ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 28 February 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Supremo Tribunal Administrativo — Portugal) — Manuel Jorge Sequeira Mesquita v Fazenda Pública

(Case C-278/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Value added tax (VAT) - Sixth Directive 77/388/EEC - Exemption - Article 13B(b) - Leasing or letting of immovable property - Meaning - Contract for the transfer of the use of land comprising vineyards for agricultural purposes)

(2019/C 139/19)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Supremo Tribunal Administrativo

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Manuel Jorge Sequeira Mesquita

Defendant: Fazenda Pública

Operative part of the judgment

Article 13B(b) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment must be interpreted as meaning that the exemption from value added tax on the leasing or letting of immovable property provided for in that provision is applicable to a contract for transfer of the use of land comprising vineyards for agricultural purposes to a company engaged in viticulture, entered into for a period of one year, automatically renewable and under which rent is paid at the end of each year

(1) OJ C 259, 23.7.2018.
Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 2 May 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the College van Beroep voor het Bedrijfsleven — Netherlands) — T. Boer & Zonen BV v Staatssecretaris van Economische Zaken

(Case C-98/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Protection of health - Hygiene package - Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 - Hygiene of food of animal origin - Rules for food business operators - Specific requirements - Meat of domestic ungulates - Storage and transport - Requirements for the temperature of the meat)

(2019/C 220/07)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

College van Beroep voor het Bedrijfsleven

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: T. Boer & Zonen BV

Defendant: Staatssecretaris van Economische Zaken

Operative part of the judgment

Annex III, Section I, Chapter VII, points 1 and 3, to Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 laying down specific hygiene rules for food of animal origin must be interpreted as meaning that the chilling of meat after slaughter must be carried out in the slaughterhouse itself until the meat has reached a temperature throughout of not more than 7 oC before any loading of the meat into a refrigerated truck.

(1) OJ C 152, 30.4.2018.
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 11 April 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — X BV v Staatssecretaris van Financiën

(Case C-288/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Common Customs Tariff - Classification of goods - Combined Nomenclature - Subheadings 85285100 and 85285940 - Flat screen monitors with liquid crystal display capable of displaying signals from automatic data processing systems - Agreement on trade in information technology products)

(2019/C 206/19)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: X BV

Defendant: Staatssecretaris van Financiën

Operative part

The Combined Nomenclature, which appears in Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 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, must be interpreted as meaning that, in order to determine whether flat panel monitors with screens of the liquid crystal display (LCD) technology, designed and manufactured for displaying both data from an automatic data-processing machine and also composite video signals from other sources, must be classified under subheading 85285100 of the Combined Nomenclature or the subheading 85285940 of that nomenclature, it is necessary, when examining all their objective characteristics and properties, to assess both the degree to which they are capable of performing several functions and the standard of performance that they achieve when performing those functions, in order to determine whether their principal function is to be used in an automatic data-processing system. In that context, particular importance should be given to the question whether they are designed to be viewed close up. Whether the person who uses the screen and the person who processes and/or enters data into an automatic data-processing machine are one and the same is not a relevant criterion for the purposes of that assessment.

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

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 15 May 2019 — European Commission v Sabine Tuerck

(Case C-132/18 P) (1)

(Appeal - Civil service - Pensions - Transfer of pension rights acquired in a national pension scheme to the European Union pension scheme - Deduction of the appreciation between the date of the application for a transfer and the actual date of the transfer)

(2019/C 255/12)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: European Commission (represented by: G. Gattinara and B. Mongin and by L. Radu Bouyon, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings: Sabine Tuerck (represented by: S. Orlandi and T. Martin, avocats)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders the European Commission to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 161, 7.5.2018.
2.

