do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-403/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad — Varna (Bulgaria) lodged on 25 August 2014 — ‘Vekos trade’ AD v Direktor na Direktsia ‘Obzhalvane i danachno-osiguritelna praktika’, Varna, pri Tsentralno Upravlenie na Natsionalnata agentsia za prihodite
Date: 2014-08-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, administrative transparency, contract of carriage, principle of proportionality, provision of services








C_2014395EN.01002402.xml










10.11.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 395/24






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad — Varna (Bulgaria) lodged on 25 August 2014 — ‘Vekos trade’ AD v Direktor na Direktsia ‘Obzhalvane i danachno-osiguritelna praktika’, Varna, pri Tsentralno Upravlenie na Natsionalnata agentsia za prihodite
(Case C-403/14)
(2014/C 395/30)
Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Administrativen sad — Varna

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant:‘Vekos trade’ AD

Defendant: Direktor na Direktsia ‘Obzhalvane i danachno-osiguritelna praktika’, Varna, pri Tsentralno Upravlenie na Natsionalnata agentsia za prihodite

Questions referred







1.


Are the principles of fiscal neutrality, proportionality and protection of legitimate expectations violated by administrative practice and case-law according to which it is for the vendor — the consignor under the transport contract — to determine the authenticity of the acquirer’s signature and to establish whether it comes from a person representing the company (the acquirer), one of its employees in a corresponding position or an authorised person?










2.


In a case such as the present does Article 138(1) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC (1) of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax have direct effect, and can the national court directly apply the provision?






(1)  OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1.
Last publications of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Official Journal of the European Union
Date: 2014-08-25
Institutions: Court of Justice of the European Union
Subjects: Court of Justice of the European Union, EU Official Journal








C_2014282EN.01000101.xml










25.8.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 282/1





Last publications of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Official Journal of the European Union

2014/C 282/01

Last publication


OJ C 261, 11.8.2014


Past publications


OJ C 253, 4.8.2014


OJ C 245, 28.7.2014


OJ C 235, 21.7.2014


OJ C 223, 14.7.2014


OJ C 212, 7.7.2014


OJ C 202, 30.6.2014

These texts are available on:
EUR-Lex: http://eur-lex.europa.eu
Case C-404/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší soud České republiky (Czech Republic) lodged on 25 August 2014 — Marie Matoušková, court commissioner in inheritance proceedings v Misha Martinus and Elisabeth Jekaterina Martinus, represented by David Sedlák as trustee; Beno Jeriël Eljada Martinus
Date: 2014-08-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: capacity to contract, contract, guardianship, inheritance, judicial proceedings, law of succession








C_2014431EN.01001001.xml










1.12.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 431/10





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší soud České republiky (Czech Republic) lodged on 25 August 2014 — Marie Matoušková, court commissioner in inheritance proceedings v Misha Martinus and Elisabeth Jekaterina Martinus, represented by David Sedlák as trustee; Beno Jeriël Eljada Martinus
(Case C-404/14)
(2014/C 431/16)
Language of the case: Czech

Referring court

Nejvyšší soud České republiky

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Marie Matoušková, court commissioner in inheritance proceedings

Persons concerned by the inheritance proceedings: Misha Martinus and Elisabeth Jekaterina Martinus, represented by David Sedlák as trustee; Beno Jeriël Eljada Martinus

Question referred

If an inheritance settlement agreement concluded on behalf of a minor by his or her trustee requires the approval of a court in order to be valid, is that decision on the part of the court a measure within the meaning of Article 1(1)(b) or a measure within the meaning of Article 1(3)(f) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 (1) of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and matters of parental responsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000?


(1)  OJ 2003 L 338, p. 1.
Case C-405/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší správní soud (Czech Republic) lodged on 25 August 2014 — PST CLC a.s. v Generální ředitelství cel
Date: 2014-08-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Combined Nomenclature, application of EU law, classification, cold store, customs regulations








C_2014431EN.01001101.xml










1.12.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 431/11





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší správní soud (Czech Republic) lodged on 25 August 2014 — PST CLC a.s. v Generální ředitelství cel
(Case C-405/14)
(2014/C 431/17)
Language of the case: Czech

Referring court

Nejvyšší správní soud

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: PST CLC a.s.

Defendant: Generální ředitelství cel

Question referred

Was Commission Regulation (EC) No 384/2004 (1) of 1 March 2004 concerning the classification of certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature valid at the time of its effectiveness from 22 March 2004 to 22 December 2009 insofar as point 2 of the annex thereto is concerned, which specifies that products consisting of a heat sink and a fan fall within CN Code 8414 59 30, and was it thus applicable to the present case?


(1)  OJ 2004 L 64, p. 21.
Case T-632/14: Action brought on 25 August 2014  — Intercon v Commission
Date: 2014-08-25
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU financing, audit, framework agreement, research programme








C_2014380EN.01001602.xml










27.10.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 380/16





Action brought on 25 August 2014 — Intercon v Commission
(Case T-632/14)
2014/C 380/22
Language of the case: Polish

Parties


Applicant: Intercon Sp. z o.o. (Łódź, Poland) (represented by: B. Eger, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:






—


hold that, by issuing an order for repayment of the amount of EUR 2 58  479,21, the Commission has breached the provisions of Grant Agreement No ARTreat — 224297 under the Seventh Research Framework Programme (FP7);










—


order the Commission to pay the costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of its action, the applicant raises three pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law:






—


exceeding of the limits of the scope of examination by reason of the audit which was carried out and the consequent impermissible evaluation of the results of that audit.














2.


Second plea in law:






—


failure to take into account the Form C signed by the beneficiary, although the Commission had requested that this be submitted, and failure to take account of evidence in the form of a declaration of an employee that it was not possible to obtain the documents from the coordinator of the consortium.














3.


Third plea in law:






—


Failure to take into account new comments and clarifications by reference to Article II.22.5 of the annex to the agreement, even though the Commission had requested the beneficiary to submit these and had imposed a time-limit for that purpose.