Каталог правовых документов (cjeu_case)

104 315 документов
26641

Case T-661/19: Judgment of the General Court of 10 November 2021 — Sasol Germany and Others v Commission (REACH — Substances of very high concern — Establishment of a list of identified substances with a view to their eventual inclusion in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 — Decision identifying the substance 4-tert-butylphenol as a substance meeting the criteria for inclusion in the list — Article 57 of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 — Weight of evidence approach — Manifest error of assessment — Proportionality)

cjeu_case ·
26643

Judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 10 November 2021.#Google LLC, formerly Google Inc. and Alphabet, Inc. v European Commission.#Competition – Abuse of dominant position – Online general search services and specialised product search services – Decision finding an infringement of Article 102 TFEU and Article 54 of the EEA Agreement – Leveraging abuse – Competition on the merits or anticompetitive practice – Conditions of access by competitors to a dominant undertaking’s service the use of which cannot be effectively replaced – Dominant undertaking favouring the display of results from its own specialised search service – Effects – Need to establish a counterfactual scenario – None – Objective justifications – None – Possibility of imposing a fine having regard to certain circumstances – Guidelines on the method of setting fines – Unlimited jurisdiction.#Case T-612/17.

cjeu_case ·
26644

Judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 10 November 2021.#Google LLC, formerly Google Inc. and Alphabet, Inc. v European Commission.#Competition – Abuse of dominant position – Online general search services and specialised product search services – Decision finding an infringement of Article 102 TFEU and Article 54 of the EEA Agreement – Leveraging abuse – Competition on the merits or anticompetitive practice – Conditions of access by competitors to a dominant undertaking’s service the use of which cannot be effectively replaced – Dominant undertaking favouring the display of results from its own specialised search service – Effects – Need to establish a counterfactual scenario – None – Objective justifications – None – Possibility of imposing a fine having regard to certain circumstances – Guidelines on the method of setting fines – Unlimited jurisdiction.#Case T-612/17.

cjeu_case ·
26645

Case T-612/17: Judgment of the General Court of 10 November 2021 — Google and Alphabet v Commission (Google Shopping) (Competition — Abuse of dominant position — Online general search services and specialised product search services — Decision finding an infringement of Article 102 TFEU and Article 54 of the EEA Agreement — Leveraging abuse — Competition on the merits or anticompetitive practice — Conditions of access by competitors to a dominant undertaking’s service the use of which cannot be effectively replaced — Dominant undertaking favouring the display of results from its own specialised search service — Effects — Need to establish a counterfactual scenario — None — Objective justifications — None — Possibility of imposing a fine having regard to certain circumstances — Guidelines on the method of setting fines — Unlimited jurisdiction)

cjeu_case ·
26646

Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber, Extended Composition) of 10 November 2021.#Liam Jenkinson v Council of the European Union and Others.#Arbitration clause – International civilian staff of EU international missions – Recruitment on a contractual basis – Consecutive fixed-term employment contracts – Claim that all contractual relationships should be recategorised as a contract of indefinite duration – Action for contractual liability – Action for non-contractual liability.#Case T-602/15 RENV.

cjeu_case ·
26647

Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber, Extended Composition) of 10 November 2021.#Liam Jenkinson v Council of the European Union and Others.#Arbitration clause – International civilian staff of EU international missions – Recruitment on a contractual basis – Consecutive fixed-term employment contracts – Claim that all contractual relationships should be recategorised as a contract of indefinite duration – Action for contractual liability – Action for non-contractual liability.#Case T-602/15 RENV.

cjeu_case ·
26649

Order of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 9 November 2021.#Heidi Amort and Others v European Commission.#Action for annulment – Medicinal products for human use – Conditional marketing authorisation for the medicinal product for human use ‘COVID-19 Vaccine Janssen – COVID-19 vaccine (Ad26.COV2-S [recombinant])’ – No interest in bringing proceedings – Lack of direct concern – Lack of individual concern – Non-regulatory act – Inadmissibility.#Case T-267/21.

cjeu_case ·
26650

Order of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 9 November 2021.#Heidi Amort and Others v European Commission.#Action for annulment – Medicinal products for human use – Conditional marketing authorisation for the medicinal product for human use ‘COVID-19 Vaccine Janssen – COVID-19 vaccine (Ad26.COV2-S [recombinant])’ – No interest in bringing proceedings – Lack of direct concern – Lack of individual concern – Non-regulatory act – Inadmissibility.#Case T-267/21.

cjeu_case ·
26651

Order of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 9 November 2021.#Heidi Amort and Others v European Commission.#Action for annulment – Medicinal products for human use – Conditional marketing authorisation for the medicinal product for human use ‘COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca – COVID-19 Vaccine (ChAdOx1-S [recombinant]) ’ – No legal interest in bringing proceedings – No direct concern – No individual concern – Non-regulatory act – Inadmissibility.#Case T-165/21.

cjeu_case ·
26652

Order of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 9 November 2021.#Heidi Amort and Others v European Commission.#Action for annulment – Medicinal products for human use – Conditional marketing authorisation for the medicinal product for human use ‘COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca – COVID-19 Vaccine (ChAdOx1-S [recombinant]) ’ – No legal interest in bringing proceedings – No direct concern – No individual concern – Non-regulatory act – Inadmissibility.#Case T-165/21.

cjeu_case ·
26653

Order of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 9 November 2021.#Heidi Amort and Others v European Commission.#Action for annulment – Medicinal products for human use – Conditional marketing authorisation for the medicinal product for human use ‘COVID-19 Vaccine Moderna – COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine (nucleoside-modified)’ – No legal interest in bringing proceedings – No direct concern – No individual concern – Non-regulatory act – Inadmissibility.#Case T-136/21.

cjeu_case ·
26654

Order of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 9 November 2021.#Heidi Amort and Others v European Commission.#Action for annulment – Medicinal products for human use – Conditional marketing authorisation for the medicinal product for human use ‘COVID-19 Vaccine Moderna – COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine (nucleoside-modified)’ – No legal interest in bringing proceedings – No direct concern – No individual concern – Non-regulatory act – Inadmissibility.#Case T-136/21.

cjeu_case ·
26655

Order of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 9 November 2021.#Heidi Amort and Others v European Commission.#Action for annulment – Medicinal products for human use – Conditional marketing authorisation for the medicinal product for human use ‘Comirnaty – COVID-19 mRNA (nucleoside-modified) vaccine’ – No legal interest in bringing proceedings – No direct concern – No individual concern – Non-regulatory act – Inadmissibility.#Case T-96/21.

cjeu_case ·
26656

Order of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 9 November 2021.#Heidi Amort and Others v European Commission.#Action for annulment – Medicinal products for human use – Conditional marketing authorisation for the medicinal product for human use ‘Comirnaty – COVID-19 mRNA (nucleoside-modified) vaccine’ – No legal interest in bringing proceedings – No direct concern – No individual concern – Non-regulatory act – Inadmissibility.#Case T-96/21.

cjeu_case ·