34741Case C-208/20: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sofiyski rayonen sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 14 May 2020 — ‘Toplofikatsia Sofia’ EAD, ‘Chez Elektro Balgaria’ AD and ‘Agentsia za kontrol na prosrocheni zadalzhenia’ EOODcjeu_case · 14 мая 2020 г.
34742Rectification order of 14 May 2020.#Compañía de Tranvías de La Coruña, SA v Ayuntamiento de A Coruña.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado Contencioso Administrativo No 2 A Coruña.#Case C-45/19.cjeu_case · 14 мая 2020 г.
34743Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 14 May 2020.#FMS and Others v Országos Idegenrendészeti Főigazgatóság Dél-alföldi Regionális Igazgatóság and Országos Idegenrendészeti Főigazgatóság.#Reference for a preliminary ruling — Asylum and immigration policy — Directive 2013/32/EU — Application for international protection — Article 33(2) — Grounds of inadmissibility — Article 40 — Subsequent applications — Article 43 — Border procedures — Directive 2013/33/EU — Article 2(h) and Articles 8 and 9 — Detention — Whether lawful — Directive 2008/115/EU — Article 13 — Effective remedies — Article 15 — Detention — Whether lawful — Right to an effective remedy — Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Principle of primacy of EU law.#Joined Cases C-924/19 PPU and C-925/19 PPU.cjeu_case · 14 мая 2020 г.
34744Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 14 May 2020.#FMS and Others v Országos Idegenrendészeti Főigazgatóság Dél-alföldi Regionális Igazgatóság and Országos Idegenrendészeti Főigazgatóság.#Requests for a preliminary ruling from the Szegedi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság.#Reference for a preliminary ruling — Asylum and immigration policy — Directive 2013/32/EU — Application for international protection — Article 33(2) — Grounds of inadmissibility — Article 40 — Subsequent applications — Article 43 — Border procedures — Directive 2013/33/EU — Article 2(h) and Articles 8 and 9 — Detention — Whether lawful — Directive 2008/115/EU — Article 13 — Effective remedies — Article 15 — Detention — Whether lawful — Right to an effective remedy — Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Principle of primacy of EU law.#Joined Cases C-924/19 PPU and C-925/19 PPU.cjeu_case · 14 мая 2020 г.
34745Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 14 May 2020.#European Commission v United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.#Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Directive 2006/112/EC — Derogations — Simplification measures and measures to prevent tax evasion or avoidance — Article 395(2) — Obligation incumbent on Member States to notify the European Commission of special measures intended to simplify the procedure for charging VAT — Substantial amendment of the measure initially notified.#Case C-276/19.cjeu_case · 14 мая 2020 г.
34746Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 14 May 2020.#European Commission v United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.#Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Directive 2006/112/EC — Derogations — Simplification measures and measures to prevent tax evasion or avoidance — Article 395(2) — Obligation incumbent on Member States to notify the European Commission of special measures intended to simplify the procedure for charging VAT — Substantial amendment of the measure initially notified.#Case C-276/19.cjeu_case · 14 мая 2020 г.
34747Arrêt de la Cour (sixième chambre) du 14 mai 2020.#EIS GmbH contre TO.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Protection des consommateurs – Directive 2011/83/UE – Article 6, paragraphe 1, sous c) et h), et paragraphe 4 – Annexe I, point A – Droit de rétractation – Informations à fournir par le professionnel concernant les conditions, le délai et les modalités d’exercice du droit de rétractation – Obligation, pour le professionnel, d’indiquer son numéro de téléphone “lorsqu’il est disponible” – Portée.#Affaire C-266/19.cjeu_case · 14 мая 2020 г.
34748Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 14 May 2020.#EIS GmbH v TO.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Consumer protection – Directive 2011/83/EU – Article 6(1)(c) and (h) and (4) – Annex I(A) – Right of withdrawal – Information to be supplied by the trader relating to the conditions, time limit and procedures for exercising the right of withdrawal – Requirement for the trader to state his or her telephone number ‘where available’ – Scope.#Case C-266/19.cjeu_case · 14 мая 2020 г.
