Catalogue des documents juridiques (cjeu_case)

104 314 documents
14068

Order of the Court (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) of 9 January 2024.#Yayla Türk Lebensmittelvertrieb GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#Appeal – EU trade mark – Determination as to whether appeals should be allowed to proceed – Article 170b of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Request failing to demonstrate that an issue is significant with respect to the unity, consistency or development of EU law – Refusal to allow the appeal to proceed.#Case C-611/23 P.

cjeu_case ·
14072

Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 9 January 2024.#Criminal proceedings against M.S.S. and Others.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 53(2) and Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Interpretation of national law – Manifest lack of jurisdiction – Requirement to set out the legislative context of the dispute in the main proceedings and the reasons justifying the need for an answer to the question referred for a preliminary ruling – Lack of sufficient information – Manifest inadmissibility.#Case C-338/23.

cjeu_case ·
14073

Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 9 January 2024.#Criminal proceedings against M.S.S. and Others.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sofiyski gradski sad.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 53(2) and Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Interpretation of national law – Manifest lack of jurisdiction – Requirement to set out the legislative context of the dispute in the main proceedings and the reasons justifying the need for an answer to the question referred for a preliminary ruling – Lack of sufficient information – Manifest inadmissibility.#Case C-338/23.

cjeu_case ·
14074

Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 9 January 2024.#Criminal proceedings against C.A.A. and C.V.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Acte éclairé – Decision 2006/928/EC – Mechanism for cooperation and verification of progress in Romania to address specific benchmarks in the areas of judicial reform and the fight against corruption – Legal nature and effects – Binding on Romania – Direct effect of the benchmarks – Obligation to combat corruption in general and high-level corruption in particular – Obligation to provide for dissuasive and effective criminal penalties – Limitation period for criminal liability – Decision of a constitutional court which has declared invalid a provision of national legislation governing the grounds for interrupting that period – Systemic risk of impunity – Principle that offences and penalties must be defined by law – Requirements of foreseeability and precision of criminal law – Principle of the retroactive application of the more lenient criminal law (lex mitior) – Principle of legal certainty – National standard of protection of fundamental rights – Obligation of the courts of a Member State to disapply decisions of the constitutional court and/or the supreme court of that Member State in the event that they are incompatible with EU law.#Case C-131/23.

cjeu_case ·
14075

Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 9 January 2024.#Criminal proceedings against C.A.A. and C.V.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Braşov.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Acte éclairé – Decision 2006/928/EC – Mechanism for cooperation and verification of progress in Romania to address specific benchmarks in the areas of judicial reform and the fight against corruption – Legal nature and effects – Binding on Romania – Direct effect of the benchmarks – Obligation to combat corruption in general and high-level corruption in particular – Obligation to provide for dissuasive and effective criminal penalties – Limitation period for criminal liability – Decision of a constitutional court which has declared invalid a provision of national legislation governing the grounds for interrupting that period – Systemic risk of impunity – Principle that offences and penalties must be defined by law – Requirements of foreseeability and precision of criminal law – Principle of the retroactive application of the more lenient criminal law (lex mitior) – Principle of legal certainty – National standard of protection of fundamental rights – Obligation of the courts of a Member State to disapply decisions of the constitutional court and/or the supreme court of that Member State in the event that they are incompatible with EU law.#Case C-131/23.

cjeu_case ·
14076

Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 9 January 2024.#Criminal proceedings against M.A.sr and Others.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Acte éclairé – Identical questions – Protection of the financial interests of the European Union – Article 325(1) TFEU – PFI Convention – Article 2(1) – Obligation to counter fraud affecting the financial interests of the European Union by taking effective deterrent measures – Obligation to provide for criminal penalties – Value added tax (VAT) – Directive 2006/112/EC – Serious VAT fraud – Limitation period for criminal liability – Judgment of a constitutional court which had invalidated a national provision governing the reasons for interrupting that period – Systemic risk of impunity – Protection of fundamental rights – Article 49(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Principle that offences and penalties must be defined by law – Requirements of foreseeability and precision of criminal law – Principle of the retroactive application of the more lenient criminal law (lex mitior) – Principle of legal certainty – National standard of protection of fundamental rights – Duty on the courts of a Member State to disapply judgments of the constitutional court and/or the supreme court of that Member State in the event that they are incompatible with EU law – Disciplinary liability of judges in the event of non-compliance with those judgments – Principle of the primacy of EU law.#Case C-75/23.

cjeu_case ·
14077

Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 9 January 2024.#Criminal proceedings against M.A.sr and Others.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Braşov.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Acte éclairé – Identical questions – Protection of the financial interests of the European Union – Article 325(1) TFEU – PFI Convention – Article 2(1) – Obligation to counter fraud affecting the financial interests of the European Union by taking effective deterrent measures – Obligation to provide for criminal penalties – Value added tax (VAT) – Directive 2006/112/EC – Serious VAT fraud – Limitation period for criminal liability – Judgment of a constitutional court which had invalidated a national provision governing the reasons for interrupting that period – Systemic risk of impunity – Protection of fundamental rights – Article 49(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Principle that offences and penalties must be defined by law – Requirements of foreseeability and precision of criminal law – Principle of the retroactive application of the more lenient criminal law (lex mitior) – Principle of legal certainty – National standard of protection of fundamental rights – Duty on the courts of a Member State to disapply judgments of the constitutional court and/or the supreme court of that Member State in the event that they are incompatible with EU law – Disciplinary liability of judges in the event of non-compliance with those judgments – Principle of the primacy of EU law.#Case C-75/23.

cjeu_case ·
14079

Case C-338/23, Bravchev: Order of the Court (Eight Chamber Chamber) of 9 January 2024 — (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sofiyski gradski sad — Bulgaria) — Criminal proceedings against M.S.S. and Others (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 53(2) and Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Interpretation of national law — Manifest lack of jurisdiction — Requirement to set out the legislative context of the dispute in the main proceedings and the reasons justifying the need for an answer to the question referred for a preliminary ruling — Lack of sufficient information — Manifest inadmissibility)

cjeu_case ·
14080

Case C-131/23, Unitatea Administrativ Teritorială Judeţul Braşov: Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 9 January 2024 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Braşov — Romania) — Criminal proceedings against C.A.A. and C.V. (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Acte éclairé — Decision 2006/928/EC — Mechanism for cooperation and verification of progress in Romania to address specific benchmarks in the areas of judicial reform and the fight against corruption — Legal nature and effects — Binding on Romania — Direct effect of the benchmarks — Obligation to combat corruption in general and high-level corruption in particular — Obligation to provide for dissuasive and effective criminal penalties — Limitation period for criminal liability — Decision of a constitutional court which has declared invalid a provision of national legislation governing the grounds for interrupting that period — Systemic risk of impunity — Principle that offences and penalties must be defined by law — Requirements of foreseeability and precision of criminal law — Principle of the retroactive application of the more lenient criminal law (lex mitior) — Principle of legal certainty — National standard of protection of fundamental rights — Obligation of the courts of a Member State to disapply decisions of the constitutional court and/or the supreme court of that Member State in the event that they are incompatible with EU law)

cjeu_case ·