ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 374/11

Order of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 September 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bezirksgericht Linz — Austria) — Peter Schotthöfer & Florian Steiner GbR v Eugen Adelsmayr

(Case C-473/15) (1)

((Requests for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Extradition of a national of a Member State of the European Union to a third State where he risks being subjected to the death penalty - Citizenship of the Union - Articles 18 and 21 TFEU - Article 19(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Protection against extradition))

(2017/C 374/14)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bezirksgericht Linz

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Peter Schotthöfer & Florian Steiner GbR

Defendant: Eugen Adelsmayr

Operative part of the order

Article 19(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union must be interpreted as meaning that a request for extradition originating from a third country concerning a Union citizen who, in exercising his freedom of movement, leaves his Member State of origin in order to reside on the territory of another Member State, must be rejected by the latter Member State where that citizen runs a serious risk of being subjected to the death penalty in the event of extradition.

(1) OJ C 406, 7.12.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 129/12

Order of the President of the Court of 26 January 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Audiencia Provincial de Cantabria — Spain) — Luca Jerónimo García Almodóvar, Catalina Molina Moreno v Banco de Caja España de Inversiones, Salamanca y Soria, SAU

(Case C-554/15) (1)

(2017/C 129/16)

Language of the case: Spanish

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

(1) OJ C 27, 25.1.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 475/9

Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 5 October 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Dresden — Germany) — Ute Wunderlich v Bulgarian Air Charter Limited

(Case C-32/16) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court - Absence of reasonable doubt - Air transport - Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 - Article 2(l) - Definition of ‘cancellation’ - Flight making an unscheduled stopover))

(2016/C 475/12)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Amtsgericht Dresden

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Ute Wunderlich

Defendant: Bulgarian Air Charter Limited

Operative part of the order

Article 2(l) of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91 must be interpreted as meaning that a flight in respect of which the places of departure and arrival accorded with the planned schedule but during which an unscheduled stopover took place cannot be regarded as cancelled.

(1) OJ C 165, 10.5.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 343/37

Order of the President of the Court of 8 July 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation — France) — Sarval Sud-Est SAS, Siffda Bretagne SAS, Siffda Centre SAS, Siram SARL, Francisque Gay, Patrick Legras de Grandcourt v Association ATM Porc, Association ATM Avicole, Association ATM équidés Angee, Association ATM éleveurs de ruminants, Association ATM lapins Clipp, Association ATM palmipèdes gras — Cifog, Association ATM ponte — CNPO, Atemax France, Monnard Jura SNC, Fédération nationale bovine (FNB), Fédération nationale porcine

(Case C-155/16) (1)

(2016/C 343/50)

Language of the case: French

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

(1) OJ C 200, 6.6.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 112/31

Order of the President of the Court of 23 January 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia de Alicante — Spain) — Manuel González Poyato, Ana Belén Tovar García v Banco Popular Español SA

(Case C-34/16) (1)

(2017/C 112/43)

Language of the case: Spanish

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

(1) OJ C 136, 18.4.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 86/22

Order of the President of the Court of 25 November 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Handelsgericht Wien — Austria) — RMF Financial Holdings Sàrl v Heta Asset Resolution AG

(Case C-282/16) (1)

(2017/C 086/28)

Language of the case: German

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

(1) OJ C 314, 29.8.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 168/17

Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 9 March 2017 — Simet SpA v European Commission

(Case C-232/16 P) (1)

((Appeal - Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - State aid - Transport sector - Inter-regional bus transport services - Regulation (EEC) No 1191/69 - Right to compensation for expenses arising from the performance of public service obligations - National judicial decision - Aid incompatible with the internal market))

(2017/C 168/22)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Appellant: Simet SpA (represented by: A. Clarizia, C. Varrone and P. Clarizia, avvocati)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: G. Conte, D. Grespan and P.J. Loewenthal, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the order

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. Simet SpA shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 232, 27.6.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 129/3

Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 1 February 2017 — Darko Graf v European Commission

(Case C-241/16 P) (1)

((Appeal - Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Action for damages - Act of accession of the Republic of Croatia to the European Union - Commitments relating to a strategy for judicial reform - Creation followed by the abolition of the position of public bailiff - Damage suffered by persons appointed as public bailiffs - Monitoring of the Republic of Croatia’s commitments by the European Commission - Appeal dismissed - Appeal manifestly inadmissible))

