ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 5 September 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil supérieur de la Sécurité sociale — Luxembourg) — EU v Caisse pour l’avenir des enfants

(Case C-801/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Freedom of movement for workers - Equal treatment - Article 45 TFEU - Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 - Article 4 - Social security convention concluded between the Member State of employment and a non-member country - Family allowances - Application to a frontier worker who is neither a national nor a resident of one of the Contracting States to the convention)

(2020/C 19/05)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Conseil supérieur de la Sécurité sociale

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: EU

Defendant: Caisse pour l’avenir des enfants

Operative part of the order

Article 45 TFEU, read in conjunction with Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the coordination of social security systems, must be interpreted as precluding the refusal by the competent authorities of one Member State to pay to a national of a second Member State, who works in the first Member State without living there, family allowances for his child living in a non-member country with her mother when, under identical conditions for the grant of those benefits, those competent authorities recognise the entitlement of their own nationals and residents to family benefits pursuant to a bilateral international convention concluded between the first Member State and that non-member country, unless those authorities can put forward an objective justification for refusing to do so.

(1) OJ C 82, 4.3.2019.
Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 15 July 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Arbitral Tributário (Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa — CAAD) — Portugal) — Galeria Parque Nascente-Exploração de Espaços Comerciais SA v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

(Case C-438/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court - Common system of taxation applicable to mergers, divisions, partial divisions, transfers of assets and exchanges of shares concerning companies of different Member States - Directive 90/434/EEC - Articles 4 and 11 - Directive 2009/133/EC - Articles 4 and 15 - ‘Reverse merger’ - Tax system leading to a situation whereby, in the event of a ‘reverse merger’, costs which are incurred by the parent company relating to a loan taken out by that parent company for the purchase of shares of the subsidiary acquiring the parent company and which are deductible for that parent company are considered non-deductible for that subsidiary)

(2019/C 319/22)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Tribunal Arbitral Tributário (Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa — CAAD)

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Galeria Parque Nascente-Exploração de Espaços Comerciais SA

Defendant: Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

Operative part of the judgment

Council Directive 90/434/EEC of 23 July 1990 on the common system of taxation applicable to mergers, divisions, partial divisions, transfers of assets and exchanges of shares concerning companies of different Member States and to the transfer of the registered office of an SE or SCE between Member States, as amended by Council Directive 2006/98/EC of 20 November 2006, must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which leads to a situation whereby costs which were considered tax deductible for the acquired company before the merger of the companies concerned, and which would have been tax deductible if that merger had not taken place, are not considered tax deductible for the acquiring company.

(1) OJ C 319, 10.9.2018.
Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 11 December 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Audiencia Provincial Sección No 4 de Zaragoza — Spain) — María Pilar Bueno Ruiz and Zurich Insurance PL, Sucursal de España v Irene Conte Sánchez

(Case C-431/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles - Directive 2009/103/EC - First paragraph of Article 3 - Concept of ‘use of vehicles’ - Leaks of oil and other liquids from a motor vehicle - Damages)

(2020/C 68/17)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Audiencia Provincial Sección No 4 de Zaragoza

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: María Pilar Bueno Ruiz and Zurich Insurance PL, Sucursal de España

Defendant: Irene Conte Sánchez

Operative part of the order

The first paragraph of Article 3 of Directive 2009/103/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009 relating to insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles, and the enforcement of the obligation to insure against such liability must be interpreted as meaning that the concept of ‘use of vehicles’, referred to in that provision, covers a situation in which a vehicle which has been manoeuvred and/or parked in a private car park, in accordance with its function as a means of transport, is involved in an accident in that car park.

(1) OJ C 373, 15.10.2018.
2.

