Catalogue des documents juridiques (cjeu_case)

104 315 documents
33081

Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 23 September 2020.#VE v European Securities and Markets Authority.#Civil service – Members of the temporary staff – Contract for an indefinite period – Appraisal report – 2016 appraisal exercise – Plea of illegality relating to the appraisal manual – Manifest error of assessment – Assessment of activities undertaken as staff representative – Procedural irregularity – Termination of the employment contract – Insufficient performance during a period of two years.#Cases T-77/18 and T-567/18.

cjeu_case ·
33082

Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 23 September 2020.#VE v European Securities and Markets Authority.#Civil service – Members of the temporary staff – Contract for an indefinite period – Appraisal report – 2016 appraisal exercise – Plea of illegality relating to the appraisal manual – Manifest error of assessment – Assessment of activities undertaken as staff representative – Procedural irregularity – Termination of the employment contract – Insufficient performance during a period of two years.#Cases T-77/18 and T-567/18.

cjeu_case ·
33085

Case T-421/18: Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Bauer Radio v EUIPO — Weinstein (MUSIKISS) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark MUSIKISS — Earlier United Kingdom word and figurative marks KISS — Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union and Euratom — Transition period — Decision of the Board of Appeal to remit the case to the Opposition Division — Admissibility — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

cjeu_case ·
33087

Cases T-77/18 and T-567/18: Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — VE v ESMA (Civil service — Members of the temporary staff — Contract for an indefinite period — Appraisal report — 2016 appraisal exercise — Plea of illegality relating to the appraisals guide — Manifest error of assessment — Assessment of activities undertaken as staff representative — Procedural irregularity — Termination of the work contract — Insufficient performance during a period of two years)

cjeu_case ·
33088

Arrêt de la Cour (quatrième chambre) du 23 septembre 2020.#WO contre Vas Megyei Kormányhivatal.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Sécurité sociale – Assurance maladie – Règlement (CE) no 883/2004 – Article 20 – Soins programmés – Autorisation préalable – Octroi obligatoire – Conditions – Empêchement de la personne assurée de solliciter une autorisation préalable – Règlement (CE) no 987/2009 – Article 26 – Prise en charge des coûts des soins programmés engagés par la personne assurée – Modalités de remboursement – Directive 2011/24/UE – Soins de santé transfrontaliers – Article 8, paragraphe 1 – Soins de santé susceptibles d’être soumis à autorisation préalable – Principe de proportionnalité – Article 9, paragraphe 3 – Traitement des demandes de soins de santé transfrontaliers – Éléments à prendre en compte – Délai raisonnable – Libre prestation des services – Article 56 TFUE.#Affaire C-777/18.

cjeu_case ·
33089

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 23 September 2020.#WO v Vas Megyei Kormányhivatal.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Szombathelyi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Social security – Sickness insurance – Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 – Article 20 – Scheduled treatment – Prior authorisation – Mandatory grant – Conditions – Insured person prevented from applying for prior authorisation – Regulation (EC) No 987/2009 – Article 26 – Assumption of costs of scheduled treatment incurred by the insured person – Procedure for reimbursement – Directive 2011/24/EU – Cross-border healthcare – Article 8(1) – Healthcare that may be subject to prior authorisation – Principle of proportionality – Article 9(3) – Processing of applications for cross-border healthcare – Factors to be taken into account – Reasonable time – Freedom to provide services – Article 56 TFEU.#Case C-777/18.

cjeu_case ·
33090

Case C-777/18: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 23 September 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Szombathelyi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság — Hungary) — WO v Vas Megyei Kormányhivatal (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social security — Sickness insurance — Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 — Article 20 — Scheduled treatment — Prior authorisation — Mandatory grant — Conditions — Insured person prevented from applying for prior authorisation — Regulation (EC) No 987/2009 — Article 26 — Assumption of costs of scheduled treatment incurred by the insured person — Procedure for reimbursement — Directive 2011/24/EU — Cross-border healthcare — Article 8(1) — Healthcare that may be subject to prior authorisation — Principle of proportionality — Article 9(3) — Processing of applications for cross-border healthcare — Factors to be taken into account — Reasonable time — Freedom to provide services — Article 56 TFEU)

cjeu_case ·
33091

Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 23 September 2020.#Portigon AG v Single Resolution Board.#Economic and monetary union – Banking union – Single Resolution Mechanism for credit institutions and certain investment firms (SRM) – Single Resolution Fund (SRF) – Decision of the SRB on the calculation of the 2017 ex ante contributions – Action for annulment – Direct and individual concern – Admissibility – Essential procedural requirements – Authentication of the decision – Obligation to state reasons – Limitation of the temporal effects of the judgment.#Case T-420/17.