(2017/C 129/04)

Language of the case: Croatian

Parties

Appellant: Darko Graf (represented by: L. Duvnjak, odvjetnik)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: S. Ječmenica and G. Wils, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the order

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. Mr Darko Graf is ordered to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 251, 11.7.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 283/29

Order of the President of the Court of 18 May 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Versailles — France) — Green Yellow Canet en Roussillon SNC (C-583/16), Green Yellow Hyères Sup SNC (C-584/16) v Enedis, SA, in the presence of: Axa Corporate Solutions Assurances SA

(Joined Cases C-583/16 and C-584/16) (1)

(2017/C 283/42)

Language of the case: French

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

(1) OJ C 38, 6.2.2017.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 202/13

Order of the President of the Court of 30 March 2017 — European Commission v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, supported by: French Republic

(Case C-489/16) (1)

(2017/C 202/21)

Language of the case: French

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

(1) OJ C 410, 7.11.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 32/6

Order of the Court (Third Chamber) of 15 November 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hanseatisches Oberlandesgericht in Bremen — Germany) — Execution of European arrest warrants issued against Pál Aranyosi

(Case C-496/16) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters - Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA - European arrest warrant - Grounds for refusal to execute - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Article 4 - Prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment - Conditions of detention in the issuing Member State - Annulment of the European arrest warrant by the issuing judicial authority - Hypothetical question - No need to adjudicate))

(2018/C 032/08)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Hanseatisches Oberlandesgericht in Bremen

Party to the main proceedings

Pál Aranyosi

Operative part of the order

There is no need to proceed to judgment on the request for a preliminary ruling made by the Hanseatisches Oberlandesgericht in Bremen (Higher Regional Court, Bremen, Germany) by decision of 12 September 2016.

(1) OJ C 475, 19.12.2016
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 424/16

Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 10 October 2017 — Greenpeace Energy eG v European Commission

(Case C-640/16 P) (1)

((Appeal - Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - State aid - Action for annulment - Article 263 TFEU - Admissibility - Aid planned by the United Kingdom in favour of Hinkley Point C nuclear power station - Decision declaring the aid compatible with the internal market - Locus standi - Appellant not individually concerned))

(2017/C 424/22)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Appellant: Greenpeace Energy eG (represented by: D. Fouquet, J. Nysten and S. Michaels, Rechtsanwälte)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: K. Blanck-Putz, P. Němečková and T. Maxian Rusche, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the Commission: French Republic (represented by: D. Colas and J. Bousin, acting as Agents), United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented by: D. Robertson, acting as Agent)

Operative part of the order

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. Greenpeace Energy eG shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission.

(1) OJ C 38, 6.2.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the President of the Court of 7 June 2018 — Guccio Gucci SpA v European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), Guess? IP Holder LP

(Case C-674/16 P) (1)

(2018/C 341/12)

Language of the case: English

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

(1) OJ C 144, 8.5.2017.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 190/17

Order of the President of the Court of 23 January 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof — Germany) — Die Länderbahn GmbH DLB v DB Station & Service AG

(Case C-344/16) (1)

(2018/C 190/23)

Language of the case: German

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

(1) OJ C 428, 21.11.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 32/8

Order of the Court of 16 November 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Supremo Tribunal Administrativo — Portugal) — Instituto de Financiamento da Agricultura e Pescas, IP v António da Silva Rodrigues

(Case C-243/17) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 53(2) and Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court - Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 - Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 - Article 3(1) - Protection of the European Union’s financial interests - Concept of ‘multiannual programme’ - Scope of application))

(2018/C 032/12)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Supremo Tribunal Administrativo

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Instituto de Financiamento da Agricultura e Pescas, IP

Defendant: António da Silva Rodrigues

Operative part of the order

1. The first subparagraph of Article 3(1) of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 of 18 December 1995 on the protection of the European Communities financial interests must be interpreted as meaning that, in the case of an irregularity which is neither continuous nor repeated, the limitation period of four years provided for in that provision runs from the date the irregularity was committed.

