do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-204/23,  Lufthansa Linee Aeree Germaniche and Others: Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 25 April 2024 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato – Italy) – Autorità di regolazione dei trasporti v Lufthansa Linee Aeree Germaniche, Austrian Airlines, Brussels Airlines, Swiss International Air Lines Ltd, Lufthansa Cargo (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Air transport – Airport charges – Directive 2009/12/EC – Article 11(5) – Funding for the independent supervisory authority – Contribution from airport users – Criteria for taxation)
Date: 2024-04-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: airport, charges for use of infrastructure, equal treatment, financing method, principle of proportionality, supervisory body








C_202403575EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/3575


17.6.2024






Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 25 April 2024 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato – Italy) – Autorità di regolazione dei trasporti v Lufthansa Linee Aeree Germaniche, Austrian Airlines, Brussels Airlines, Swiss International Air Lines Ltd, Lufthansa Cargo


(Case C-204/23,
                (1)
Lufthansa Linee Aeree Germaniche and Others)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Air transport - Airport charges - Directive 2009/12/EC - Article 11(5) - Funding for the independent supervisory authority - Contribution from airport users - Criteria for taxation)
(C/2024/3575)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Consiglio di Stato

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Autorità di regolazione dei trasporti

Respondents: Lufthansa Linee Aeree Germaniche, Austrian Airlines, Brussels Airlines, Swiss International Air Lines Ltd, Lufthansa Cargo

Intervening party: Presidenza del Consiglio dei ministri

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 11(5) of Directive 2009/12/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2009 on airport charges
must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation under which funding for an independent supervisory authority is secured by levying a financial contribution on airport users, the amount of which does not correlate to the cost of services provided by that authority, in so far as such legislation complies with the general principles of EU law, in particular the principles of proportionality and non-discrimination.










2.


Article 11(5) of Directive 2009/12
must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation under which funding for an independent supervisory authority is secured by levying a financial contribution on airport users, even if they are not established in the Member State covered by that authority or incorporated under the law of that Member State.






(1)  
            OJ C 189, 30.5.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3575/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-290/24, Abkez: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands) lodged on 25 April 2024 – AI, ZY, BG v Staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheid
Date: 2024-04-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: asylum seeker, forced migration, international protection, right of asylum








C_202403902EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/3902


1.7.2024






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands) lodged on 25 April 2024 – AI, ZY, BG v Staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheid


(Case C-290/24, Abkez)
                (1)

(C/2024/3902)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Raad van State

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellants: AI, ZY, BG

Respondent: Staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheid

Questions referred







1.


Must Article 4 of Council Directive 2001/55/EC (2) of 20 July 2001 on minimum standards for giving temporary protection in the event of a mass influx of displaced persons and on measures promoting a balance of efforts between Member States in receiving such persons and bearing the consequences thereof be interpreted as meaning that, where a Member State has made use of the possibility offered by Article 7(1) of that directive also to grant temporary protection under that directive to additional categories of displaced persons (‘the optional group’), the temporary protection given to that optional group continues not only in the case of an automatic extension as referred to in Article 4(1) for the period specified in that provision, but also in the case of a decision to extend the period as referred to in Article 4(2) for the period specified in that provision?










2.


Does it make any difference to the answer to the question of whether the temporary protection given to the optional group continues in the event of a decision to extend it as referred to in Article 4(2) that a Member State has decided to terminate the temporary protection given to the optional group before the Council has decided to extend the temporary protection for one year as referred to in Article 4(2)?






(1)  The name of the present case is a fictitious name. It does not correspond to the real name of any party to the proceedings.

(2)  
            OJ 2001 L 212, p. 12.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3902/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-218/23 P: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 25 April 2024 – NS v European Parliament (Appeal – Civil service – Officials – Reassignment – Interests of the service – Correspondence between the grade and the post – Loss of an allowance – Right to be heard – Obligation to state reasons – Duty to have regard for the welfare of officials)
Date: 2024-04-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European official, allowances and expenses, damages, pay scale, reassignment, rights of the defence








C_202403577EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/3577


17.6.2024






Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 25 April 2024 – NS v European Parliament


(Case C-218/23 P)
                (1)

(Appeal - Civil service - Officials - Reassignment - Interests of the service - Correspondence between the grade and the post - Loss of an allowance - Right to be heard - Obligation to state reasons - Duty to have regard for the welfare of officials)
(C/2024/3577)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: NS (represented by: L. Levi, avocate)

Other party to the proceedings: European Parliament (represented by: L. Darie, I. Lázaro Betancor and S. Seyr, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders NS to bear her own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Parliament.