EU law, in particular Council Directive 89/665/EEC of 21 December 1989 on the coordination of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the application of review procedures to the award of public supply and public works contracts, as amended by Directive 2007/66/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2007, and Council Directive 92/13/EEC of 25 February 1992 coordinating the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the application of Community rules on the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and telecommunications sectors, as amended by Directive 2007/66, as well as the principles of equivalence and effectiveness, must be interpreted as not precluding legislation of a Member State which does not allow review of a judgment, which has acquired the force of res judicata, of a court or tribunal of that Member State which has ruled on an action for annulment against an act of a contracting authority without addressing a question the examination of which was envisaged in an earlier judgment of the Court in response to a request for a preliminary ruling made in the course of the proceedings relating to that action for annulment or in an earlier judgment of the Court in response to a request for a preliminary ruling in a different case. However, if the applicable domestic rules of procedure include the possibility for national courts to reverse a judgment which has acquired the force of res judicata, for the purposes of rendering the situation arising from that judgment compatible with an earlier national judicial decision which has become final – where both the court which delivered that judgment and the parties to the case leading to that judgment were already aware of that earlier decision – that possibility must, in accordance with the principles of equivalence and effectiveness, in the same circumstances, prevail in order to render the situation compatible with EU law, as interpreted by an earlier judgment of the Court of Justice.
Order of the President of the Fourth Chamber of the Court of 17 January 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal (England & Wales) (Civil Division) — Royaume-Uni) — Sandoz Ltd, Hexal AG v G.D. Searle LLC, Janssen Sciences Ireland

(Case C-114/18) (1)

(2020/C 313/23)

Language of the case: English

The President of the Fourth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 152, 30.4.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the President of the Court of 3 December 2019 — European Commission v Kingdom of Belgium

(Case C-676/18) (1)

(2020/C 137/61)

Language of the case: French

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 16, 14.1.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 12 November 2020 — Jean-François Jalkh v European Parliament

(Joined Cases C-792/18 P and C-793/18 P) (1)

(Appeal - Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Law governing the institutions - Protocol on the privileges and immunities of the European Union - Articles 8 and 9 - Scope - Decision to lift parliamentary immunity - Conditions)

(2021/C 44/11)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Jean-François Jalkh (represented by: F. Wagner, avocat)

Other party to the proceedings: European Parliament (represented by: S. Alonso de León and C. Burgos, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the order

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeals as, in part, manifestly inadmissible and, in part, manifestly unfounded;

2. Orders Mr Jean-François Jalkh to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 65, 18.2.2019.
Order of the President of the Court of 14 February 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — Latte Più Srl and Others v Agenzia per le Erogazioni in Agricoltura (AGEA), Regione Veneto

(Case C-218/18) (1)

(2020/C 320/21)

Language of the case: Italian

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 240, 9.7.2018.
Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 19 November 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein oikeus — Finland) — Criminal proceedings against A, B

(Case C-486/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court - State aid - Tax levied on confectionery, ice cream and soft drinks - Exemption of similar products liable to constitute State aid for the purposes of Article 107(1) TFEU - Power to impose criminal penalties for failure to fulfil obligations as regards that tax)

(2020/C 45/09)

Language of the case: Finnish

Referring court

Korkein oikeus

Criminal proceedings against

A, B

Operative part of the order

EU law must be interpreted as not precluding a natural person, acting on behalf of a company subject to a consumption tax levied on certain products, such as the tax at issue in the main proceedings, who failed to fulfil its obligations as regards that tax, from facing criminal sanctions under the applicable national law, even though the exemption enjoyed by other undertakings as regards similar products should be considered State aid for the purposes of Article 107(1) TFEU.

(1) OJ C 295, 2.9.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 5 September 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the High Court of Justice (Chancery Division) – United Kingdom) — Eli Lilly and Company v Genentech Inc.

(Case C-239/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 53(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products - Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 - Article 3(b) - Conditions for obtaining - Marketing authorisation - Authorisation issued to a third party - Manifest inadmissibility)

(2019/C 383/39)

Language of the case: English

Referring court

High Court of Justice (Chancery Division)

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Eli Lilly and Company

Defendant: Genentech Inc.

Operative part of the order

The request for a preliminary ruling from the High Court of Justice (England & Wales), Chancery Division (Patents Court) (United Kingdom), made by decision of 4 March 2019, is manifestly inadmissible.

(1) OJ C 172, 20.5.2019
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the President of the Court of 23 October 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesverwaltungsgericht Steiermark — Austria) — Proceedings brought by DX v Bürgermeister der Stadt Graz, interested party: Finanzpolizei

(Case C-227/19) (1)

(2020/C 77/55)

Language of the case: German

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 213, 24.6.2019.
Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 19 November 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Trgovački sud u Zagrebu — Croatia) — INA-INDUSTRIJA NAFTE d.d. and Others v LJUBLJANSKA BANKA d.d.

