ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 16 May 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Köln — Germany) — RV

(Case C-724/21) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Citizenship of the Union - Article 21 TFEU - Right to move and reside freely in the territory of the Member States - Criminal offence specifically concerning international child abduction - Restriction - Child protection - Proportionality)

(2022/C 266/10)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landgericht Köln

Parties to the main proceedings

Defendant: RV

Interested party: Staatsanwaltschaft Köln

Operative part of the order

Article 21 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding the legislation of a Member State under which the removal by a parent of a child from the carer who is entitled to determine the place of that child’s residence, with the aim of taking the child abroad, attracts criminal penalties even in the absence of force, threat of serious harm or deception, whereas where such removal takes place in the territory of the first Member State, the same act is punishable only if recourse is had to force, threat of serious harm or deception.

(1) Date lodged: 30 November 2021.
Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 31 January 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Okręgowy w Łodzi — Poland) — TM v EJ

(Case C-28/21) (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 - Article 3 - Compulsory cover of damage to property - Scope - Legislation of a Member State excluding loss of earnings from cover by compulsory insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles)

(2022/C 222/05)

Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Sąd Okręgowy w Łodzi

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: TM

Defendant: EJ

Operative part of the order

Must 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 be interpreted as not precluding a provision of national law under which compulsory insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles does not cover damage consisting of loss of earnings, on condition that that limitation of cover applies without any difference in treatment depending on the Member State of residence of the injured party or of the owner or holder of the damaged vehicle.

(1) OJ C 182, 10.5.2021.
Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 2 May 2022 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Obvodní soud pro Prahu 1 — Czech Republic) — Správa železnic, státní organizace v České dráhy a.s., PKP Cargo International a.s., PDV Railway a.s., KŽC Doprava, s.r.o. (C-221/21), and České dráhy a.s. v Univerzita Pardubice and Others (C-222/21)

(Joined Cases C-221/21 and C-222/21) (1)

(References for a preliminary ruling - Article 53(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Rail transport - Directive 2012/34/EU - Decisions of the regulatory body - Article 56(10) - Judicial review - National law providing for the jurisdiction of the civil courts - Rules governing the action - Compatibility with Directive 2012/34 - Manifest inadmissibility of the request for a preliminary ruling)

(2022/C 368/06)

Language of the case: Czech

Referring court

Obvodní soud pro Prahu 1

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Správa železnic, státní organizasse (C-221/21), České dráhy a.s. (C-222/21)

Defendants: České dráhy a.s., PKP Cargo International a.s., PDV Railway a.s., KŽC Doprava s.r.o. (C-221/21), Univerzita Pardubice and Others (C-222/21)

Operative part of the order

The requests for a preliminary ruling made by the Obvodní soud pro Prahu 1 (District Court, Prague 1, Czech Republic), by decisions of 22 September 2020 and 1 October 2020, are manifestly inadmissible.

(1) OJ C 242, 21.6.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the President of the Court of 30 March 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof — Austria) — YV v Stadtverkehr Lindau (B) GmbH

(Case C-685/21) (1)

(2022/C 359/69)

Language of the case: German

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

(1) OJ C 84, 21.2.2022.
1.

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 not precluding, subject to the principles of equivalence and effectiveness, national legislation under which, for the purpose of challenging a decision to recover amounts wrongly paid, adopted after the expiry of the limitation period for proceedings referred to in that provision, the addressee of that decision is required to plead the irregularity thereof within a certain period before the competent administrative court, failing which the challenge will be time-barred, and the addressee is no longer able to object to the enforcement of that decision by relying on that irregularity in the context of the judicial proceedings for enforced recovery brought against that addressee.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the Court of 3 November 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Judiciaire de Perpignan — France) — RV v Institut national de la statistique et des études économiques (INSEE) and Others

(Case C-32/21) (1)

(Removal from the register)

(2022/C 482/02)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal Judiciaire de Perpignan

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: RV

Defendants: Institut national de la statistique et des études économiques (INSEE), Préfet des Pyrénées-Orientales, Commune de Serralongue

Operative part of the order

Case C-32/21 is removed from the Court Register.

