34061Ordonnance de la Cour (dixième chambre) du 2 juillet 2020.#Procédure engagée par S.A.D. Maler und Anstreicher OG.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Article 53, paragraphe 2, du règlement de procédure de la Cour – Article 19, paragraphe 1, second alinéa, TUE – Protection juridictionnelle effective dans les domaines couverts par le droit de l’Union – Principe d’indépendance des juges – Article 47 de la charte des droits fondamentaux de l’Union européenne – Compétence de la Cour – Article 267 TFUE – Recevabilité – Dispositions nationales relatives à l’attribution des affaires dans un tribunal – Voie de recours – Interprétation nécessaire pour que la juridiction de renvoi puisse rendre son jugement – Irrecevabilité manifeste.#Affaire C-256/19 REC.cjeu_case · 2 juillet 2020
34062Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 2 July 2020.#S.A.D. Maler und Anstreicher OG v Magistrat der Stadt Wien and Bauarbeiter Urlaubs- und Abfertigungskasse.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Wien.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 53(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court – Second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU – Effective judicial protection in the areas covered by EU law – Principle of judicial independence – Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Jurisdiction of the Court – Article 267 TFEU – Admissibility – National provisions relating to the allocation of cases in a court or tribunal – Remedy – Interpretation necessary to enable the referring court to give judgment – Manifest inadmissibility.#Case C-256/19.cjeu_case · 2 juillet 2020
34063Arrêt de la Cour (dixième chambre) du 2 juillet 2020.#mk advokaten GbR contre MBK Rechtsanwälte GbR.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Marques – Directive 2008/95/CE – Article 5, paragraphe 1 – Usage dans la vie des affaires d’un signe identique ou similaire à une marque d’autrui pour des produits ou des services identiques ou similaires à ceux pour lesquels cette marque est enregistrée – Portée des termes “faire usage” – Annonce mise en ligne sur un site Internet sur commande d’une personne opérant dans la vie des affaires puis reprise sur d’autres sites Internet.#Affaire C-684/19.cjeu_case · 2 juillet 2020
34064Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 2 July 2020.#mk advokaten GbR v MBK Rechtsanwälte GbR.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf.#Reference for a preliminary ruling — Trade marks — Directive 2008/95/EC — Article 5(1) — Use in the course of trade of a sign that is identical with or similar to another person’s trade mark for goods or services that are identical with or similar to those for which that mark is registered — Scope of the term ‘using’ — Advertisement placed on a website by order of a person operating in the course of trade and subsequently reproduced on other websites.#Case C-684/19.cjeu_case · 2 juillet 2020
34065Arrêt de la Cour (septième chambre) du 2 juillet 2020.#IE contre Magistrat der Stadt Wien.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Conservation des habitats naturels ainsi que de la faune et de la flore sauvages – Directive 92/43/CEE – Article 12, paragraphe 1 – Système de protection stricte des espèces animales – Annexe IV – Cricetus cricetus (grand hamster) – Aires de repos et sites de reproduction – Détérioration ou destruction – Aires abandonnées.#Affaire C-477/19.cjeu_case · 2 juillet 2020
34066Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 2 July 2020.#IE v Magistrat der Stadt Wien.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Wien.#Reference for a preliminary ruling — Conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora — Directive 92/43/EEC — Article 12(1) — System of strict protection for animal species — Annex IV — Cricetus cricetus (European hamster) — Resting places and breeding sites — Deterioration or destruction — Areas which have been abandoned.#Case C-477/19.cjeu_case · 2 juillet 2020
34067Arrêt de la Cour (première chambre) du 2 juillet 2020.#Blackrock Investment Management (UK) Ltd contre Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Fiscalité – Taxe sur la valeur ajoutée (TVA) – Directive 2006/112/CE – Exonérations – Article 135, paragraphe 1, sous g) – Exonérations des opérations de gestion de fonds communs de placement – Prestation unique utilisée pour la gestion de fonds communs de placement et d’autres fonds.#Affaire C-231/19.cjeu_case · 2 juillet 2020
34068Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 2 July 2020.#Blackrock Investment Management (UK) Limited v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber).#Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Value added tax (VAT) — Directive 2006/112/EC — Exemptions — Article 135(1)(g) — Exemption of transactions for the management of special investment funds — Single supply used for the management of special investment funds and for other funds.#Case C-231/19.cjeu_case · 2 juillet 2020
34069Arrêt de la Cour (dixième chambre) du 2 juillet 2020.#Procédure engagée par Veronsaajien oikeudenvalvontayksikkö.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Taxe sur la valeur ajoutée (TVA) – Directive 2006/112/CE – Prestations de services – Article 135, paragraphe 1, sous l) – Exonération de la TVA – Location de biens immeubles – Notion de “bien immeuble” – Exclusion – Article 47 – Lieu des opérations imposables – Prestations de services rattachées à un bien immeuble – Règlement d’exécution (UE) no 282/2011 – Articles 13 ter et 31 bis – Baies de brassage – Services d’hébergement en centre de données.#Affaire C-215/19.cjeu_case · 2 juillet 2020
34070Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 2 July 2020.#Proceedings brought by Veronsaajien oikeudenvalvontayksikkö.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein hallinto-oikeus.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Value added tax (VAT) – Directive 2006/112/EC – Supply of services – Article 135(1)(l) – Exemption from VAT – Letting of immovable property – Concept of ‘immovable property’ – Exclusion – Article 47 – Place of taxable transactions – Supply of services connected with immovable property – Implementing Regulation (EU) No 282/2011 – Articles 13b and 31a – IT equipment cabinets – Colocation centre services.#Case C-215/19.cjeu_case · 2 juillet 2020
