Documents : Union européenne

Union supranationale de 27 États membres. Les actes officiels (règlements, directives, décisions) sont publiés par l'Office des publications de l'UE (Cellar/EUR-Lex). La jurisprudence de la Cour de justice de l'UE (CJUE) relève également d'un organe de l'UE.

Site officiel ↗

Types de documents
regulation (161354) cjeu_case (104315) decision (43245) directive (8067)
316 981 documents
50603

Arrêt de la Cour (huitième chambre) du 6 octobre 2020.#Vodafone España SAU contre Diputación Foral de Guipúzcoa.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Réseaux et services de communications électroniques – Directive 2002/20/CE – Article 13 – Redevance pour les droits d’utilisation des radiofréquences – Réglementation nationale sectorielle soumettant la réservation du domaine public radioélectrique à une taxe – Réglementation nationale soumettant la constitution de concessions administratives sur les biens du domaine public à un impôt sur les transmissions patrimoniales.#Affaire C-443/19.

cjeu_case ·
50604

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 6 October 2020.#Vodafone España SAU v Diputación Foral de Guipúzcoa.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia del País Vasco.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Electronic communications networks and services – Directive 2002/20/EC – Article 13 – Fee for rights of use for radio frequencies – Sectoral national legislation subjecting the allocation of public radio frequencies to a charge – National legislation subjecting the grant of administrative concessions on public assets to a tax on the transfer of assets.#Case C-443/19.

cjeu_case ·
50605

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 6 October 2020.#État luxembourgeois v B and Others.#References for a preliminary ruling – Directive 2011/16/EU – Administrative cooperation in the field of taxation – Articles 1 and 5 – Decision ordering that information be provided to the competent authority of a Member State, acting in response to a request for exchange of information from the competent authority of another Member State – Person holding the information the production of which is ordered by the competent authority of the first Member State – Taxpayer concerned by the investigation giving rise to the request from the competent authority of the second Member State – Third parties with whom that taxpayer maintains legal, banking, financial or, more broadly, economic relations – Judicial protection – Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Article 47 – Right to an effective remedy – Article 52(1) – Limitation – Legal basis – Respect for the essence of the right to an effective remedy – Existence of a remedy enabling the individuals in question to obtain an effective review of all the relevant issues of fact and of law, as well as effective judicial protection of the rights guaranteed to them by EU law – Objective of general interest recognised by the Union – Combating international tax fraud and tax evasion – Proportionality – Whether the information referred to in the information order is ‘foreseeably relevant’ – Judicial review – Scope – Personal, temporal and material factors to be taken into consideration.#Joined Cases C-245/19 and C-246/19.

cjeu_case ·
50606

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 6 October 2020.#État luxembourgeois v B and Others.#Requests for a preliminary ruling from the Cour administrative (Luxembourg).#References for a preliminary ruling – Directive 2011/16/EU – Administrative cooperation in the field of taxation – Articles 1 and 5 – Decision ordering that information be provided to the competent authority of a Member State, acting in response to a request for exchange of information from the competent authority of another Member State – Person holding the information the production of which is ordered by the competent authority of the first Member State – Taxpayer concerned by the investigation giving rise to the request from the competent authority of the second Member State – Third parties with whom that taxpayer maintains legal, banking, financial or, more broadly, economic relations – Judicial protection – Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Article 47 – Right to an effective remedy – Article 52(1) – Limitation – Legal basis – Respect for the essence of the right to an effective remedy – Existence of a remedy enabling the individuals in question to obtain an effective review of all the relevant issues of fact and of law, as well as effective judicial protection of the rights guaranteed to them by EU law – Objective of general interest recognised by the Union – Combating international tax fraud and tax evasion – Proportionality – Whether the information referred to in the information order is ‘foreseeably relevant’ – Judicial review – Scope – Personal, temporal and material factors to be taken into consideration.#Joined Cases C-245/19 and C-246/19.