Article 157 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding legislation such as that in the main proceedings which provides that, where a worker employed full-time and for an indefinite duration is dismissed at the time he is on part-time parental leave, that worker receives a compensation payment for dismissal and a redeployment leave allowance determined at least in part on the basis of the reduced salary being received when the dismissal takes place, in circumstances when a far greater number of women than men choose to take part-time parental leave and when that difference in treatment which results therefrom cannot be explained by objective factors unrelated to any sex discrimination.
Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 13 June 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d'État — France) — Copebi SCA v Établissement national des produits de l'agriculture et de la mer (FranceAgriMer)

(Case C-505/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - State aid - Decision 2009/402/EC - Contingency plans in the fruit and vegetable sector implemented by the French Republic - Finding that the aid is incompatible - Recovery order - Scope of the decision - Economic agricultural committees)

(2019/C 263/25)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Conseil d'État

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Copebi SCA

Respondent: Etablissement national des produits de l'agriculture et de la mer (FranceAgriMer)

Other party: Ministre de l’Agriculture et de l’Alimentation

Operative part of the judgment

Commission Decision 2009/402/EC of 28 January 2009 on the ‘contingency plans’ in the fruit and vegetable sector implemented by France must be interpreted as covering aid paid by the Office national interprofessionnel des fruits, des légumes et de l’horticulture (ONIFLHOR) (National Fruit, Vegetables and Horticulture Trade Board) to the comité économique bigarreau industrie (CEBI) (Economic Committee for the Whiteheart Cherry Industry) and allocated to producers of whiteheart cherries for industrial uses by the producer groups which are members of that committee, even though first, the CEBI is not one of the eight economic agricultural committees referred to in that decision and, second, that aid, unlike the financing mechanism described in that decision, was financed only by subsidies from ONIFLHOR and not also by voluntary contributions from producers.

(1) OJ C 364, 8.10.2018.
Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 5 June 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the cour d’appel de Bruxelles — Belgium) — Skype Communications Sàrl v Institut belge des services postaux et des télécommunications (IBPT)

(Case C-142/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Electronic communications networks and services - Directive 2002/21/EC - Article 2(c) - Notion of ‘electronic communications service’ - Transmission of signals - Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) service to fixed or mobile telephone numbers - SkypeOut service)

(2019/C 263/15)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour d’appel de Bruxelles

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Skype Communications Sàrl

Defendant: Institut belge des services postaux et des télécommunications (IBPT)

Operative part of the judgment

Article 2(c) of Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services (Framework Directive), as amended by Directive 2009/140/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009, must be interpreted as meaning that the provision, by a software publisher, of a feature offering a Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) service which allows the user to call a fixed or mobile number covered by a national numbering plan from a terminal via the public switched telephone network (PSTN) of a Member State constitutes an ‘electronic communications service’ within the meaning of that provision, provided that, first, the software publisher is remunerated for the provision of that service and, second, the provision of that service involves the conclusion of agreements between that software publisher and telecommunications service providers that are duly authorised to send and terminate calls to the PSTN.

(1) OJ C 161, 7.5.2018.
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 27 June 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Okresní soud v Českých Budějovicích — Czech Republic) — RD v SC

(Case C-518/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Regulation (EC) No 805/2004 - European Enforcement Order for uncontested claims - Certification of a judicial decision as a European Enforcement Order - Minimum standards applicable to uncontested claims procedures - Defendant without a known address who did not appear at the hearing)

(2019/C 280/10)

Language of the case: Czech

Referring court

Okresní soud v Českých Budějovicích

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: RD

Defendant: SC

Operative part of the judgment

Regulation (EC) No 805/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004 creating a European Enforcement Order for uncontested claims must be interpreted as meaning that, where a court is unable to obtain the defendant’s address, it does not allow a judicial decision relating to a debt, made following a hearing attended by neither the defendant nor the guardian ad litem appointed for the purpose of the proceedings, to be certified as a European Enforcement Order.

(1) OJ C 392, 29.10.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019 — Red Bull GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), Marques, Optimum Mark sp. z o.o.

(Case C-124/18 P) (1)

(Appeal - EU trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Article 4 and Article 7(1)(a) - Absolute ground for refusal - Invalidity proceedings - Combination of two colours per se - No systematic arrangement associating the colours in a predetermined and uniform way)

(2019/C 319/14)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Red Bull GmbH (represented by: A. Renck, Rechtsanwalt, and S. Petivlasova, abogada)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral and D. Botis, acting as Agents), Marques (represented by: R. Mallinson, Solicitor, and T. Müller, Rechtsanwalt), Optimum Mark sp. z o.o. (represented by: R. Skubisz, J. Dudzik and M. Mazurek, adwokaci, and E. Jaroszyńska-Kozłowska, advocate)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders Red Bull GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 200, 11.6.2018.
Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 10 July 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākā tiesa — Latvia) — SIA ‘Kuršu zeme’ v Valsts ieņēmumu dienests

