Catalogue des documents juridiques (cjeu_case)

104 315 documents
35246

Ordonnance de la Cour (neuvième chambre) du 2 avril 2020.#International Tax Stamp Association Ltd (ITSA) contre Commission européenne.#Pourvoi – Article 181 du règlement de procédure de la Cour – Rapprochement des législations – Fabrication, présentation et vente des produits du tabac et des produits connexes ‐ Mise en place et fonctionnement d’un système de traçabilité des produits du tabac – Règlement délégué et actes d’exécution – Recours en annulation – Recevabilité – Article 263, quatrième alinéa, TFUE – Défaut d’affectation directe – Article 256, paragraphe 1, second alinéa, TFUE – Article 58, premier alinéa, du statut de la Cour de justice de l’Union européenne – Article 168, paragraphe 1, sous d), et article 169, paragraphe 2, du règlement de procédure de la Cour – Absence d’identification précise des points de motifs critiqués de l’arrêt attaqué et d’arguments juridiques spécifiques au soutien du pourvoi – Argumentation visant à obtenir de la Cour un simple réexamen des arguments présentés en première instance – Pourvoi manifestement irrecevable.#Affaire C-553/19 P.

cjeu_case ·
35247

Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 2 April 2020.#International Tax Stamp Association Ltd (ITSA) v European Commission.#Appeal — Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Approximation of laws — Manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco and related products — Establishment and operation of a traceability system for tobacco products — Delegated regulation and implementing measures — Action for annulment — Admissibility — Article 263, fourth para., TFEU — Lack of individual concern — Article 256(1), second para., TFEU — Article 58, first para., of the Statue of the Court of Justice of the European Union — Article 168(1)(d) and Article 169(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Paragraphs of the contested grounds of the judgment under appeal and specific legal arguments in support of the appeal not made clear — Line of argument asking the Court simply to re-examine the arguments put forward at first instance — Manifestly inadmissible appeal.#Case C-553/19 P.

cjeu_case ·
35248

Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 2 April 2020.#Italian Republic v European Commission.#Appeal – Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) – European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) – Sugar sector – Expenditure excluded from EU financing – Expenditure incurred by the Italian Republic – Appeal, in part, manifestly inadmissible and, in part, manifestly unfounded.#Case C-390/19 P.

cjeu_case ·
35249

Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 2 April 2020.#Italian Republic v European Commission.#Appeal – Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) – European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) – Sugar sector – Expenditure excluded from EU financing – Expenditure incurred by the Italian Republic – Appeal, in part, manifestly inadmissible and, in part, manifestly unfounded.#Case C-390/19 P.

cjeu_case ·
35250

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 2 April 2020.#Ruska Federacija v I.N.#Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — EEA Agreement — Non-discrimination — Article 36 — Freedom to provide services — Scope — Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway concerning the latters’ association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis — Agreement on the surrender procedure between the Member States of the European Union and Iceland and Norway — Extradition to a third State of an Icelandic national — Protection of a Member State’s nationals against extradition — No equivalent protection for nationals of another State — Icelandic national who was granted asylum under national law before acquiring Icelandic citizenship — Restriction of freedom of movement — Justification based on the prevention of impunity — Proportionality — Verification of the guarantees provided for in Article 19(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.#Case C-897/19 PPU.

cjeu_case ·
35251

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 2 April 2020.#Ruska Federacija v I.N.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Vrhovni sud.#Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — EEA Agreement — Non-discrimination — Article 36 — Freedom to provide services — Scope — Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway concerning the latters’ association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis — Agreement on the surrender procedure between the Member States of the European Union and Iceland and Norway — Extradition to a third State of an Icelandic national — Protection of a Member State’s nationals against extradition — No equivalent protection for nationals of another State — Icelandic national who was granted asylum under national law before acquiring Icelandic citizenship — Restriction of freedom of movement — Justification based on the prevention of impunity — Proportionality — Verification of the guarantees provided for in Article 19(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.#Case C-897/19 PPU.

cjeu_case ·
35254

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 2 April 2020.#European Commission v Kingdom of Spain.#Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Flood risk assessment and management – Directive 2007/60/EC – Article 7(1) and (5), Article 10(1) and (2) and Article 15(1) – Flood risk management plan – Establishment – Public consultation and information – Making available to the European Commission – River basin districts ES 120 Gran Canaria, ES 122 Fuerteventura, ES 123 Lanzarote, ES 124 Tenerife, ES 125 La Palma, ES 126 La Gomera and ES 127 El Hierro (Spain).#C-384/19.

cjeu_case ·
35255

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 2 April 2020.#European Commission v Kingdom of Spain.#Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Flood risk assessment and management – Directive 2007/60/EC – Article 7(1) and (5), Article 10(1) and (2) and Article 15(1) – Flood risk management plan – Establishment – Public consultation and information – Making available to the European Commission – River basin districts ES 120 Gran Canaria, ES 122 Fuerteventura, ES 123 Lanzarote, ES 124 Tenerife, ES 125 La Palma, ES 126 La Gomera and ES 127 El Hierro (Spain).#C-384/19.

cjeu_case ·
35258

Arrêt de la Cour (huitième chambre) du 2 avril 2020.#kunsthaus muerz gmbh contre Zürich Versicherungs AG.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Libre prestation des services – Assurance directe sur la vie – Directive 2002/83/CE – Articles 35 et 36 – Droit et délai de renonciation – Information incorrecte concernant les modalités d’exercice du droit de renonciation – Conditions de forme de la déclaration de renonciation – Expiration du droit de renonciation – Pertinence de la qualité de “consommateur” du preneur d’assurance.#Affaire C-20/19.

cjeu_case ·
35259

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 2 April 2020.#kunsthaus muerz gmbh v Zürich Versicherungs AG.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Wien.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Freedom to provide services – Direct life assurance – Directive 2002/83/EC – Articles 35 and 36 – Right of cancellation and cancellation period – Incorrect information concerning the detailed rules for exercising the right of cancellation – Formal requirements for the declaration of cancellation – Lapse of the right of cancellation – Relevance of the policy holder’s status as a ‘consumer’.#Case C-20/19.

cjeu_case ·
35260

Opinion of Advocate General Campos Sánchez-Bordona delivered on 2 April 2020.#Verein für Konsumenteninformation v Volkswagen AG.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesgericht Klagenfurt.#Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Point 2 of Article 7 — Jurisdiction in matters relating to tort, delict or quasi-delict — Place where the harmful event occurred — Place where the damage occurred — Manipulation of data relating to the emission of exhaust gases from engines produced by a motor vehicle manufacturer.#Case C-343/19.

cjeu_case ·