2. The second, third and fourth questions referred by the Supremo Tribunal Administrativo (Supreme Administrative Court, Portugal) are manifestly inadmissible.

(1) OJ C 256, 7.8.2017.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 13/11

Order of the President of the Court of 22 September 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Hannover — Germany) — Kathrin Meyer v TUIfly GmbH

(Case C-196/17) (1)

(2018/C 013/16)

Language of the case: German

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

(1) OJ C 231, 17.7.2017.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 190/3

Order of the Court (Sixth chamber) of 22 March 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado Contencioso-Administrativo No 2 de Zaragoza — Spain) — Pilar Centeno Meléndez v Universidad de Zaragoza

(Case C-315/17) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 1999/70/EC - Framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP - Clause 4 - Principle of non-discrimination - Rules for horizontal career progression - Grant of remuneration supplement - National legislation excluding non-established civil servants - Definition of ‘employment conditions’ and ‘objective reasons’))

(2018/C 190/03)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Juzgado Contencioso-Administrativo No 2 de Zaragoza

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Pilar Centeno Meléndez

Defendant: Universidad de Zaragoza

Operative part of the order

Clause 4(1) of the Framework Agreement on fixed-term work, concluded on 18 March 1999, which is set out in the Annex to Council Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999 concerning the Framework Agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP, must be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which restricts participation in the regime for horizontal career progression of administrative and technical staff of the University of Zaragoza (Spain) and, accordingly, receipt of the remuneration supplement ensuing from participation in that regime to career civil servants and permanent contract agents, to the exclusion, in particular, of individuals employed as non-established civil servants.

(1) OJ C 269, 14.8.2017.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 142/18

Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 7 February 2018 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Corte suprema di cassazione — Italy) — Manuela Maturi and Others v Fondazione Teatro dell’Opera di Roma, Fondazione Teatro dell’Opera di Roma v Manuela Maturi (C-142/17), Catia Passeri v Fondazione Teatro dell’Opera di Roma (C-143/17)

(Joined Cases C-142/17 and C-143/17) (1)

((References for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Social policy - Equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation - Directive 2006/54/EC - National rules providing for the temporary possibility for performing artists having reached retirement age to continue to perform until the age previously laid down for entitlement to a pension, fixed at 47 years old for women and 52 years old for men))

(2018/C 142/23)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Corte suprema di cassazione

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Manuela Maturi, Laura Di Segni, Isabella Lo Balbo, Maria Badini, Loredana Barbanera, Fondazione Teatro dell’Opera di Roma (C-142/17), Catia Passeri (C-143/17)

Defendants: Fondazione Teatro dell’Opera di Roma, Manuela Maturi, Laura Di Segni, Isabella Lo Balbo, Maria Badini, Loredana Barbanera, Luca Troiano, Mauro Murri (C-142/17), Fondazione Teatro dell’Opera di Roma (C-143/17)

Re:

Article 14(1)(c) Directive 2006/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on the implementation of the principle of equal opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation and Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as meaning that national rules, such as those laid down in Article 3(7) of Decree-Law No 64 of 30 April 2010, converted into Law No 100, of 29 June 2010, in the version in force at the material time, pursuant to which workers employed as dancers having reached the retirement age laid down by those rules of 45 years old for both women and men, have the option for a transitional period of two years to continue to work until the working age limit laid down by the previous rules, set at 47 years old for women and 52 years old for men, establishes direct discrimination based on sex which is prohibited by that directive.

(1) OJ C 249, 31.7.2017.
Case C-491/17: Order of the President of the Third Chamber of the Court of 28 May 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom — United Kingdom) — Hoteles Piñero Canarias, S.L. v Keefe (by his litigation friend Eyton)

Order of the President of the Third Chamber of the Court of 28 May 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom — United Kingdom) — Hoteles Piñero Canarias, S.L. v Keefe (by his litigation friend Eyton)

(Case C-491/17) ( 1 )

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

( 1 ) OJ C 347, 16.10.2017.
Case C-721/17: Order of the President of the Court of 17 May 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Hannover — Germany) — Sebastian Vollmer, Vera Sagalov v Swiss Global Air Lines AG

Order of the President of the Court of 17 May 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Hannover — Germany) — Sebastian Vollmer, Vera Sagalov v Swiss Global Air Lines AG