(Case C-273/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Common system of value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Right to deduct input VAT - Article 168 - Goods supply chain - Refusal of the right to deduct on account of that chain’s existence - Obligation on the competent tax authority to establish the existence of an abusive practice)

(2019/C 305/24)

Language of the case: Latvian

Referring court

Augstākā tiesa

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: SIA ‘Kuršu zeme’

Respondent: Valsts ieņēmumu dienests

Operative part of the judgment

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 meaning that, for the purposes of refusing the right to deduct input value added tax (VAT), the fact that an acquisition of goods took place at the end of a chain of successive sale transactions between several persons and that the taxable person acquired possession of the goods concerned in the warehouse of a person forming part of that chain, other than the person mentioned as supplier on the invoice, is not in itself sufficient to find the existence of an abusive practice on the part of the taxable person or the other persons participating in that chain, the competent tax authority being required to establish the existence of an undue tax advantage obtained by that taxable person or those other persons.

(1) OJ C 259, 23.7.2018.
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 5 September 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Judecătoria Constanța — Romania) — R v P

(Case C-468/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters relating to maintenance obligations - Regulation (EC) No 4/2009 - Article 3(a) and (d) and Article 5 - Court seised of three joined claims concerning the divorce of the parents of a minor child, parental responsibility and the maintenance obligation with regard to that child - Court declaring that it has jurisdiction relating to the divorce and no jurisdiction relating to parental responsibility - Jurisdiction to entertain proceedings with regard to the claim concerning the maintenance obligation - Court for the place where the defendant is habitually resident and before which he has entered an appearance)

(2019/C 383/34)

Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Judecătoria Constanța

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: R

Defendant: P

Operative part of the judgment

Article 3(a) and (d) and Article 5 of Council Regulation (EC) No 4/2009 of 18 December 2008 on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of decisions and cooperation in matters relating to maintenance obligations must be interpreted as meaning that where there is an action before a court of a Member State which includes three claims concerning, respectively, the divorce of the parents of a minor child, parental responsibility in respect of that child and the maintenance obligation with regard to that child, the court ruling on the divorce, which has declared that it has no jurisdiction to rule on the claim concerning parental responsibility, nevertheless has jurisdiction to rule on the claim concerning the maintenance obligation with regard to that child where it is also the court for the place where the defendant is habitually resident or the court before which the defendant has entered an appearance, without contesting the jurisdiction of that court.

(1) OJ C 381, 22.10.2018.
Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 5 September 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof — Austria) — Verein für Konsumenteninformation v Deutsche Bahn AG

(Case C-28/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Technical and business requirements for credit transfers and direct debits in euro - Regulation (EU) No 260/2012 - Single euro payments area (SEPA) - Payment by direct debit - Article 9(2) - Accessibility of payments - Residence condition)

(2019/C 383/14)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberster Gerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Verein für Konsumenteninformation

Respondent: Deutsche Bahn AG

Operative part of the judgment

Article 9(2) of Regulation (EU) No 260/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 March 2012 establishing technical and business requirements for credit transfers and direct debits in euro and amending Regulation (EC) No 924/2009 must be interpreted as precluding a contractual clause, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which excludes payment by direct debit in euros under the European Union-wide direct debit scheme (SEPA direct debit) where the payer does not have his place of residence in the same Member State as that in which the payee has established his place of business.

(1) OJ C 104, 19.3.2018.
Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 19 September 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Upper Tribunal — United Kingdom) — The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs v Henrika Dakneviciute

(Case C-544/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 49 TFEU - Freedom of establishment - Self-employment - National of a Member State who ceases to be self-employed because of the physical constraints in the late stages of pregnancy and the aftermath of childbirth - Retention of self-employed status)

(2019/C 399/18)

Language of the case: English

Referring court

Upper Tribunal

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs

Defendant: Henrika Dakneviciute

Operative part of the judgment

Article 49 TFEU must be interpreted as meaning that a woman who ceases self-employed activity in circumstances where there are physical constraints in the late stages of pregnancy and the aftermath of childbirth retains the status of being self-employed, provided that she returns to the same or another self-employed activity or employment within a reasonable period after the birth of her child.