34071Arrêt de la Cour (première chambre) du 2 juillet 2020.#WM contre Stadt Frankfurt am Main.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Espace de liberté, de sécurité et de justice – Directive 2008/115/CE – Normes et procédures communes applicables dans les États membres au retour des ressortissants de pays tiers en séjour irrégulier – Conditions de rétention – Article 16, paragraphe 1 – Placement en rétention dans un établissement pénitentiaire à des fins d’éloignement – Ressortissant de pays tiers représentant une grave menace pour l’ordre public ou la sécurité publique.#Affaire C-18/19.cjeu_case · 2 juillet 2020
34072Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 2 July 2020.#WM v Stadt Frankfurt am Main.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof.#Reference for a preliminary ruling — Area of freedom, security and justice — Directive 2008/115/EC — Common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals — Conditions of detention — Article 16(1) — Detention in prison accommodation for the purpose of removal — Third-country national who poses a serious threat to public policy or public security.#Case C-18/19.cjeu_case · 2 juillet 2020
34073Opinion of Advocate General Pikamäe delivered on 2 July 2020.#TQ v Staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheid.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Den Haag, zittingsplaats 's-Hertogenbosch.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Area of freedom, security and justice – Directive 2008/115/EC – Common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals – Article 5(a), Article 6(1) and (4), Article 8(1) and Article 10 – Return decision issued against an unaccompanied minor – Best interests of the child – Obligation for the Member State concerned to be satisfied, before the adoption of a return decision, that that minor will be returned to a member of his or her family, a nominated guardian or adequate reception facilities in the State of return – Distinction on the basis solely of the criterion of the age of the minor in order to grant a right of residence – Return decision not followed by removal measures.#Case C-441/19.cjeu_case · 2 juillet 2020
34074Opinion of Advocate General Tanchev delivered on 2 July 2020.#Recorded Artists Actors Performers Ltd v Phonographic Performance (Ireland) Ltd and Others.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the High Court (Irlande).#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Intellectual property – Rights related to copyright – Directive 2006/115/EC – Article 8(2) – Use of phonograms in the European Union – Right of the performers to equitable remuneration shared with the phonogram producers – Applicability to nationals of third States – Performances and Phonograms Treaty – Articles 4 and 15 – Reservations notified by third States – Limitations of the right to equitable remuneration that may, on the basis of reciprocity, follow, in the European Union, for nationals of third States from those reservations – Article 17(2) and Article 52(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Fundamental right to the protection of intellectual property – Requirement that any limitation must be provided for by law, respect the essence of the fundamental right and be proportionate – Division between the European Union and the Member States of competences to set those limitations – Division of competences in relations with third States – Article 3(2) TFEU – Exclusive competence of the European Union.#Case C-265/19.cjeu_case · 2 juillet 2020
34075Opinion of Advocate General Kokott delivered on 2 July 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 · 2 juillet 2020
34076Case C-853/19: Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 2 July 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Okresný súd Poprad — Slovakia) — IM v Sting Reality s.r.o. (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 53(2) and Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Consumer protection — Directive 2005/29/EC — Unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices — Articles 8 and 9 — Aggressive commercial practices — Directive 93/13/EEC — Unfair terms in consumer contracts — Term which has been individually negotiated — Powers of the national court)cjeu_case · 2 juillet 2020
34077Case C-256/19: Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 2 July 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Wien — Austria) — proceedings brought by S.A.D. Maler und Anstreicher OG (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 53(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court — Second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU — Effective judicial protection in the areas covered by EU law — Principle of judicial independence — Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Jurisdiction of the Court — Article 267 TFEU — Admissibility — National provisions relating to the allocation of cases in a court or tribunal — Remedy — Interpretation necessary to enable the referring court to give judgment — Manifest inadmissibility)cjeu_case · 2 juillet 2020
34078Case C-684/19: Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 2 July 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf — Germany) — mk advokaten GbR v MBK Rechtsanwälte GbR (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Trade marks — Directive 2008/95/EC — Article 5(1) — Use in the course of trade of a sign that is identical with or similar to another person’s trade mark for goods or services that are identical with or similar to those for which that mark is registered — Scope of the term ‘using’ — Advertisement placed on a website by order of a person operating in the course of trade and subsequently reproduced on other websites)cjeu_case · 2 juillet 2020
34079Case C-477/19: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 2 July 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Wien — Austria) — IE v Magistrat der Stadt Wien (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora — Directive 92/43/EEC — Article 12(1) — System of strict protection for animal species — Annex IV — Cricetus cricetus (European hamster) — Resting places and breeding sites — Deterioration or destruction — Areas which have been abandoned)cjeu_case · 2 juillet 2020
34080Case C-231/19: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 2 July 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) — United Kingdom) — BlackRock Investment Management (UK) Limited v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Value added tax (VAT) — Directive 2006/112/EC — Exemptions — Article 135(1)(g) — Exemption of transactions for the management of special investment funds — Single supply used for the management of special investment funds and for other funds)cjeu_case · 2 juillet 2020