34749Arrêt de la Cour (quatrième chambre) du 14 mai 2020.#T-Systems Magyarország Zrt. et BKK Budapesti Közlekedési Központ Zrt. contre Közbeszerzési Hatóság Közbeszerzési Döntőbizottság.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Marchés publics – Passation des marchés publics – Directive 2014/24/UE – Article 1er, paragraphe 2, et article 72 – Directive 2014/25/UE – Article 1er, paragraphe 2, et article 89 – Procédures de recours en matière de passation des marchés publics de fournitures et de travaux – Directive 89/665/CEE – Article 2 sexies, paragraphe 2 – Procédures de passation des marchés des entités opérant dans les secteurs de l’eau, de l’énergie, des transports et des télécommunications – Directive 92/13/CEE – Article 2 sexies, paragraphe 2 – Modifications d’un contrat conclu à l’issue d’une procédure de passation de marché public – Absence de nouvelle procédure de passation de marché – Amendes imposées au pouvoir adjudicateur et à l’attributaire du marché – Principe de proportionnalité.#Affaire C-263/19.cjeu_case · 14 мая 2020 г.
34750Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 14 May 2020.#T-Systems Magyarország Zrt. and BKK Budapesti Közlekedési Központ v Közbeszerzési Hatóság Közbeszerzési Döntőbizottság.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Törvényszék.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Public procurement – Award of public contracts – Directive 2014/24/EU – Article 1(2) and Article 72 – Directive 2014/25/EU – Article 1(2) and Article 89 – Procedures for review of the award of public supply and public works contracts – Directive 89/665/EEC – Article 2e(2) – Procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and telecommunications sectors – Directive 92/13/EEC – Article 2e(2) – Modifications to a contract concluded following a public procurement procedure – No new public procurement procedure – Fines imposed on the contracting authority and on the successful tenderer – Principle of proportionality.#Case C-263/19.cjeu_case · 14 мая 2020 г.
34751Arrêt de la Cour (sixième chambre) du 14 mai 2020.#NK contre MS et AS.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Protection des consommateurs – Droits des consommateurs – Directive 2011/83/UE – Champ d’application – Article 3, paragraphe 3, sous f) – Notion de “contrats portant sur la construction d’immeubles neufs” – Article 16, sous c) – Notion de “biens confectionnés selon les spécifications du consommateur ou nettement personnalisés” – Contrat entre un architecte et un consommateur portant sur l’élaboration d’un plan d’une maison unifamiliale neuve.#Affaire C-208/19.cjeu_case · 14 мая 2020 г.
34752Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 14 May 2020.#NK v MS and AS.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesgericht für Zivilrechtssachen Graz.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Consumer protection – Consumer rights – Directive 2011/83/EU – Scope – Article 3(3)(f) – Concept of ‘contracts for the construction of new buildings’ – Article 16(c) – Concept of ‘goods made to the consumer’s specifications or clearly personalised’ – Contract between an architect and a consumer for the drawing-up of a plan for a new single-family house.#Case C-208/19.cjeu_case · 14 мая 2020 г.
34753Arrêt de la Cour (sixième chambre) du 14 mai 2020.#Spenner GmbH & Co. KG contre Bundesrepublik Deutschland.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Environnement – Système d’échange de quotas d’émission de gaz à effet de serre dans l’Union européenne – Directive 2003/87/CE – Article 10 bis – Régime transitoire d’allocation de quotas à titre gratuit – Décision 2011/278/UE – Article 9 – Détermination du niveau d’activité historique – Modification significative de la capacité d’une installation intervenue avant la période de référence – Détermination de la période de référence pertinente.#Affaire C-189/19.cjeu_case · 14 мая 2020 г.
34754Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 14 May 2020.#Spenner GmbH & Co. KG v Bundesrepublik Deutschland.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Environment – Scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading in the European Union – Directive 2003/87/EC – Article 10a – Transitional regime for free allocation of allowances – Decision 2011/278/EU – Article 9 – Determination of the historical activity level – Significant change in the capacity of an installation which took place before the baseline period – Determination of the relevant baseline period.#Case C-189/19.cjeu_case · 14 мая 2020 г.