(1) Filing date: 19.1.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the President of the Court of 30 June 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Okresný súd Prešov — Slovakia) — UR v 365.bank a.s.

(Case C-12/22) (1)

(2022/C 368/36)

Language of the case: Slovak

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

(1) OJ C 148, 4.4.2022.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the President of the Court of 12 September 2022 — European Commission v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg

(Case C-214/22) (1)

(2023/C 15/43)

Language of the case: French

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

(1) OJ C 191, 10.5.2022.
Order of the Court of 16 August 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Hamburg — Germany) — flightright GmbH v Brussels Airlines SA/NV

(Case C-465/22) (1)

(Air transport - Compensation of air passengers in the event of long delay of flights - Connecting flight - Delay in the first flight - No contractual relationship between the passenger and the Community air carrier which operated the second flight - Action for damages against the air carrier which operated the second flight)

(2022/C 389/02)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Amtsgericht Hamburg

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: flightright GmbH

Defendant: Brussels Airlines SA/NV

Operative part of the order

Case C-465/22 is removed from the Register of the Court.

(1) Date lodged: 12.7.2022.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 315/25

Request for an opinion submitted by the Republic of Malta pursuant to Article 218(11) TFEU

(Opinion 1/14)

2014/C 315/37

Language of the case: all the official languages

Applicant

Republic of Malta (represented by: A. Buhagiar, P. Grech, Agents)

Question submitted to the Court

Is the Council of Europe Draft Convention against the Manipulation of Sports Competitions, insofar as it regulates sports betting and defines ‘illegal sports betting’ in Article 3(5)(a) as ‘all sports betting activity whose type or operator is not allowed under the applicable law of the jurisdiction where the consumer is located’, in conjunction with Articles 9 and 11 thereof which target ‘illegal sports betting’ so defined, compatible with the Treaties, particularly Articles 18, 49 and 56 TFEU?
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 462/4

Opinion of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 14 October 2014 — European Commission

(Opinion 1/13) (1)

((Opinion pursuant to Article 218(11) TFEU - Convention on the civil aspects of international child abduction - Accession of third States - Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 - Exclusive external competence of the European Union - Risk of undermining the uniform and consistent application of EU rules and the proper functioning of the system which they establish))

(2014/C 462/05)

Language of the case: all the official languages

Applicant

European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre and A.-M. Rouchaud-Joët, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the Opinion

The exclusive competence of the European Union encompasses the acceptance of the accession of a third State to the Convention on the civil aspects of international child abduction concluded in The Hague on 25 October 1980.

(1) OJ C 226, 3.8.2013.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . Officials - Recruitment - Special rules applicable to Spanish and Portuguese nationals - Special rules applicable to overseas staff of the European Association for Cooperation - Separate sets of rules

( Council Regulations Nos 3517/85 and 3018/87 )

2 . Officials - Recruitment - Special rules applicable to overseas staff of the European Association for Cooperation - Powers of the Commission - Limits

( Council Regulation No 3018/87, Art . 3 )

Summary

1 . The special and temporary measures laid down in Regulation No 3517/85 for the recruitment of Spanish and Portuguese nationals upon the accession of Spain and Portugal and by Regulation No 3018/87 for the recruitment of overseas staff of the European Association for Cooperation were adopted for two specific purposes and thus constitute two independent sets of rules .

It follows that an official recruited on the basis of the special and temporary measures for recruitment laid down by either of those regulations may not claim the benefit, in whole or in part, of the special and temporary measures for recruitment laid down by the other regulation .

2 . The European Association for Cooperation is an association governed by Belgian law and cannot, therefore, be regarded as an administrative unit of the Commission .