cjeu_case ·
50607

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 6 October 2020.#Jobcenter Krefeld - Widerspruchsstelle v JD.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Free movement of persons – Workers – Regulation (EU) No 492/2011 – Article 7(2) – Equal treatment – Social advantages – Article 10 – Children attending school – Directive 2004/38/EC – Article 24 – Social assistance – Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 – Article 4 – Article 70 – Special non-contributory cash benefits – Migrant worker with dependent children attending school in the host Member State.#Case C-181/19.

cjeu_case ·
50608

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 6 October 2020.#Jobcenter Krefeld - Widerspruchsstelle v JD.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landessozialgericht Nordrhein-Westfalen.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Free movement of persons – Workers – Regulation (EU) No 492/2011 – Article 7(2) – Equal treatment – Social advantages – Article 10 – Children attending school – Directive 2004/38/EC – Article 24 – Social assistance – Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 – Article 4 – Article 70 – Special non-contributory cash benefits – Migrant worker with dependent children attending school in the host Member State.#Case C-181/19.

cjeu_case ·
50609

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 6 October 2020.#Bank Refah Kargaran v Council of the European Union.#Appeal – Common foreign and security policy (CFSP) – Article 29 TEU – Article 215 TFEU – Restrictive measures against the Islamic Republic of Iran to prevent nuclear proliferation – Harm allegedly suffered by the appellant as a result of its name being included and maintained on the list of persons and entities covered by the freezing of financial funds and resources – Actions for damages – Jurisdiction of the CJEU to hear and determine an action for damages for the harm allegedly caused by restrictive measures taken in decisions adopted pursuant to the CFSP – Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law intended to confer rights on individuals – Inadequate statement of reasons for legal acts imposing restrictive measures.#Case C-134/19 P.

cjeu_case ·
50610

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 6 October 2020.#Bank Refah Kargaran v Council of the European Union.#Appeal – Common foreign and security policy (CFSP) – Article 29 TEU – Article 215 TFEU – Restrictive measures against the Islamic Republic of Iran to prevent nuclear proliferation – Harm allegedly suffered by the appellant as a result of its name being included and maintained on the list of persons and entities covered by the freezing of financial funds and resources – Actions for damages – Jurisdiction of the CJEU to hear and determine an action for damages for the harm allegedly caused by restrictive measures taken in decisions adopted pursuant to the CFSP – Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law intended to confer rights on individuals – Inadequate statement of reasons for legal acts imposing restrictive measures.#Case C-134/19 P.

cjeu_case ·
50611

Opinion of Advocate General Pitruzzella delivered on 6 October 2020.#RJ v Stadt Offenbach am Main.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Darmstadt.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Protection of the safety and health of workers – Organisation of working time – Directive 2003/88/EC – Article 2 – Concept of ‘working time’ – Period of stand-by time according to a stand-by system – Professional firefighters – Directive 89/391/EEC – Articles 5 and 6 – Psychosocial risks – Obligation to prevent.#Case C-580/19.

cjeu_case ·
50612

Opinion of Advocate General Pitruzzella delivered on 6 October 2020.#D. J. v Radiotelevizija Slovenija.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Vrhovno sodišče Republike Slovenije.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Protection of the safety and health of workers – Organisation of working time – Directive 2003/88/EC – Article 2 – Concept of ‘working time’ – Stand-by time according to a stand-by system – Specific work maintaining television transmitters situated far away from residential areas – Directive 89/391/EEC – Articles 5 and 6 – Psychosocial risks – Obligation to prevent.#Case C-344/19.

cjeu_case ·
50613

Case C-443/19: Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 6 October 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia del País Vasco — Spain) — Vodafone España SAU v Diputación Foral de Gipuzkoa (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Electronic communications networks and services — Directive 2002/20/EC — Article 13 — Fee for rights of use for radio frequencies — Sectoral national legislation subjecting the allocation of public radio frequencies to a charge — National legislation subjecting the grant of administrative concessions on public assets to a tax on the transfer of assets)

