Каталог правовых документов (cjeu_case)

104 315 документов
30241

Opinion of Advocate General Hogan delivered on 25 March 2021.#Bundesrepublik Deutschland v SE.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Common policy on asylum and subsidiary protection – Directive 2011/95/EU – Third indent of Article 2(j) – Concept of ‘family member’ – Adult applying for international protection on the basis of his or her family relationship with a minor who has already been granted subsidiary protection – Relevant date for assessing ‘minor’ status.#Case C-768/19.

cjeu_case ·
30242

Case C-907/19: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 25 March 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof — Germany) — Q-GmbH v Finanzamt Z (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Directive 2006/112/EC — Value added tax (VAT) — Exemptions — Article 135(1)(a) — Insurance transactions and related services performed by insurance brokers and insurance agents — Service supplied for an insurer, comprising different services — Categorisation as a single supply)

cjeu_case ·
30243

Case C-856/19: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 25 March 2021 — European Commission v Hungary (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Article 258 TFEU — Directive 2011/64/EU — Article 10(2) and (3) — Excise duty applied to manufactured tobacco — Rate of the overall excise duty on cigarettes lower than the prescribed minimum rate — Internal difficulties — Threat of serious disruption to public order — Duty of sincere cooperation)

cjeu_case ·
30245

Joined Cases C-517/19 P and C-518/19 P: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 25 March 2021 — Maria Álvarez y Bejarano and Others v European Commission, Council of the European Union, European Parliament (Appeal — Civil service — Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union — Reform of the Staff Regulations — Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1023/2013 — New provisions relating to the annual reimbursement of travel expenses and the granting of travelling time — Link with expatriate status — Plea of illegality — Principles of equal treatment and of proportionality — Intensity of the judicial review)

cjeu_case ·
30246

Case C-307/19: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 25 March 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Visoki trgovački sud Republike Hrvatske — Croatia) — Obala i lučice d.o.o. v NLB Leasing d.o.o. (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Applicable law — Regulation (EC) No 864/2007 and Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 — Scope ratione temporis — Lack of jurisdiction of the Court — Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Article 1(1) — Substantive scope — Concept of ‘civil and commercial matters’ — Article 7(1) — Concepts of ‘matters relating to a contract’ and ‘provision of services’ — Article 24(1) — Concept of ‘tenancies of immovable property’ — Regulation (EC) No 1393/2007 — Service of judicial and extrajudicial documents — Notaries acting in enforcement proceedings — Proceedings for the recovery of a debt relating to a daily parking ticket for a vehicle parked on the public highway)

cjeu_case ·
30247

Case C-165/19 P: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 25 March 2021 — Slovak Telekom a.s. v European Commission, Slovanet, a.s. (Appeal — Competition — Article 102 TFEU — Abuse of dominant position — Slovak market for broadband internet access services — Regulatory obligation on the part of operators with significant market power to grant access to the local loop — Conditions laid down by the incumbent operator for unbundled access by other operators to the local loop — Indispensability of the access — Margin squeeze — Costs — Competitor at least as efficient as the dominant undertaking — Rights of the defence)

cjeu_case ·
30248

Case C-152/19 P: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 25 March 2021 — Deutsche Telekom AG v European Commission, Slovanet a.s. (Appeal — Competition — Article 102 TFEU — Abuse of dominant position — Slovak market for broadband internet access services — Regulatory obligation on the part of operators with significant market power to grant access to the local loop — Conditions laid down by the incumbent operator for unbundled access by other operators to the local loop — Indispensability of the access — Imputability of a subsidiary’s conduct to the parent company — Rights of the defence)