34755Arrêt de la Cour (cinquième chambre) du 14 mai 2020.#Procédure pénale contre Bouygues travaux publics e.a.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Travailleurs migrants – Sécurité sociale – Règlement (CEE) no 1408/71 – Législation applicable – Article 14, point 1, sous a), et point 2, sous b) – Règlement (CE) no 883/2004 – Article 12, paragraphe 1 – Article 13, paragraphe 1, sous a) – Travailleurs détachés – Travailleurs exerçant une activité dans deux ou plusieurs États membres – Règlement (CEE) no 574/72 – Article 11, paragraphe 1, sous a) – Article 12 bis, point 2, sous a), et point 4, sous a) – Règlement (CE) no 987/2009 – Article 19, paragraphe 2 – Certificats E 101 et A 1 – Effet contraignant – Portée – Sécurité sociale – Droit du travail.#Affaire C-17/19.cjeu_case · 14 мая 2020 г.
34756Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 14 May 2020.#Criminal proceedings against Bouygues travaux publics and Others.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (France).#Reference for a preliminary ruling — Migrant workers — Social security — Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 — Legislation applicable — Article 14(1)(a) and (2)(b) — Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 — Article 12(1) — Article 13(1)(a) — Posted workers — Workers employed in two or more Member States — Regulation (EEC) No 574/72 — Article 11(1)(a) — Article 12a(2)(a) and(4)(a) — Regulation (EC) No 987/2009 — Article 19(2) — E 101 and A 1 Certificates — Binding effect — Consequences — Social security — Employment law.#Case C-17/19.cjeu_case · 14 мая 2020 г.
34757Arrêt de la Cour (deuxième chambre) du 14 mai 2020.#A.m.a. – Azienda Municipale Ambiente SpA contre Consorzio Laziale Rifiuti – Co.La.Ri.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Environnement – Déchets – Directive 1999/31/CE – Décharges existantes – Période d’entretien de la décharge après désaffectation – Prolongation – Coûts de la mise en décharge des déchets – Principe du pollueur-payeur – Application dans le temps de la directive.#Affaire C-15/19.cjeu_case · 14 мая 2020 г.
34758Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 14 May 2020.#A.m.a. - Azienda Municipale Ambiente SpA v Consorzio Laziale Rifiuti – Co.La.Ri.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte suprema di cassazione.#Reference for a preliminary ruling — Environment — Waste — Directive 1999/31/EC — Existing landfill sites — Period of responsibility for after-care of the landfill following closure — Extension — Costs of the landfill of waste — Polluter pays principle — Temporal scope of the directive.#Case C-15/19.cjeu_case · 14 мая 2020 г.
34759Opinion of Advocate General Pikamäe delivered on 14 May 2020.#United Biscuits (Pension Trustees) Limited and United Biscuits Pension Investments Limited v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Value added tax (VAT) – Directive 2006/112/EC – Article 135(1)(a) – Exemption of insurance transactions – Supply of pension fund management services to trustees by investment fund managers – Exclusion of any risk indemnity – Occupational pension scheme – National tax practice – Exercise of an insurance activity – Authorised entities – Entities not holding such authorisation – Concept of ‘insurance transactions’.#Case C-235/19.cjeu_case · 14 мая 2020 г.
34760Opinion of Advocate General Pitruzzella delivered on 14 May 2020.#Jobcenter Krefeld - Widerspruchsstelle v JD.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landessozialgericht Nordrhein-Westfalen.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Free movement of persons – Workers – Regulation (EU) No 492/2011 – Article 7(2) – Equal treatment – Social advantages – Article 10 – Children attending school – Directive 2004/38/EC – Article 24 – Social assistance – Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 – Article 4 – Article 70 – Special non-contributory cash benefits – Migrant worker with dependent children attending school in the host Member State.#Case C-181/19.cjeu_case · 14 мая 2020 г.