ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 6 June 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Grondwettelijk Hof — Belgium) — P. M., N. G.d.M., P. V.d.S. v Ministerraad

(Case C-264/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts - Directive 2014/24/EU - Article 10, (c), and (d)(i),(ii) and (v) - Validity - Scope - Exclusion of arbitration and conciliation services and of certain legal services - Principles of equal treatment and subsidiarity - Articles 49 and 56 TFEU)

(2019/C 263/19)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Grondwettelijk Hof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: P. M., N. G.d.M., P. V.d.S.

Defendant: Ministerraad

Operative part of the judgment

The examination of the question referred has disclosed no factor of such a kind as to affect the validity of the provisions of Article 10(c) and (d)(i),(ii) and (v) of Directive 2014/24/EU, of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC, having regard to the principles of equal treatment and subsidiarity, and also Articles 49 and 56 TFEU.

(1) OJ C 276, 6.8.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 10 July 2019 — Caviro Distillerie Srl, Distillerie Bonollo SpA, Distillerie Mazzari SpA, Industria Chimica Valenzana (ICV) SpA v European Commission

(Case C-345/18 P) (1)

(Appeal - Commercial policy - Dumping - Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/176 - Imports of tartaric acid originating in China and produced by Hangzhou Bioking Biochemical Engineering Co. Ltd - Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 - Article 3(2), (3) and (5) - No material injury - Manifest error of assessment - Determination of injury - Evaluation of all relevant economic factors and indices having a bearing on the state of the EU industry - Market share)

(2019/C 305/27)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellants: Caviro Distillerie Srl, Distillerie Bonollo SpA, Distillerie Mazzari SpA, Industria Chimica Valenzana (ICV) SpA (represented by: R. MacLean, Solicitor)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: J.-F. Brakeland and A. Demeneix, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders Caviro Distillerie Srl, Distillerie Bonollo SpA, Distillerie Mazzari SpA and Industria Chimica Valenzana (ICV) SpA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 259, 23.7.2018.
2.

Article 90 of Directive 2006/112 must be interpreted as meaning that, in a situation such as that at issue in the main proceedings, the failure to pay part of the leasing instalments due under a financial leasing agreement in respect of the period from the cessation of payments to the time of the non-retroactive termination of the agreement, on the one hand, and the failure to pay compensation due in the event of early termination of the agreement and corresponding to the amount of all the unpaid instalments up to the end of the term of the agreement, on the other hand, constitute a case of non-payment capable of being covered by the derogation from the requirement to reduce the taxable amount for value added tax, laid down in paragraph 2 of that article, unless the taxable person demonstrates a reasonable probability that the debt will not be honoured, this being a matter to be determined by the referring court.
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 4 September 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Milano — Italy) — Avv. Alessandro Salvoni v Anna Maria Fiermonte

(Case C-347/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 - Article 53 - Certificate relating to a judgment in civil and commercial matters in Annex I - Powers of the court of origin - Automatic verification whether there have been breaches of the rules on jurisdiction concerning consumer contracts)

(2019/C 383/28)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale di Milano

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Avv. Alessandro Salvoni

Defendant: Anna Maria Fiermonte

Operative part of the judgment

Article 53 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, as amended by Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/281 of 26 November 2014 read in conjunction with Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as precluding the court of origin which has been requested to issue the certificate provided for in Article 53 of that regulation in respect of a judgment which has acquired the force of res judicata from being able to ascertain of its own motion whether there has been a breach of the rules set out in Chapter II, Section 4 of that regulation, so that it may inform the consumer of any breach that is established and enable him to assess, in full knowledge of the facts, the possibility of availing himself of the remedy provided for in Article 45 of that regulation.