(Case C-200/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 - Jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters - Article 7(1)(a) - Special jurisdiction in matters relating to a contract - Concept of ‘matters relating to a contract’ - Financial obligations imposed by national law on the co-owners of a building - Legal action seeking enforcement of those obligations)

(2020/C 68/27)

Language of the case: Croatian

Referring court

Trgovački sud u Zagrebu

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: INA-INDUSTRIJA NAFTE d.d., CROATIA osiguranje d.d., REPUBLIKA HRVATSKA, Croatia Airlines d.d., GRAD ZAGREB, HRVATSKA ELEKTROPRIVREDA d.d., HRVATSKE ŠUME d.o.o., KAPITAL d.o.o. u stečaju, bankrupt, PETROKEMIJA d.d., Đuro Đaković Holding d.d., ENERGOINVEST d.d., TELENERG d.o.o., ENERGOCONTROL d.o.o., UDRUGA POSLODAVACA U ZDRAVSTVU, HRVATSKI ZAVOD ZA MIROVINSKO OSIGURANJE, ZAGREPČANKA-POSLOVNI OBJEKTI d.d., BRODOGRADILIŠTE VIKTOR LENAC d.d., INOVINE d.d., MARAT INŽENJERING d.o.o., GOYA — COMPANY d.o.o., METROPOLIS PLAN d.o.o., Dalekovod d.d., INFRATERRA d.o.o., Citat d.o.o., STAROSTA d.o.o., METALKA METALCOM d.o.o., I.Š., B.C., Z.N., D.G., M.R., A.T

Defendant: LJUBLJANSKA BANKA d.d.

Operative part of the order

1. Article 7 of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted as meaning that a dispute concerning the failure to discharge financial obligations imposed by national law on the co-owners of a building must be regarded as falling within the concept of ‘matters relating to a contract’ within the meaning of Article 7(1)(a) of that regulation.

2. Article 7(5) of Regulation No 1215/2012 must be interpreted as meaning that a dispute such as that at issue in the main proceedings concerning an obligation arising from the ownership by a company of business premises in which it is established and carries out activities does not constitute a ‘dispute arising out of the operations of a branch, agency or other establishment’ within the meaning of that provision.

(1) OJ C 164, 13.5.2019
Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 29 April 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Arbitral Tributário (Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa — CAAD) — Portugal) — Ramada Storax SA v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

(Case C-756/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Taxation - Value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Articles 90 and 273 - Taxable amount - Reduction - Non-payment - Insolvency of the debtor residing outside the country - Ruling by a court of another Member State declaring debts claimed irrecoverable - Principles of fiscal neutrality and proportionality)

(2020/C 287/35)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Tribunal Arbitral Tributário (Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa — CAAD)

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Ramada Storax SA

Defendant: Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

Re:

Articles 90 and 273 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as precluding the legislation of a Member State, pursuant to which the right to a reduction of the value added tax paid and relating to debts deemed irrecoverable following insolvency proceedings is refused to the taxable person where the debts concerned have been declared irrecoverable by a court of another Member State on the basis of the law in force in that Member State.

(1) OJ C 19, 20.1.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the President of the Court of 26 November 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Erding — Germany) — EUflight.de GmbH v Eurowings GmbH

(Case C-648/19) (1)

(2020/C 137/70)

Language of the case: German

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 399, 25.11.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 31 January 2020 — Association européenne du charbon et du lignite (Euracoal) v European Commission, Deutscher Braunkohlen-Industrie — Verein eV, Lausitz Energie Kraftwerke AG, Mitteldeutsche Braunkohlengesellschaft mbH, eins energie in sachsen GmbH & Co. KG

(Case C-172/19 P) (1)

(Appeal - Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Environment - Directive 2010/75/EU - Best available techniques (BAT) conclusions - Implementing Decision (EU) 2017/1442 - Large combustion plants - Action for annulment - Inadmissibility - Lack of direct concern - Participation in the process leading to the adoption of the act - Procedural guarantees at the time of the adoption of the act - Substitution of grounds - No grounds alleging infringement of the appellant’s procedural rights - Act not of individual concern - Appeal manifestly unfounded)

(2020/C 313/07)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Appellant: Association européenne du charbon et du lignite (Euracoal) (represented by: W. Spieth and N. Hellermann, Rechtsanwälte)

Other parties to the proceedings: Deutscher Braunkohlen-Industrie — Verein eV, Lausitz Energie Kraftwerke AG, Mitteldeutsche Braunkohlengesellschaft mbH, eins energie in sachsen GmbH & Co. KG (represented by: W. Spieth and N. Hellermann, Rechtsanwälte), European Commission (represented by: R. Tricot and A. C. Becker, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the order

