do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-312/12: Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 21 February 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Labour Court, Huy — Belgium) — Agim Ajdini v Belgian State (Rules of Procedure — Articles 53(2), 93(a) and 99 — Request for a preliminary ruling — Examination of the conformity of a national provision with both European Union law and the national constitution — National legislation granting priority to an interlocutory procedure for the review of constitutionality — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Failure to implement European Union law — Clear absence of jurisdiction of the Court)
Date: 2013-02-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Belgium, EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, EU law - national law, application of EU law, control of constitutionality, disabled person, discrimination on the basis of nationality, equal treatment, interpretation of the law, jurisdiction








C_2013108EN.01001201.xml










13.4.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 108/12





Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 21 February 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Labour Court, Huy — Belgium) — Agim Ajdini v Belgian State
(Case C-312/12) (1)

(Rules of Procedure - Articles 53(2), 93(a) and 99 - Request for a preliminary ruling - Examination of the conformity of a national provision with both European Union law and the national constitution - National legislation granting priority to an interlocutory procedure for the review of constitutionality - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Failure to implement European Union law - Clear absence of jurisdiction of the Court)
2013/C 108/23
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Labour Court, Huy

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Agim Ajdini

Defendant: Belgian State

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Labour Court, Huy — Interpretation of Articles 20, 21 and 26 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and of Article 234 EC — Fundamental rights — Principle of non-discrimination — Serbian national with a disability — Admissibility of national legislation excluding certain persons from entitlement to disability benefits on grounds of nationality — National of a third country which is an official candidate for accession to the European Union — Power of a national court to refer a matter to the Court of Justice — Admissibility of national legislation requiring the national court to bring a matter to the Constitutional Court at the outset

Operative part of the order

It is clear that the Court of Justice of the European Union has no jurisdiction to answer the questions referred for a preliminary ruling by the Labour Court, Huy (Belgium).


(1)  OJ C 287, 22.9.2012.
Case C-18/12: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 21 February 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší správní soud — Czech Republic) — Město Žamberk v Finanční ředitelství v Hradci Králové, now Odvolací finanční ředitelství (Taxation — VAT — Directive 2006/112/EC — Article 132(1)(m) — Exemption — Supply of services closely linked to sport or physical education — Taking part in sporting activities of a non-organised and unsystematic nature — Municipal aquatic park)
Date: 2013-02-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Czechia, VAT, interpretation of the law, provision of services, sport, tax exemption, tax system








C_2013114EN.01001801.xml










20.4.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 114/18





Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 21 February 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší správní soud — Czech Republic) — Město Žamberk v Finanční ředitelství v Hradci Králové, now Odvolací finanční ředitelství
(Case C-18/12) (1)

(Taxation - VAT - Directive 2006/112/EC - Article 132(1)(m) - Exemption - Supply of services closely linked to sport or physical education - Taking part in sporting activities of a non-organised and unsystematic nature - Municipal aquatic park)
2013/C 114/25
Language of the case: Czech

Referring court

Nejvyšší správní soud

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Město Žamberk

Defendant: Finanční ředitelství v Hradci Králové, now Odvolací finanční ředitelství

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Nejvyšší správní soud — Interpretation of Article 132(1)(m) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1) — Exemptions — Supplies of services closely linked to sport or physical education — Occasional unsystematic participation in recreational sporting activities in a swimming pool complex (aquatic park) operated by the municipality and provided with facilities for those activities

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 132(1)(m) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as meaning that non-organised and unsystematic sporting activities which are not aimed at participation in sports competitions may be categorised as taking part in sport within the meaning of that provision.










2.


Article 132(1)(m) of Directive 2006/112 must be interpreted as meaning that access to an aquatic park offering visitors not only facilities for engaging in sporting activities but also other types of amusement or rest may constitute a supply of services closely linked to sport. It is for the referring court to determine whether, in the light of the interpretative guidance provided by the Court of Justice of the European Union in the present judgment and having regard to the specific circumstances of the case in the main proceedings, that is the position in that case.






(1)  OJ C 98, 31.3.2012.
Case C-37/12 P: Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 21 February 2013 — Saupiquet SAS v European Commission (Appeal — Common customs tariff — Tariff quota — Sunday closure of customs offices — Infringement of the principle of equal treatment — Accountability)
Date: 2013-02-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Thailand, common customs tariff, customs, equal treatment, import licence, originating product, preserved product, public holiday, tariff quota








C_2013108EN.01000801.xml










13.4.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 108/8





Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 21 February 2013 — Saupiquet SAS v European Commission
(Case C-37/12 P) (1)

(Appeal - Common customs tariff - Tariff quota - Sunday closure of customs offices - Infringement of the principle of equal treatment - Accountability)
2013/C 108/14
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: Saupiquet SAS (represented by: R. Ledru, avocat)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: B.-R. Killmann and L. Keppenne, Agents)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 24 November 2011 in Case T-131/10 Saupiquet v Commission by which the General Court dismissed an application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2009) 10005 final of 16 December 2009, holding that refunding import duties on canned tuna fish originating in Thailand to the appellant is not justified — Closure of customs offices on Sundays in certain Member States — Infringement of the principle of equal treatment — Incorrect interpretation

Operative part of the order







1.


The appeal is dismissed.










2.


Saupiquet SAS is ordered to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 89, 24.3.2012.