(1) OJ C 285, 13.8.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 29 July 2019 — European Medicines Agency v Shire Pharmaceuticals Ireland Ltd, European Commission

(Case C-359/18 P) (1)

(Appeal - Regulation (EC) No 141/2000 - Orphan medicinal products - Article 5 - Application for designation of a medicinal product as an ‘orphan medicinal product’ - Validation - Existence of a prior marketing authorisation (MA) for the same medicinal product)

(2019/C 319/17)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: European Medicines Agency (represented by: initially by S. Marino, S. Drosos, T. Jabłoński and A. Spina, Agents, and subsequently by S. Marino, S. Drosos and T. Jabłoński, Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings: Shire Pharmaceuticals Ireland Ltd (represented by: G. Castle, Solicitor, D. Anderson QC and M. Birdling, Barrister and by S. Cowlishaw, Solicitor), European Commission (represented by: K. Petersen and A. Sipos, Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders the European Medicines Agency (EMA) to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by Shire Pharmaceuticals Ireland Ltd;

3. Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 294, 20.8.2018
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 5 September 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Baden-Württemberg — Germany) — TDK-Lambda Germany GmbH v Hauptzollamt Lörrach

(Case C-559/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 - Customs Union and Common Customs Tariff - Tariff classification - Combined Nomenclature - Subheading 85044030 - Static converters - Classification criteria - Main intended use)

(2019/C 383/38)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Finanzgericht Baden-Württemberg

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: TDK-Lambda Germany GmbH

Defendant: Hauptzollamt Lörrach

Operative part of the judgment

Subheading 85 044 030 of the Combined Nomenclature set out in Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff, as amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 927/2012 of 9 October 2012, and Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1001/2013 of 4 October 2013, must be interpreted as meaning that static converters such as those at issue in the main proceedings may fall within that subheading only if the main use for which they are intended is with ‘telecommunication apparatus or automatic data processing machines and the units thereof’, within the meaning of that subheading, which is a matter for verification by the referring court.

(1) OJ C 436, 3.12.2018.
1.

Article 168(a) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, as amended by Council Directive 2010/45/EU of 13 July 2010, must be interpreted as precluding a taxable person who participates in the food chain from being refused the right to deduct input value added tax (VAT) on the sole ground, assuming that it has been duly established, that that taxable person has not complied with his obligations under Article 18(2) of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety, to identify his suppliers for the purposes of traceability of foodstuffs, which it is for the referring court to ascertain. Non-compliance with those obligations may, however, constitute one element among others which, taken together and in a consistent manner, tend to show that the taxable person knew or should have known that he was involved in a transaction involving VAT fraud, which it is for the referring court to assess.
1.

Articles 45 and 48 TFEU must be interpreted as not precluding a law of a Member State under which a migrant worker residing in the territory of that Member State, who is subject to the social security legislation of the Member State of employment under Article 13 of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of the Council of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons and their families moving within the Community, in its version amended and updated by Council Regulation (EC) No 118/97 of 2 December 1996, as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1992/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006, is not insured for the purposes of the social security scheme of that Member State of residence, despite the fact that the legislation of the Member State of employment does not confer on that worker any entitlement to an old-age pension or child benefit;
Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 17 October 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d'appel de Liège — Belgium) — Ministère public, Ministre des Finances du Royaume de Belgique v QC, Comida paralela 12.

(Case C-579/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Excise duties - Directive 2008/118/EC - Articles 8 and 38 - Person liable to pay excise duty following the unlawful introduction of goods into the territory of a Member State - Concept - Company civilly liable for acts committed by its manager)

(2019/C 423/20)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour d'appel de Liège

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Ministère public, Ministre des Finances du Royaume de Belgique

Defendants: QC, Comida paralela 12

Operative part of the judgment

Article 38 of Council Directive 2008/118/EC of 16 December 2008 concerning the general arrangements for excise duty and repealing Directive 92/12/EEC, read in conjunction with Article 8(2) of that directive, must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which, in the event of the unlawful introduction into the territory of a Member State of excise goods released for consumption in another Member State, makes a legal entity which is civilly liable for the criminal offences committed by its manager jointly and severally liable for the excise duties.