It follows that the engagement and appointment by the Commission of a member of the overseas staff of the Association constitutes recruitment from outside the institutions and that the Commission cannot, therefore, be under any obligation to verify and, if necessary, modify that person' s classification with the Association on the basis of which he or she was classified on recruitment as an official of the European Communities .
Keywords

Operative part



Keywords

++++

Officials - Recruitment - Competition - Competition on the basis of qualifications and tests - Practical test - Provision to candidates of different makes of typewriters - Equal treatment - Infringement - None

( Staff Regulations of Officials, Annex III )

Operative part

( 1 ) Dismisses the application;

( 2 ) Orders the parties to bear their own costs, including those relating to the application for interim measures .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1. Officials - Actions - Interest in bringing proceedings - Requirement that claims put forward by an official must relate to him personally (Staff Regulations, Art. 91)

2. Officials - Organization of departments - Assignment of staff - Administration' s discretion

3. Officials - Temporary postings - Appointment - Appointing authority' s discretion

(Staff Regulations, Art. 7(2) )

Summary

1. Even though the duty of the institutions to comply with the provisions of the Staff Regulations relating to the recruitment of their staff corresponds to a public interest, an official is not entitled to act in the interests of the law or of the institutions and may put forward, in support of an action for annulment, only such claims as relate to him personally.

2. The Community institutions draw up their lists of posts independently and enjoy wide discretionary powers in the organization of their departments, so as to organize the various administrative units taking account of a whole range of factors, such as the nature and scope of the tasks which are assigned to them and the budgetary possibilities.

The administration has no obligation with regard to an official to organize the department in which he is employed so as to guarantee him an opportunity to perform certain duties and obtain promotion as a result.

3. Article 7(2) of the Staff Regulations confers a power on the appointing authority to call upon an official to occupy temporarily a post in a higher career bracket, but does not impose on it any obligation to exercise such power. Where it takes a decision in the matter, the appointing authority enjoys a wide discretionary power which it exercises in the light of the circumstances of the case.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Officials - Actions - Prior complaint through official channels - Time-limits - Time-barred - Re-opening - Requirements - New fact

(Staff Regulations, Arts 90 and 91)

Summary

Whilst Article 90(1) of the Staff Regulations provides that any official may request the Appointing Authority to take a decision relating to him, that right does not allow an official to circumvent the time-limits laid down in Articles 90 and 91 of the Staff Regulations for the lodging of a complaint and an appeal by indirectly calling in question by means of a request a previous decision which has not been challenged within the period prescribed. Only the existence of new substantial facts may justify the submission of a request for a review of such a decision.

In view of the differences between the classification rules applicable to successful candidates in competitions and those applicable to promotions, an official cannot rely on a new fact stemming from the classification obtained by certain of his colleagues on promotion in order to challenge the classification which he was given after passing a competition.
Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber) of 22 February 1990. - Pedro Bocos Viciano v Commission of the European Communities. - Official - Open competition - Refusal to offer a post. - Case T-72/89.



European Court reports 1990 Page II-00057

Pub.RJ Page Pub somm



Summary

Parties

Operative part



Summary

++++

The action brought by a person whose name is entered on a reserve list following an open competition against the failure by a Community institution to offer him a post comes under Article 179 of the Treaty and Articles 90 and 91 of the Staff Regulations of Officials ( see the judgments of 22 October 1975 in Case 9/75 Meyer-Burckhardt v Commission (( 1975 )) ECR 1171 and of 29 October 1975 in Joined Cases 81 to 88/74 Marenco and Others v Commission (( 1975 )) ECR 1247 ).

Such an action cannot be declared admissible in the absence of a prior complaint as provided for in Article 91 of the Staff Regulations ( see the judgment of 3 February 1977 in Case 91/76 De Lacroix v Court of Justice (( 1977 )) ECR 225 ).

Parties

In Case T-72/89

Pedro Bocos Viciano, residing in Gandía, Spain, represented by Eugenio Carbonell Serrano, of the Valencia Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Catherine Thill, 17 boulevard Royal,

applicant,

v

Commission of the European Communities, represented by its Legal Adviser, Miguel Díaz-Llanos La Roche, and Daniel Calleja Crespo, a member of its Legal Department, acting as Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the office of Georgios Kremlis, a member of its Legal Department, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg,

defendant,

APPLICATION for annulment of the Commission' s decision not to offer the applicant a post, an acknowledgement of his right to be offered a post and an order that the Commission inform him of the result of his medical examination,

THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE ( Fourth Chamber )

composed of : D . A . O . Edward, President of Chamber, R . Schintgen and R . García-Valdecasas, Judges,

( the grounds of the judgment are not reproduced )

hereby :

Operative part

( 1)Dismisses the application as inadmissible;

