Definition of the relevant market – Dominant position – Abuse – Reconstruction of prices – Determining the cost benchmark – Price-cost test – No requirement to demonstrate the existence of actual effects – Intention to eliminate a competitor – Objective justification – Calculation of the fine – 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines – Value of sales – Additional amount – Unlimited jurisdiction.#Case T-671/19.

cjeu_case ·
10197

Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber, Extended Composition) of 18 September 2024.#Qualcomm, Inc. v European Commission.#Competition – Abuse of dominant position – Market for UMTS baseband chipsets – Decision finding an infringement of Article 102 TFEU and Article 54 of the EEA Agreement – Predatory pricing – Competence of the author of the act – Rights of the defence – Definition of the relevant market – Dominant position – Abuse – Reconstruction of prices – Determining the cost benchmark – Price-cost test – No requirement to demonstrate the existence of actual effects – Intention to eliminate a competitor – Objective justification – Calculation of the fine – 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines – Value of sales – Additional amount – Unlimited jurisdiction.#Case T-671/19.

cjeu_case ·
10200

Case T-671/19: Judgment of the General Court of 18 September 2024 – Qualcomm v Commission (Qualcomm – Predation) (Competition – Abuse of dominant position – Market for UMTS baseband chipsets – Decision finding an infringement of Article 102 TFEU and Article 54 of the EEA Agreement – Predatory pricing – Competence of the author of the act – Rights of the defence – Definition of the relevant market – Dominant position – Abuse – Reconstruction of prices – Determining the cost benchmark – Price-cost test – No requirement to demonstrate the existence of actual effects – Intention to eliminate a competitor – Objective justification – Calculation of the fine – 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines – Value of sales – Additional amount – Unlimited jurisdiction)

cjeu_case ·