(Case C-721/17) ( 1 )

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

( 1 ) OJ C 123, 9.4.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 18 October 2018 — Alex SCI v European Commission

(Case C-696/17 P) (1)

(Appeal - Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - State aid - Financing of an urban development project - Rejection of a complaint - Action for annulment - Individual concern - Locus standi)

(2019/C 4/14)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Alex SCI (represented by: J. Fouchet, avocat)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: C. Georgieva-Kecsmar, K. Herrmann and T. Maxian Rusche, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the Commission: French Republic (represented by: D. Colas, E. de Moustier and P. Dodeller, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the order

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. Alex SCI shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission.

3. The French Republic shall bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 72, 26.2.2018
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the President of the Court of 15 June 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Oradea — Romania) — Sindicatul Energia Oradea v SC Termoelectrica SA

(Case C-392/17) (1)

(2018/C 341/16)

Language of the case: Romanian

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

(1) OJ C 293, 4.9.2017.
Order of the Court (First Chamber) of 24 October 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Bacău, Romania) — SC Topaz Development SRL v Constantin Juncu, Raisa Juncu

(Case C-211/17) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court - Consumer protection - Directive 93/13/EEC - Unfair terms in consumer contracts - Promissory contract for sale and purchase drafted by the property developer and certified by a notary - Article 3(2) and Article 4(1) - Proof of the negotiated nature of the terms - Presumption - Consumer’s signature of the contract - Article 3(3) - Paragraph 1(d) to (f) and (i) of the Annex - Express forfeiture clause - Penalty clause - Unfairness - Articles 6 and 7 - Possibility for the national court to vary the term found to be unfair)

(2020/C 45/03)

Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Curtea de Apel Bacău

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: SC Topaz Development SRL

Defendants: Constantin Juncu, Raisa Juncu

Operative part of the order

1. Article 3(2) and Article 4(1) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts must be interpreted as meaning that, in circumstances such as those in the main proceedings, the mere signing of a contract concluded by a consumer with a seller or supplier which provides that, by signing the contract, the consumer accepts all of the contractual terms drafted in advance by the seller or supplier, does not lead to a rebuttal of the presumption that such terms had not been individually negotiated.

2. Article 3(3) of Directive 93/13, read in conjunction with the Annex thereto, must be interpreted as meaning that an express forfeiture clause and a penalty clause, such as those at issue in the main proceedings, contained in a contract concluded by a consumer with a seller or supplier that are exclusively in favour of, and were drafted in advance by, the seller or supplier, are liable to constitute unfair terms referred to in paragraph 1(d) to (f) of that Annex, which is a matter for the national court to determine.

3. Article 6 of Directive 93/13 must be interpreted as meaning that, where an express forfeiture clause and a penalty clause contained in a promissory contract for sale and purchase concluded between a consumer and a seller or supplier are held to be unfair, the national court cannot remedy the invalidity of such unfair terms by substituting its own decision, unless the contract cannot continue to exist after those unfair terms are deleted and the cancellation of the contract in its entirety would expose the consumer to particularly detrimental consequences.

(1) OJ C 249, 31.7.2017
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the Court (Second Chamber) of 17 January 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Giudice di Pace di Roma — Italy) — Alberto Rossi v Ministero di Giustizia

(Case C-626/17) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 53(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Social policy - Fixed-term employment - Justices of the Peace - Manifest inadmissibility))

(2019/C 112/10)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Giudice di Pace di Roma

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Alberto Rossi

Defendant: Ministero di Giustizia

Intervener in support of the applicant: Unione Nazionale Giudici di Pace (Unagipa), Associazione Nazionale Guidici di Pace, Coordinamento Nazionale Giustizia di Pace, Organismo Unitario della Magistratura Onoraria — Magistrati Onorari Riuniti, Maria Maddalena Acernese and 656 other Justices of the Peace, Angela Abbondandolo and 139 honorary vice-prosecutors, Santina Adelfio and 101 other honorary judges

Operative part of the order

The request for a preliminary ruling made by the Giudice di Pace di Roma (Justice of the Peace of Rome, Italy), by decision of 17 October 2017, is manifestly inadmissible.

(1) OJ C 52, 12.2.2018.