cjeu_case ·
50614

Joined Cases C-245/19 and C-246/19: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 6 October 2020 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Cour administrative — Luxembourg) — État luxembourgeois v B (C-245/19), and État luxembourgeois v B, C, D and F.C. (C-246/19) (References for a preliminary ruling — Directive 2011/16/EU — Administrative cooperation in the field of taxation — Articles 1 and 5 — Decision ordering that information be provided to the competent authority of a Member State, acting in response to a request for exchange of information from the competent authority of another Member State — Person holding the information the protection of which is ordered by the competent authority of the first Member State — Taxpayer concerned by the investigation giving rise to the request from the competent authority of the second Member State — Third parties with whom that taxpayer maintains legal, banking, financial or, more broadly, economic relations — Judicial protection — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 47 — Right to an effective remedy — Article 52(1) — Limitation — Legal basis — Respect for the essence of the right to an effective remedy — Existence of a remedy enabling the individuals in question to obtain an effective review of all the relevant issues of fact and of law, as well as effective judicial protection of the rights guaranteed to them by EU law — Objective of general interest recognised by the Union — Combating international tax fraud and tax evasion — Proportionality — Whether the information referred to in the information order is ‘foreseeably relevant’ — Judicial review — Scope — Personal, temporal and material factors to be taken into consideration)

cjeu_case ·
50615

Case C-181/19: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 6 October 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landessozialgericht Nordrhein-Westfalen — Germany) — Jobcenter Krefeld — Widerspruchsstelle v JD (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Free movement of persons — Workers — Regulation (EU) No 492/2011 — Article 7(2) — Equal treatment — Social advantages — Article 10 — Children attending school — Directive 2004/38/EC — Article 24 — Social assistance — Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 — Article 4 — Article 70 — Special non-contributory cash benefits — Migrant worker with dependent children attending school in the host Member State)

cjeu_case ·
50616

Case C-134/19 P: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 6 October 2020 — Bank Refah Kargaran v Council of the European Union, European Commission (Appeal — Common foreign and security policy (CFSP) — Article 29 TEU — Article 215 TFEU — Restrictive measures against the Islamic Republic of Iran to prevent nuclear proliferation — Harm allegedly suffered by the appellant as a result of its name being included and maintained on the list of persons and entities covered by the freezing of financial funds and resources — Action for damages — Jurisdiction of the Court to hear and determine an action for damages for the harm allegedly caused by restrictive measures taken in decisions adopted pursuant to the CFSP — Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law intended to confer rights on individuals — Inadequate statement of reasons for legal acts imposing restrictive measures)

cjeu_case ·
50619

Arrêt de la Cour (grande chambre) du 6 octobre 2020.#La Quadrature du Net e.a. contre Premier ministre e.a.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Traitement des données à caractère personnel dans le secteur des communications électroniques – Fournisseurs de services de communications électroniques – Fournisseurs de services d’hébergement et fournisseurs d’accès à Internet – Conservation généralisée et indifférenciée des données relatives au trafic et des données de localisation – Analyse automatisée des données – Accès en temps réel aux données – Sauvegarde de la sécurité nationale et lutte contre le terrorisme – Lutte contre la criminalité – Directive 2002/58/CE – Champ d’application – Article 1er, paragraphe 3, et article 3 – Confidentialité des communications électroniques – Protection – Article 5 et article 15, paragraphe 1 – Directive 2000/31/CE – Champ d’application – Charte des droits fondamentaux de l’Union européenne – Articles 4, 6 à 8 et 11 et article 52, paragraphe 1 – Article 4, paragraphe 2, TUE.#Affaires jointes C-511/18, C-512/18 et C-520/18.

cjeu_case ·
50620

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 6 October 2020.#La Quadrature du Net and Others v Premier ministre and Others.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Processing of personal data in the electronic communications sector – Providers of electronic communications services – Hosting service providers and Internet access providers – General and indiscriminate retention of traffic and location data – Automated analysis of data – Real-time access to data – Safeguarding national security and combating terrorism – Combating crime – Directive 2002/58/EC – Scope – Article 1(3) and Article 3 – Confidentiality of electronic communications – Protection – Article 5 and Article 15(1) – Directive 2000/31/EC – Scope – Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Articles 4, 6, 7, 8 and 11 and Article 52(1) – Article 4(2) TEU.#Joined Cases C-511/18, C-512/18 and C-520/18.

cjeu_case ·