( 2)Orders the parties to bear their own costs .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1. Officials - Actions - Act adversely affecting an official - Decision not to admit an applicant to take part in a competition adopted following reconsideration of a previous decision - Limitation period - Starting point - Notification of the new decision

(Staff Regulations, Arts 90 and 91)

2. Officials - Recruitment - Competitions - Competition based on tests - Requirement of university degrees - Concept of university degree - Assessment in the light of the legislation of the State in which studies took place

3. Officials - Recruitment - Competitions - Refusal to admit to a competition - Decision having adverse effect - Duty to state reasons - Scope

(Staff Regulations, second paragraph of Art. 25; Annex III, Art. 5)

Summary

1. The decision by which the selection board for a competition, after reconsidering an application at the candidate' s request, refuses to admit a candidate to take part in the tests replaces the decision previously adopted by the selection board and cannot be regarded as merely confirming it.

Since a decision taken by a selection board for a competition may be challenged before the Court of First Instance without any need for a prior complaint, the limitation period begins to run upon the notification of the new decision.

2. In the absence of any provision to the contrary contained in either a regulation or a directive applicable to recruitment competitions organized by the Community institutions or in the notice of competition, the requirement of a university degree is necessarily to be construed in the light of the definition of that term in the legislation of the Member State in which the candidate completed the studies on which he relies.

Since the organization of university education comes within the competence of the Member States, the Community institutions are required, by their duty of sincere cooperation with the Member States, to respect the rules adopted by the Member States in the exercise of their competence. That is so in particular where provisions of constitutional law are involved.

3. The duty to state the grounds for each decision adversely affecting an official set out in the second paragraph of Article 25 of the Staff Regulations is intended both to provide the person concerned with sufficient details to allow him to ascertain whether or not the decision is well founded and to enable the Court to review the legality of the decision.

A decision by which a selection board refuses to admit a candidate to the tests in a competition on the ground that he does not satisfy the condition regarding possession of a university degree is adequately reasoned where the decision clearly explains the reason why the selection board did not consider the qualification produced by the candidate to be a university diploma and, moreover, indicates that the selection board did not regard itself as bound by the decisions of other selection boards referred to by the candidate under which holders of the same qualification had been admitted to take part in competitions organized by other institutions for equivalent posts.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Actions for annulment - Natural or legal persons - Measures of direct and individual concern to them - Decision of the Commission granting exemption to a selective distribution system - Undertaking in competition with the authorized distributors, never having applied for entry to the network and not having participated in the administrative procedure before the Commission - Inadmissibility of the action - Undertaking a party to proceedings before a national court concerning the lawfulness of the distribution system - No effect

(EC Treaty, Arts 85(1) and (3), 173, fourth para., and 177, first para., subpara. (b); Council Regulation No 17, Arts 3 and 19(3))

Summary

A decision granting exemption to a selective distribution system cannot be regarded as being of individual concern, within the meaning of the fourth paragraph of Article 173 of the Treaty, to an undertaking in competition with the authorized distributors, which has not complained to the Commission under Article 3 of Regulation No 17, participated in the administrative procedure under Article 19(3) of that regulation or applied to the supplier for admission to the selective distribution network, since it is in a situation which cannot be distinguished from that of numerous other economic operators on the parallel market.

In that regard, it has no bearing that that undertaking is a party to proceedings brought before a national court by an authorized distributor for infringement of national law on unfair competition and that it has contended in its defence to those proceedings that the distribution network infringes Article 85(1) of the Treaty. It cannot claim to be distinguished individually to a degree sufficient for the purpose of Article 173 merely because the lawfulness of the decision granting the exemption is relevant to the outcome of the proceedings pending before the national court, since any distributor operating on the same market may in appropriate circumstances have an interest in questioning in such proceedings the lawfulness of the distribution system at issue.

Such an undertaking does not lack adequate legal protection since, even if the question of the validity of the decision granting the exemption is liable to affect the outcome of the proceedings before the national court, that court may, if it considers it necessary to do so, have recourse to the preliminary ruling procedure under subparagraph (b) of the first paragraph of Article 177 of the Treaty and refer a question on the validity or interpretation of that decision to the Court of Justice.