Catalogue des documents juridiques

104314 documents
1721

Case T-106/25: Judgment of the General Court of 4 March 2026 – Pols Erm v EUIPO – Holder (Pol’s FREEZE FRESH) (EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the EU figurative mark Pol’s FREEZE FRESH – Earlier EU figurative marks PAUL depuis 1889 and PAUL LE CAFE – Relative ground for refusal – Detriment to the distinctive character or repute of the earlier mark – Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Link between the marks at issue)

cjeu_case ·
1724

Arrêt du Tribunal (deuxième chambre, siégeant avec cinq juges) du 4 mars 2026.#Agenţia Naţională de Administrare Fiscală (ANAF) et Direcţia Generală de Administrare a Marilor Contribuabili contre Heineken România S.A.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Union douanière – Tarif douanier commun – Nomenclature combinée – Classement tarifaire – Position 2206 – Sous-positions 2206 00 31, 2206 00 51, 2206 00 81 et 2206 00 39, 2206 00 59 – Boissons composées de jus de pommes fermenté, dont la part d’alcool provenant de plantes autres que les pommes est, selon le type de boisson, de minimum 48 %, 50 %, 51 %, 52 % ou 53 % par rapport à celle provenant de la fermentation des pommes et présentant les caractéristiques organoleptiques du cidre.#Affaire T-691/24.

cjeu_case ·
1725

Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber, Extended Composition) of 4 March 2026.#Agenţia Naţională de Administrare Fiscală (ANAF) and Direcţia Generală de Administrare a Marilor Contribuabili v Heineken România S.A.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Customs union – Common Customs Tariff – Combined Nomenclature – Tariff classification – Heading 2206 – Subheadings 2206 00 31, 2206 00 51, 2206 00 81 and 2206 00 39, 2206 00 59 – Beverages composed of fermented apple juice, in which the proportion of alcohol derived from plants other than apples is, depending on the type of beverage, equal at least to 48%, 50%, 51%, 52% or 53% in comparison with the alcohol obtained from the fermentation of apples and which have the organoleptic characteristics of cider.#Case T-691/24.

cjeu_case ·
1726

Arrêt du Tribunal (dixième chambre) du 4 mars 2026.#Opticoelectron Group AD contre Agence européenne de garde-frontières et de garde-côtes.#Marchés publics de fournitures – Procédure d’appel d’offres – Fourniture d’équipements de surveillance à Frontex – Rejet de l’offre d’un soumissionnaire – Recours en annulation – Article 76, sous d), du règlement de procédure – Intérêt à agir – Recevabilité – Violation des exigences techniques minimales de la procédure d’attribution – Égalité de traitement – Transparence – Principe de bonne administration.#Affaire T-669/24.

cjeu_case ·
1728

Judgment of the General Court (Chamber giving preliminary rulings) of 4 March 2026.#NI and HZ v European Air Charter AG.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Düsseldorf.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Air transport – Compensation for passengers in the event of long delay or cancellation of a flight – Exemption from the obligation to pay compensation – Article 5(3) of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 – Extraordinary circumstances – Shortcomings in airport security checks – Autonomous decision of the air carrier to wait for the passengers that had not yet passed the security check – Aircraft rotation – Rescheduling of flights subsequent to the delayed flight – Causal link.#Case T-656/24.

cjeu_case ·
1729

Arrêt du Tribunal (cinquième chambre) du 4 mars 2026.#Compass-Datenbank GmbH contre Commission européenne.#Accès aux documents – Règlement (CE) no 1049/2001 – Contenu de la plate-forme centrale européenne – Interconnexion des registres du commerce ou des sociétés dans le UE Business Registers Interconnection System – Décision 2011/833/UE – Refus d’accès – Présomption de véracité attachée à la déclaration de non-possession de documents.#Affaire T-594/24.