cjeu_case ·
30249

Arrêt de la Cour (quatrième chambre) du 25 mars 2021.#BT contre Balgarska Narodna Banka.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Systèmes de garantie des dépôts – Directive 94/19/CE – Article 1er, point 3, sous i) – Article 7, paragraphe 6 – Article 10, paragraphe 1 – Notion de “dépôt indisponible” – Constat d’indisponibilité du dépôt – Autorité compétente – Droit à indemnisation du déposant – Clause contractuelle contraire à la directive 94/19 – Principe de primauté du droit de l’Union – Système européen de surveillance financière – Autorité bancaire européenne (ABE) – Règlement (UE) no 1093/2010 – Article 1er, paragraphe 2 – Article 4, point 2, sous iii) – Article 17, paragraphe 3 – Recommandation de l’ABE à une autorité bancaire nationale portant sur les mesures à prendre pour se conformer à la directive 94/19 – Effets juridiques – Validité – Assainissement et liquidation des établissements de crédit – Directive 2001/24/CE – Article 2, septième tiret – Notion de “mesures d’assainissement” – Compatibilité avec l’article 17, paragraphe 1, et l’article 52, paragraphe 1, de la charte des droits fondamentaux de l’Union européenne – Responsabilité des États membres en cas de violation du droit de l’Union – Conditions – Violation suffisamment caractérisée du droit de l’Union – Autonomie procédurale des États membres – Principe de coopération loyale – Article 4, paragraphe 3, TUE – Principes d’équivalence et d’effectivité.#Affaire C-501/18.

cjeu_case ·
30250

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 25 March 2021.#BT v Balgarska Narodna Banka.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad Sofia-grad.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Deposit-guarantee schemes – Directive 94/19/EC – Article 1(3)(i) – Article 7(6) – Article 10(1) – Concept of ‘unavailable deposit’ – Determination of unavailability of deposits – Competent authority – Depositor’s rights to compensation – Contractual clause contrary to Directive 94/19 – Principle of primacy of Union law – European System of Financial Supervision – European Banking Authority (EBA) – Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 – Article 1(2) – Article 4(2)(iii) – Article 17(3) – EBA recommendation to a national banking authority on measures to comply with Directive 94/19 – Legal effects – Validity – Reorganisation and winding up of credit institutions – Directive 2001/24/EC – Article 2, seventh indent – Concept of ‘reorganisation measures’ – Compatibility with Article 17(1) and Article 52(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Liability of Member States for breach of Union law – Conditions – Sufficiently serious breach of EU law – Procedural autonomy of Member States – Principle of sincere cooperation – Article 4(3) TEU – Principles of equivalence and effectiveness.#Case C-501/18.

cjeu_case ·
30251

Case C-501/18: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 25 March 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad Sofia-grad — Bulgaria) — BT v Balgarska Narodna Banka (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Deposit-guarantee schemes — Directive 94/19/EC — Article 1(3)(i) — Article 7(6) — Article 10(1) — Concept of ‘unavailable deposit’ — Determination of unavailability of deposits — Competent authority — Depositor’s rights to compensation — Contractual clause contrary to Directive 94/19 — Principle of primacy of Union law — European System of Financial Supervision — European Banking Authority (EBA) — Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 — Article 1(2) — Article 4(2)(iii) — Article 17(3) — EBA recommendation to a national banking authority on measures to comply with Directive 94/19 — Legal effects — Validity — Reorganisation and winding up of credit institutions — Directive 2001/24/EC — Article 2, seventh indent — Concept of ‘reorganisation measures’ — Compatibility with Article 17(1) and Article 52(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Liability of Member States for breach of Union law — Conditions — Sufficiently serious breach of EU law — Procedural autonomy of Member States — Principle of sincere cooperation — Article 4(3) TEU — Principles of equivalence and effectiveness)

cjeu_case ·
30252

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 25 March 2021.#Merck KGaA v European Commission.#Appeal – Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Pharmaceutical products – Market for antidepressant medicines (citalopram) – Settlement agreements concerning process patents concluded between a manufacturer of originator medicines holding those patents and manufacturers of generic medicines – Article 101 TFEU – Potential competition – Restriction by object – Characterisation – Calculation of the amount of the fine.#Case C-614/16 P.

cjeu_case ·
30253

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 25 March 2021.#Merck KGaA v European Commission.#Appeal – Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Pharmaceutical products – Market for antidepressant medicines (citalopram) – Settlement agreements concerning process patents concluded between a manufacturer of originator medicines holding those patents and manufacturers of generic medicines – Article 101 TFEU – Potential competition – Restriction by object – Characterisation – Calculation of the amount of the fine.#Case C-614/16 P.