cjeu_case ·
33092

Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 23 September 2020.#Portigon AG v Single Resolution Board.#Economic and monetary union – Banking union – Single Resolution Mechanism for credit institutions and certain investment firms (SRM) – Single Resolution Fund (SRF) – Decision of the SRB on the calculation of the 2017 ex ante contributions – Action for annulment – Direct and individual concern – Admissibility – Essential procedural requirements – Authentication of the decision – Obligation to state reasons – Limitation of the temporal effects of the judgment.#Case T-420/17.

cjeu_case ·
33093

Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 23 September 2020.#Hypo Vorarlberg Bank AG, formerly Vorarlberger Landes- und Hypothekenbank AG v Single Resolution Board.#Economic and monetary union – Banking union – Single Resolution Mechanism for credit institutions and certain investment firms (SRM) – Single Resolution Fund (SRF) – Decision of the SRB on the calculation of the 2017 ex ante contributions – Action for annulment – Direct and individual concern – Admissibility – Essential procedural requirements – Authentication of the decision – Obligation to state reasons – Limitation of the temporal effects of the judgment.#Case T-414/17.

cjeu_case ·
33094

Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 23 September 2020.#Hypo Vorarlberg Bank AG, formerly Vorarlberger Landes- und Hypothekenbank AG v Single Resolution Board.#Economic and monetary union – Banking union – Single Resolution Mechanism for credit institutions and certain investment firms (SRM) – Single Resolution Fund (SRF) – Decision of the SRB on the calculation of the 2017 ex ante contributions – Action for annulment – Direct and individual concern – Admissibility – Essential procedural requirements – Authentication of the decision – Obligation to state reasons – Limitation of the temporal effects of the judgment.#Case T-414/17.

cjeu_case ·
33095

Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 23 September 2020.#Landesbank Baden-Württemberg v Single Resolution Board.#Economic and monetary union – Banking union – Single Resolution Mechanism for credit institutions and certain investment firms (SRM) – Single Resolution Fund (SRF) – Decision of the SRB on the calculation of the 2017 ex ante contributions – Action for annulment – Direct and individual concern – Admissibility – Essential procedural requirements – Authentication of the decision – Obligation to state reasons – Right to effective judicial protection – Plea of illegality – Limitation of the temporal effects of the judgment.#Case T-411/17.

cjeu_case ·
33096

Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 23 September 2020.#Landesbank Baden-Württemberg v Single Resolution Board.#Economic and monetary union – Banking union – Single Resolution Mechanism for credit institutions and certain investment firms (SRM) – Single Resolution Fund (SRF) – Decision of the SRB on the calculation of the 2017 ex ante contributions – Action for annulment – Direct and individual concern – Admissibility – Essential procedural requirements – Authentication of the decision – Obligation to state reasons – Right to effective judicial protection – Plea of illegality – Limitation of the temporal effects of the judgment.#Case T-411/17.

cjeu_case ·
33097

Case T-420/17: Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Portigon v SRB (Economic and monetary union — Banking union — Single Resolution Mechanism for credit institutions and certain investment firms (SRM) — Single Resolution Fund (SRF) — Decision of the SRB on the calculation of the 2017 ex ante contributions — Action for annulment — Direct and individual concern — Admissibility — Essential procedural requirements — Authentication of the decision — Obligation to state reasons — Limitation of the temporal effects of the judgment)

cjeu_case ·
33098

Case T-414/17: Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Hypo Vorarlberg Bank v SRB (Economic and monetary union — Banking union — Single Resolution Mechanism for credit institutions and certain investment firms (SRM) — Single Resolution Fund (SRF) — Decision of the SRB on the calculation of the 2017 ex ante contributions — Action for annulment — Direct and individual concern — Admissibility — Essential procedural requirements — Authentication of the decision — Obligation to state reasons — Limitation of the temporal effects of the judgment)

cjeu_case ·
33099

Case T-411/17: Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Landesbank Baden-Württemberg v SRB (Economic and monetary union — Banking union — Single Resolution Mechanism for credit institutions and certain investment firms (SRM) — Single Resolution Fund (SRF) — Decision of the SRB on the calculation of the 2017 ex ante contributions — Action for annulment — Direct and individual concern — Admissibility — Essential procedural requirements — Authentication of the decision — Obligation to state reasons — Right to effective judicial protection — Plea of illegality — Limitation of the temporal effects of the judgment)

cjeu_case ·
33100

Judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) of 23 September 2020 (Extracts).#CEDC International sp. z o.o. v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for an EU three-dimensional mark – Shape of a blade of grass in a bottle – Earlier three-dimensional national mark – Genuine use of the earlier mark – Article 15(1) and Article 43(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 18(1) and Article 47(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) – Nature of use – Alteration of distinctive character – Use in conjunction with other marks – Scope of the protection – Requirement for clarity and precision – Requirement for the description and the representation to align with one another – Decision taken following annulment of an earlier decision by the General Court – Reference to the ground of an earlier annulled decision – Obligation to state reasons.#Case T-796/16.

cjeu_case ·