cjeu_case ·
1731

Case T-691/24, Heineken România: Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber, sitting with five Judges) of 4 March 2026 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Înalta Curte de Casaţie şi Justiţie – Romania) – Agenţia Naţională de Administrare Fiscală (ANAF) and Direcţia Generală de Administrare a Marilor Contribuabili v Heineken România S.A. (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Customs union – Common Customs Tariff – Combined Nomenclature – Tariff classification – Heading 2206 – Subheadings 22060031, 22060051, 22060081 and 22060039, 22060059 – Beverages composed of fermented apple juice, in which the proportion of alcohol derived from plants other than apples is, depending on the type of beverage, equal at least to 48 %, 50 %, 51 %, 52 % or 53 % in comparison with the alcohol obtained from the fermentation of apples and which have the organoleptic characteristics of cider)

cjeu_case ·
1732

Case T-699/24: Judgment of the General Court of 4 March 2026 – Opticoelectron Group v Frontex (Public supply contracts – Tender procedure – Provision of surveillance equipment to Frontex – Rejection of a tender – Action for annulment – Article 76(d) of the Rules of Procedure – Interest in bringing proceedings – Admissibility – Breach of the minimum technical requirements of the award procedure – Equal treatment – Transparency – Principle of good administration)

cjeu_case ·
1733

Case T-656/24, European Air Charter: Judgment of the General Court (Chamber giving preliminary rulings) of 4 March 2026 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Düsseldorf – Germany) – NI and HZ v European Air Charter AG (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Air transport – Compensation for passengers in the event of long delay or cancellation of a flight – Exemption from the obligation to pay compensation – Article 5(3) of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 – Extraordinary circumstances – Shortcomings in airport security checks – Autonomous decision of the air carrier to wait for the passengers that had not yet passed the security check – Aircraft rotation – Rescheduling of flights subsequent to the delayed flight – Causal link)

cjeu_case ·
1735

Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 4 March 2026.#Çolakoğlu Metalurji AŞ v European Commission.#Dumping – Imports of certain hot rolled stainless steel sheets and coils consigned from Türkiye – Extension to those imports of the definitive anti-dumping duty imposed on certain hot rolled stainless steel sheets and coils originating in Indonesia – Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/825 – Circumvention – Concept of ‘assembly operation’ – Concept of ‘completion operation’ – Article 13(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 – Error of law.#Case T-379/23.

cjeu_case ·
1736

Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 4 March 2026.#Çolakoğlu Metalurji AŞ v European Commission.#Dumping – Imports of certain hot rolled stainless steel sheets and coils consigned from Türkiye – Extension to those imports of the definitive anti-dumping duty imposed on certain hot rolled stainless steel sheets and coils originating in Indonesia – Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/825 – Circumvention – Concept of ‘assembly operation’ – Concept of ‘completion operation’ – Article 13(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 – Error of law.#Case T-379/23.

cjeu_case ·
1737

Case T-379/23: Judgment of the General Court of 4 March 2026 – Çolakoğlu Metalurji v Commission (Dumping – Imports of certain hot rolled stainless steel sheets and coils consigned from Türkiye – Extension to those imports of the definitive anti-dumping duty imposed on certain hot rolled stainless steel sheets and coils originating in Indonesia – Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/825 – Circumvention – Concept of assembly operation – Concept of completion operation – Article 13(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 – Error of law)

cjeu_case ·
1740

Case C-166/26, Mutaron: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour constitutionnelle (Belgium) lodged on 3 March 2026 – C.Z., acting both in his/her own name and on behalf of his/her child S.Y.K.Z., E.A.Y. and K.Y., acting both in their own name and on behalf of their children S.Y., E.Y. and F.Y., S.M.N. and L.H.H., acting both in their own name and on behalf of their child M.S.M., M.Z.M.J., H.A.S., Z.W. and D.N., acting both in their own name and on behalf of their children O.N., S.N., O.N., R.N. and S.N., A.S.A.H, F.B. and N.B., acting both in their own name and on behalf of their children M.B. and F.B, A.A.A.J., A.N. and J.N., acting both in their own name and on behalf of their children J.N. and A.N., A.M.A.R., R.M.M.A., H.Y., S.J.L.M., R.J.CL., Y.I.S.F., E.D.M.E., E.D.M.E., S.N.M., M.S., A.S. v Conseil des ministres

cjeu_case ·