cjeu_case ·
30254

Arrêt de la Cour (quatrième chambre) du 25 mars 2021.#Xellia Pharmaceuticals ApS et Alpharma LLC contre Commission européenne.#Pourvoi – Concurrence – Ententes – Produits pharmaceutiques – Marché des médicaments antidépresseurs (citalopram) – Accords de règlement amiable de litiges relatifs à des brevets de procédé conclus entre un fabricant de médicaments princeps titulaire de ces brevets et des fabricants de médicaments génériques – Article 101 TFUE – Concurrence potentielle – Restriction par objet – Qualification – Calcul du montant de l’amende – Droits de la défense – Délai raisonnable – Perte de documents par l’écoulement du temps – Devoir général de prudence – Règlement (CE) no 1/2003 – Article 23, paragraphe 2, deuxième alinéa – Plafonnement de l’amende – Prise en compte de l’exercice social précédent celui de l’adoption de la décision de la Commission européenne – Dernier exercice complet d’activité économique normale.#Affaire C-611/16 P.

cjeu_case ·
30255

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 25 March 2021.#Xellia Pharmaceuticals ApS and Alpharma, LLC, anciennement Zoetis Products LLC v European Commission.#Appeal – Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Pharmaceutical products – Market for antidepressants (citalopram) – Settlement agreements relating to disputes concerning process patents concluded by a manufacturer of originator medicines who is the holder of those patents and manufacturers of generic medicines – Article 101 TFEU – Potential competition – Restriction by object – Characterisation – Calculation of the amount of the fine – Rights of the defence – Reasonable time – Loss of documents due to the passage of time – General duty of care – Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 – Second subparagraph of Article 23(2) – Maximum amount of the fine – Taking into account the business year preceding that in which the European Commission’s decision was adopted – Last full year of normal economic activity.#Case C-611/16 P.

cjeu_case ·
30256

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 25 March 2021.#Arrow Group ApS and Arrow Generics Ltd v European Commission.#Appeal – Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Pharmaceutical products – Market for antidepressant medicines (citalopram) – Settlement agreements concerning process patents concluded between a manufacturer of originator medicines holding those patents and manufacturers of generic medicines – Article 101 TFEU – Potential competition – Restriction by object – Characterisation – Calculation of the amount of the fine.#Case C-601/16 P.

cjeu_case ·
30257

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 25 March 2021.#Arrow Group ApS and Arrow Generics Ltd v European Commission.#Appeal – Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Pharmaceutical products – Market for antidepressant medicines (citalopram) – Settlement agreements concerning process patents concluded between a manufacturer of originator medicines holding those patents and manufacturers of generic medicines – Article 101 TFEU – Potential competition – Restriction by object – Characterisation – Calculation of the amount of the fine.#Case C-601/16 P.

cjeu_case ·
30258

Arrêt de la Cour (quatrième chambre) du 25 mars 2021.#H. Lundbeck A/S et Lundbeck Ltd contre Commission européenne.#Pourvoi – Concurrence – Ententes – Produits pharmaceutiques – Marché des médicaments antidépresseurs (citalopram) – Accords de règlement amiable de litiges relatifs à des brevets de procédé conclus entre un fabricant de médicaments princeps titulaire de ces brevets et des fabricants de médicaments génériques – Article 101 TFUE – Concurrence potentielle – Restriction par objet – Qualification – Calcul du montant de l’amende – Ventes en relation directe ou indirecte avec l’infraction.#Affaire C-591/16 P.

cjeu_case ·
30259

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 25 March 2021.#H. Lundbeck A/S and Lundbeck Ltd v European Commission.#Appeal – Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Pharmaceutical products – Market for antidepressants (citalopram) – Settlement agreements relating to disputes concerning process patents concluded by a manufacturer of originator medicines who is the holder of those patents and manufacturers of generic medicines – Article 101 TFEU – Potential competition – Restriction by object – Characterisation – Calculation of the amount of the fine – Sales directly or indirectly related to the infringement.#Case C-591/16 P.

cjeu_case ·
30260

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 25 March 2021.#Generics (UK) Ltd v European Commission.#Appeal – Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Pharmaceutical products – Market for antidepressants (citalopram) – Settlement agreements relating to disputes concerning process patents concluded by a manufacturer of originator medicines who is the holder of those patents and manufacturers of generic medicines – Article 101 TFEU – Potential competition – Restriction by object – Characterisation – Calculation of the amount of the fine.#Case C-588/16 P.

cjeu_case ·