(1) OJ C 436, 3.12.2018.
Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 18 September 2019 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État — France) — AQ (C-662/18), DN (C-672/18) v Ministre de l’Action and des Comptes publics

(Joined Cases C-662/18 and C-672/18) (1)

(References for a preliminary ruling - Direct taxation - Directive 90/434/EEC - Directive 2009/133/EC - Article 8 - Capital gains relating to exchange of securities transactions - Transfer of securities received at the time of the exchange - Capital gain on which tax has been deferred - Taxation of the shareholders - Taxation on the basis of different bases of assessment and rate rules - Reductions of the basis of assessment taking into account the period for which securities have been held)

(2019/C 399/21)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Conseil d’État

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: AQ (C-662/18), DN (C-672/18)

Defendant: Ministre de l’Action and des Comptes publics

Operative part of the judgment

Article 8(1) and (6) of Council Directive 2009/133/EC of 19 October 2009 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 and Article 8(1) and the second subparagraph of Article 8(2) of Council Directive 90/434/EEC of 23 July 1990 on the common system of taxation applicable to mergers, divisions, transfers of assets and exchanges of shares concerning companies of different Member States must be interpreted as meaning that, in the context of an exchange of securities, they require the application, to the capital gain relating to the securities exchanged and deferred for taxation and to the capital gain resulting from the transfer of the securities received in exchange, of the same tax treatment, in the light of the tax rate and the application of a tax allowance to take account of the length of time the securities were held, as that which would have been applied to the capital gain which would have been realised on the transfer of the securities existing before the exchange if the exchange had not taken place.

(1) OJ C 4, 7.1.2019.

OJ C 25, 21.1.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 17 October 2019 — Alcogroup SA, Alcodis SA v European Commission, Orde van Vlaamse Balies, Ordre des barreaux francophones et germanophone, Ordre français des avocats du barreau de Bruxelles

(Case C-403/18 P) (1)

(Appeal - Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Ethanol market - Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 - Article 20(4) - Inspection decision - Conduct of the inspection - Legal professional privilege - Refusal to suspend measures of investigation - Action for annulment - Admissibility - Preparatory decision)

(2019/C 423/12)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellants: Alcogroup SA, Alcodis SA (represented by P. de Bandt, J. Dewispelaere and J. Probst, avocats)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: T. Christoforou, V. Bottka, C. Giolito and F. Jimeno Fernández, acting as Agents), Orde van Vlaamse Balies (represented by: F. Wijckmans and S. De Keer, advocaten, and by S. Engelen, avocat), Ordre des barreaux francophones et germanophone, Ordre français des avocats du barreau de Bruxelles (represented by: T. Bontinck, A. Guillerme and P. Goffinet, avocats)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal.

2. Orders Alcogroup SA and Alcodis SA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 294, 20.8.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 2 October 2019 — Crédit Mutuel Arkéa (C-152/18 P) Crédit Mutuel Arkéa (C-153/18 P) v European Central Bank, European Commission

(Joined Cases C-152/18 P and C-153/18 P) (1)

(Appeal - Economic and monetary policy - Article 127(6) TFEU - Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 - Article 4(1)(g) - Prudential supervision of credit institutions on a consolidated basis - Regulation (EU) No 468/2014 - Article 2(21)(c) - Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 - Article 10 - Supervised group - Institutions permanently affiliated to a central body)

(2019/C 413/09)

Language of the case: French

Parties

(Case C-152/18 P)

Appellant: Crédit mutuel Arkéa (represented by: H. Savoie, avocat)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Central Bank (ECB) (represented by: K. Lackhoff, R. Bax and C. Olivier, acting as Agents, and by P. Honoré, avocat), European Commission (represented by: V. Di Bucci, K.-P. Wojcik and A. Steiblytė, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the other parties: Confédération nationale du Crédit mutuel (represented by: M. Grégoire and C. De Jonghe, avocats)

(Case C-153/19 P)

Appellant: Crédit Mutuel Arkéa (represented by: H. Savoie, avocat)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Central Bank (represented by: K. Lackhoff, R. Bax and C. Olivier, acting as Agents, and by P. Honoré, avocat), European Commission (represented by: V. Di Bucci, K.-P. Wojcik and A. Steiblytė, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the other parties: Confédération nationale du Crédit mutuel (represented by: C. De Jonghe and M. Grégoire, avocats)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeals;

2. Orders Crédit mutuel Arkéa to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 161, 7.5.2018.