1. The appeal is dismissed as being manifestly unfounded.

2. Association européenne du charbon et du lignite (Euracoal) shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 164, 13.5.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 6 May 2020 — Csanád Szegedi v European Parliament

(Case C-628/19 P) (1)

(Appeal - European Parliament - Rules governing the payment of expenses and allowances to Members of the European Parliament - Parliamentary assistance allowance - Recovery of sums unduly paid)

(2020/C 287/31)

Language of the case: Hungarian

Parties

Appellant: Csanád Szegedi (represented by: K. Bodó, ügyvéd)

Other party to the proceedings: European Parliament (represented by: S. Seyr and Z. Nagy, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the order

1. The appeal is dismissed as manifestly unfounded.

2. Mr Csanád Szegedi is ordered to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 372, 4.11.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the President of the Court of 5 March 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Social no 26 de Barcelona — Spain) — LJ v Instituto Nacional de la Seguridad Social (INSS)

(Case C-861/19) (1)

(2020/C 320/50)

Language of the case: Spanish

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 54, 17.2.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the President of the Court of 13 March 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the High Court of Justice (England & Wales), Queen's Bench Division (Divisional Court) — United Kingdom) — AC, TM, GM, MM v ABC Sl, XYZ Plc

(Case C-814/19) (1)

(2020/C 320/48)

Language of the case: English

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 10, 13.1.2020.
Order of the President of the First Chamber of the Court of 25 September 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal (England & Wales) (Civil Division) — United Kingdom) — MG v HH

(Case C-946/19) (1)

(2020/C 414/44)

Language of the case: English

The President of the First Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 68, 2.3.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the President of the Court of 26 June 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Törvényszék (formerly Fővárosi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság) — Hungary) — TN v Országos Idegenrendészeti Főigazgatóság, formerly Bevándorlási és Menekültügyi Hivatal

(Case C-210/19) (1)

(2020/C 329/14)

Language of the case: Hungarian

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 182, 27.5.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the President of the Court of 22 October 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sofiyski rayonen sad — Bulgaria) — PH, OI v ‘Eurobank Bulgaria’ AD

(Case C-745/19) (1)

(2021/C 44/55)

Language of the case: Bulgarian

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 413, 9.12.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the President of the Court of 3 September 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Frankfurt am Main — Germany) — Flightright GmbH v Qatar Airways

(Case C-810/19) (1)

(2020/C 414/38)

Language of the case: German

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 77, 9.3.2020.
Order of the Court (Tenth chamber) of 14 January 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Bucaresti — Romania) — Krakvet sp. z o.o. sp.k. v Direcţia Generală Regională a Finanţelor Publice Bucureşti, Administraţia Fiscală pentru Contribuabili Nerezidenţi

(Case C-108/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Common system of value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Article 33 - Determination of the place where taxable transactions are carried out - Supply of goods with transport - Supply of goods dispatched or transported by or on behalf of the supplier - Sale through a website - Contract for the carriage of goods concluded by the buyer with a company suggested by the supplier)

(2021/C 138/16)

Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Curtea de Apel Bucureşti

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Krakvet sp. z o.o. sp.k.

Defendants: Direcţia Generală Regională a Finanţelor Publice Bucureşti, Administraţia Fiscală pentru Contribuabili Nerezidenţi

Operative part of the order

Article 33 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as meaning that, as regards goods sold through a website by a supplier established in a Member State to buyers located in another Member State, when, for the purposes of delivering those goods, those buyers, in accordance with the dispatching options offered by the supplier, choose a company suggested by that website with which they conclude a contract separate from the one which bounds them to that supplier for the purchase of those goods, the latter must be regarded as transported ‘by or on behalf of the supplier’, within the meaning of Article 33, where the role of that supplier is predominant in terms of initiating and organising the essential stages of the transport of those goods, which it is for the referring court to ascertain, taking account of all the relevant circumstances of the dispute in the main proceedings.

(1) OJ C 172, 20.5.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the President of the Court of 30 October 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Castilla-La Mancha — Spain) — KM v Subdelegación del Gobierno en Albacete

(Case C-731/19) (1)

(2021/C 44/53)

Language of the case: Spanish

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 432, 23.12.2019