Documents : Union européenne

316838 documents
2044

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 23 April 2026.#Criminal proceedings against Procuratore generale presso la Corte d’Appello.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Urgent preliminary ruling procedure – Area of freedom, security and justice – Judicial cooperation in criminal matters – Directive 2012/29/EU – Minimum standards on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime – Articles 6, 10 and 18 – Right to receive information about the case and right to be heard – National legislation providing for an extraordinary remedy, whereby a person convicted in absentia may have a conviction which has become final quashed – No recognition of the right of the victim to be informed of the application for that extraordinary remedy and of the right to participate in the related proceedings – Directive (EU) 2016/343 – Presumption of innocence and right to be present at the trial in criminal proceedings – Articles 8 and 9 – Right to a new trial or to another legal remedy which allows a fresh determination of the merits of the case – Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Right to a fair trial – Article 54 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights – Prohibition of abuse of rights.#Case C-24/26 PPU.

cjeu_case ·
2045

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 23 April 2026.#Criminal proceedings against Procuratore generale presso la Corte d’Appello.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Urgent preliminary ruling procedure – Area of freedom, security and justice – Judicial cooperation in criminal matters – Directive 2012/29/EU – Minimum standards on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime – Articles 6, 10 and 18 – Right to receive information about the case and right to be heard – National legislation providing for an extraordinary remedy, whereby a person convicted in absentia may have a conviction which has become final quashed – No recognition of the right of the victim to be informed of the application for that extraordinary remedy and of the right to participate in the related proceedings – Directive (EU) 2016/343 – Presumption of innocence and right to be present at the trial in criminal proceedings – Articles 8 and 9 – Right to a new trial or to another legal remedy which allows a fresh determination of the merits of the case – Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Right to a fair trial – Article 54 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights – Prohibition of abuse of rights.#Case C-24/26 PPU.

cjeu_case ·
2046

Case C-24/26 PPU, Casotta: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 23 April 2026 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte d’appello di Roma – Italy) – Criminal proceedings against CV (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Urgent preliminary ruling procedure – Area of freedom, security and justice – Judicial cooperation in criminal matters – Directive 2012/29/EU – Minimum standards on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime – Articles 6, 10 and 18 – Right to receive information about the case and right to be heard – National legislation providing for an extraordinary remedy, whereby a person convicted in absentia may have a conviction which has become final quashed – No recognition of the right of the victim to be informed of the application for that extraordinary remedy and of the right to participate in the related proceedings – Directive (EU) 2016/343 – Presumption of innocence and right to be present at the trial in criminal proceedings – Articles 8 and 9 – Right to a new trial or to another legal remedy which allows a fresh determination of the merits of the case – Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Right to a fair trial – Article 54 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights – Prohibition of abuse of rights)

cjeu_case ·
2049

Arrêt de la Cour (huitième chambre) du 23 avril 2026.#M.M. Ristorazione Srl contre Villa Ramazzini Srl.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Propriété intellectuelle – Directive 2004/48/CE – Respect des droits de propriété intellectuelle – Article 9, paragraphe 5 – Mesures provisoires – Absence d’engagement d’une action conduisant à une décision au fond – Réglementation nationale prévoyant le maintien des effets de mesures provisoires tendant à anticiper les effets d’une décision au fond.#Affaire C-132/25.

cjeu_case ·
2050

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 23 April 2026.#M.M. Ristorazione Srl v Villa Ramazzini Srl.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Intellectual property – Directive 2004/48/EC – Enforcement of intellectual property rights – Article 9(5) – Provisional measures – Failure to institute proceedings leading to a decision on the merits of the case – National legislation providing for the continuation of the effects of provisional measures intended to anticipate the effects of a decision on the merits of the case.#Case C-132/25.

cjeu_case ·
2051

Arrêt de la Cour (sixième chambre) du 23 avril 2026.#Ts. E. S. contre Direktor na Teritorialno podelenie na Natsionalnia osiguritelen institut - Blagoevgrad.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Sécurité sociale – Travailleurs migrants – Règlement (CE) no 883/2004 – Prestations de chômage – Calcul – Article 62, paragraphes 1 et 2 – Dernière activité salariée ou non salariée exercée sous la législation d’un État membre – Article 62, paragraphe 3 – Résidence du bénéficiaire des prestations de chômage se situant dans un État membre autre que l’“État membre compétent” – Règle de calcul ne tenant pas compte “exclusivement” du salaire ou du revenu professionnel perçu par l’intéressé au titre de sa dernière activité salariée ou non salariée – Réglementation nationale prévoyant une règle de calcul différente pour les personnes ayant exercé leur dernier emploi dans un autre État membre.#Affaire C-116/25.

cjeu_case ·
2052

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 23 April 2026.#Ts. E. S. v Direktor na Teritorialno podelenie na Natsionalnia osiguritelen institut - Blagoevgrad.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Social security – Migrant workers – Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 – Unemployment benefits – Calculation – Article 62(1) and (2) – Last activity as an employed or self-employed person pursued under the legislation of a Member State – Article 62(3) – Residence of the recipient of unemployment benefits in a Member State other than the ‘competent Member State’ – Calculation rule which does not take into account ‘exclusively’ the salary or professional income received by the person concerned in respect of his or her last activity as an employed or self-employed person – National legislation providing for a different calculation rule for persons who carried out their last employment in another Member State.#Case C-116/25.

cjeu_case ·