(1) OJ C 427, 26.11.2018.
—

ordering a host provider to remove information which it stores, the content of which is equivalent to the content of information which was previously declared to be unlawful, or to block access to that information, provided that the monitoring of and search for the information concerned by such an injunction are limited to information conveying a message the content of which remains essentially unchanged compared with the content which gave rise to the finding of illegality and containing the elements specified in the injunction, and provided that the differences in the wording of that equivalent content, compared with the wording characterising the information which was previously declared to be illegal, are not such as to require the host provider to carry out an independent assessment of that content, and
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 24 October 2019 (Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Piemonte — Italy) — Prato Nevoso Termo Energy Srl v Provincia di Cuneo, ARPA Piemonte

(Case C-212/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Environment - Directive 2008/98/EC - Waste - Used vegetable oils having undergone chemical treatment - Article 6(1) and (4) - End-of-waste status - Directive 2009/28/EC - Promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources - Article 13 - National authorisation, certification and licensing procedures that are applied to plants for the production of electricity, heating or cooling from renewable energy sources - Use of a bioliquid as a power source for an electric power plant)

(2019/C 432/07)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Piemonte

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Prato Nevoso Termo Energy Srl

Defendants: Provincia di Cuneo, ARPA Piemonte

Intervening party: Comune di Frabosa Sottana

Operative part of the judgment

Article 6(1) and (4) of Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste and repealing certain Directives and Article 13(1) of Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources and amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC, as amended by Directive (EU) 2015/1513 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 September 2015, read together, must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation under which an application for authorisation to replace methane, as a power source for an electric power plant producing atmospheric emissions, with a substance derived from the chemical treatment of used vegetable oils, must be refused, on the ground that that substance is not included in the list of categories of biomass fuels authorised for that purpose and that that list may be amended only by an internal act of general application, the adoption procedure of which is not coordinated with the administrative procedure for authorising the use of such a substance as fuel, if the Member State could consider, without making a manifest error of assessment, that it has not been demonstrated that the use of that vegetable oil, in such circumstances, satisfies the conditions laid down in Article 6(1) of Directive 2008/98 and, in particular, is devoid of any possible adverse impact on the environment and human health. It falls to the national court to ascertain whether that is the case in the main proceedings.

(1) OJ C 240, 9.7.2018.
2.

Orders the Landeskammer für Land- und Forstwirtschaft in Steiermark (Regional Chamber of Agriculture and Forestry of Styria, Austria) to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and those incurred by Ms Gabriele Schmid.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 20 November 2019 — Portuguese Republic v European Commission

(Case C-737/18 P) (1)

(Appeal - European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) - European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) - Expenditure excluded from EU financing - Expenditure incurred by the Portuguese Republic)

(2020/C 27/10)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties

Appellant: Portuguese Republic (represented by: L. Inez Fernandes, J. Saraiva de Almeida, P. Barros da Costa and P. Estêvão, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: A. Sauka and B. Rechena, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 35, 28.1.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 14 November 2019 — Silec Cable, General Cable Corp. v European Commission

(Case C-599/18 P) (1)

(Appeal - Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - European market for underground and submarine power cables - Market allocation in connection with projects - Proof of the infringement - Presumption of innocence - Distortion of the evidence - Public distancing - Subjective perception of other cartel participants - Infringement committed by several undertakings constituting a single economic entity - Gravity of the infringement committed by one of these undertakings - Determination - ‘Fringe player’ or ‘moderate player’ in the cartel - Determination - Principle of equal treatment)

(2020/C 10/21)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellants: Silec Cable, General Cable Corp. (represented by: I. Sinan, Barrister, and C. Renner, Rechtsanwältin)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: H. van Vliet, S. Baches Opi and F. Castilla Contreras, Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders Silec Cable SAS and General Cable Corp. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 436, 3.12.2018.
Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 27 November 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — Tedeschi Srl, acting on its own account and as agent of a temporary association of undertakings, Consorzio Stabile Istant Service, acting on its own account and as principal of a temporary association of undertakings v C.M. Service Srl, Università degli Studi di Roma La Sapienza

(Case C-402/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Articles 49 and 56 TFEU - Public procurement - Directive 2004/18/EC - Article 25 - Subcontracting - National legislation limiting the possibility of subcontracting to 30 % of the total amount of the contract and preventing the prices which apply to subcontracted services from being reduced by more than 20 % by comparison with the prices stipulated in the decision awarding the contract)

(2020/C 36/07)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Consiglio di Stato

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Tedeschi Srl, acting on its own account and as agent of a temporary association of undertakings, Consorzio Stabile Istant Service, acting on its own account and as principal of a temporary association of undertakings

Defendants: C.M. Service Srl, Università degli Studi di Roma La Sapienza

Operative part of the judgment

Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts must be interpreted as:

— precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which limits to 30 % the share of the contract which the tenderer is permitted to subcontract to third parties;

— precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which limits the possibility of reducing the prices which apply to subcontracted services by more than 20 % by comparison with the prices stipulated in the decision awarding the contract.

(1) OJ C 301, 27.8.2018.
Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 28 November 2019 (Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Okręgowy w Warszawie, XXIII Wydział Gospodarczy Odwoławczy, Poland) — KROL — Zakład Robót Wodno-Kanalizacyjnych Sp. z o.o., sp.k. v Porr S.A.

(Case C-722/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Combating late payment in commercial transactions - Directive 2000/35/EC - Article 1 and Article 6(3) - Scope - National legislation - Commercial transactions financed by the EU Structural Funds and by the EU Cohesion Fund - Exclusion)

(2020/C 36/18)

Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Sąd Okręgowy w Warszawie, XXIII Wydział Gospodarczy Odwoławczy

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: KROL — Zakład Robót Wodno-Kanalizacyjnych Sp. z o.o., sp.k.

Defendant: Porr S.A.

Operative part of the judgment

Article 1 and Article 6(3) of Directive 2000/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 June 2000 on combating late payment in commercial transactions must be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, pursuant to which commercial transactions financed in whole or in part by resources from the EU Structural Funds and the EU Cohesion Fund are excluded from the benefit of the compensation for late payment provided for by that directive.

(1) OJ C 164, 13.5.2019.
Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 19 December 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de première instance francophone de Bruxelles — Belgium) — Brussels Securities SA v État Belge

(Case C-389/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Common system of taxation applicable in the case of parent companies and subsidiaries of different Member States - Directive 90/435/EEC - Prevention of double taxation - First indent of Article 4(1) - Prohibition on taxing profits received - Inclusion of the dividend distributed by the subsidiary in the parent company’s tax base - Deduction of the dividend distributed from the parent company’s tax base and the indefinite carrying forward of the surplus to the following tax years - The order in which tax deductions on profits are to be applied - Loss of a tax advantage)

(2020/C 61/08)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal de première instance francophone de Bruxelles

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Brussels Securities SA

Defendant: État Belge

Operative part of the judgment

Article 4(1) of Directive 90/435/EEC of 23 July 1990 on the common system of taxation applicable in the case of parent companies and subsidiaries of different Member States, as amended by Council Directive 2003/123/EC of 22 December 2003 must be interpreted as precluding legislation of a Member State which provides that dividends received by a parent company from its subsidiary must first be included in the tax base of the parent company, before 95 % of the amount of the dividends is then deducted, and any surplus may be carried forward to subsequent tax years indefinitely, that deduction having priority over another tax deduction which may only be carried forward for a limited time.

(1) OJ C 294, 20.8.2018.
Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 12 December 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Najvyšší súd Slovenskej republiky — Slovak Republic) — Slovenské elektrárne a.s. v Úrad pre vybrané hospodárske subjekty, formerly Daňový úrad pre vybrané daňové subjekty

(Case C-376/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Admissibility - Common rules for the internal market in electricity - Directive 2009/72/EC - Scope - Article 3 - Objectives - Principle of non-discrimination - Special levy on the revenue of entities that are holders of an authorisation to carry on activity in regulated sectors - Electricity sector)

(2020/C 54/03)

Language of the case: Slovak

Referring court

Najvyšší súd Slovenskej republiky

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Slovenské elektrárne a.s.

Defendant: Úrad pre vybrané hospodárske subjekty, formerly Daňový úrad pre vybrané daňové subjekty

Operative part of the judgment

Directive 2009/72/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity and repealing Directive 2003/54/EC and, in particular, Article 3(1) to (3) and (10) thereof, must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation that establishes a special levy on the revenue, with respect to activities performed both nationally and abroad, of undertakings operating, on the basis of an authorisation issued by a public authority, in various regulated activity sectors, including undertakings that hold an authorisation for supplying electricity issued by the competent national regulatory authority.

(1) OJ C 285, 13.8.2018.