(1)  
            OJ C 252, 17.7.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3577/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-207/23,  Finanzamt X (Application and disposal of goods free of charge: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 25 April 2024 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof – Germany) – Finanzamt X v Y KG (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Common system of value added tax (VAT) – Directive 2006/112/EC – Taxable transactions – Article 16 – Application of goods forming part of a taxable person’s business assets and their transfer free of charge to another taxable person – Drying of wood and heating of asparagus fields stemming from a cogeneration plant connected to a biogas production facility – Article 74 – Taxable amount – Cost price – Limitation to costs subject to input VAT only)
Date: 2024-04-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, agricultural holding, cost price, free service, heating, perennial vegetable, production cost, tax relief, taxpayer








C_202403576EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/3576


17.6.2024






Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 25 April 2024 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof – Germany) – Finanzamt X v Y KG


(Case C-207/23,
                (1)
Finanzamt X (Application and disposal of goods free of charge)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Common system of value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Taxable transactions - Article 16 - Application of goods forming part of a taxable person’s business assets and their transfer free of charge to another taxable person - Drying of wood and heating of asparagus fields stemming from a cogeneration plant connected to a biogas production facility - Article 74 - Taxable amount - Cost price - Limitation to costs subject to input VAT only)
(C/2024/3576)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesfinanzhof

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Finanzamt X

Defendant: Y KG

Operative part of the judgment







1.


The first paragraph of Article 16 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax
must be interpreted as meaning that the transfer free of charge of heat produced by a taxable person to other taxable persons for the purposes of their economic activities constitutes an application, by that first taxable person, of goods forming part of his business assets in the form of a disposal free of charge, within the meaning of that provision, that is to be treated as a supply of goods for consideration, and whether or not those other taxable persons use that heat for purposes giving them a right to deduct value added tax is irrelevant in that regard.










2.


Article 74 of Directive 2006/112
must be interpreted as meaning that the cost price, within the meaning of that provision, includes not only direct manufacturing or production costs but also indirectly attributable costs, such as financing costs, whether or not those costs have been subject to input value added tax.






(1)  
            OJ C 252, 17.7.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3576/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union – Cases where the Commission raises no objections – SA.112404
Date: 2024-04-25
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Croatia, State aid, control of State aid, processing industry








C_202402883EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/2883


25.4.2024






Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
Cases where the Commission raises no objections
SA.112404
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2024/2883)








Date of adoption of the decision


19.3.2024




Aid number


SA.112404




Member State


Croatia




Region


Croatia




Title (title and/or name of the beneficiary)


State aid programme for compensation of energy price growth in sectors for processing of agricultural products in 2024




Legal basis


Act on Agriculture (Official Gazette 118/2018, 42/2020 and 127/20, 52/21 and 152/22)




Type of measure


Scheme


 




Objective


Remedy for a serious disturbance in the economy




Form of aid


Direct grant




Budget


Overall budget: 10 000 000  EUR
Annual budget: 10 000 000  EUR




Intensity


Measure does not constitute aid




Duration


Until 30.6.2024




Economic sectors


MANUFACTURING




Name and address of the granting authority


Ministry of Agriculture
Ulica grada Vukovara 78, Zagreb




Other information


 




The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

https://competition-cases.ec.europa.eu/search?caseInstrument=SA



ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/2883/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-276/22, Edil Work 2 and S.T.: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 25 April 2024 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte suprema di cassazione – Italy) – Edil Work 2 Srl, S.T. Srl v STE Sàrl (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Articles 49 and 54 TFEU – Freedom of establishment – Company established in a Member State but carrying on its activities in another Member State – Operation and management of the company – National legislation providing for the application of the law of the Member State in which a company carries on its activities – Restriction on freedom of establishment – Justification – Protection of the interests of creditors, minority shareholders and staff – Prevention of abusive practices and artificial arrangements – Proportionality)
Date: 2024-04-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: application of the law, head office, incorporation, national law, nationality of legal persons, private limited company, right of establishment








C_202403565EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/3565


17.6.2024






Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 25 April 2024 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte suprema di cassazione – Italy) – Edil Work 2 Srl, S.T. Srl v STE Sàrl


(Case C-276/22, Edil Work 2 and S.T.)
                (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Articles 49 and 54 TFEU - Freedom of establishment - Company established in a Member State but carrying on its activities in another Member State - Operation and management of the company - National legislation providing for the application of the law of the Member State in which a company carries on its activities - Restriction on freedom of establishment - Justification - Protection of the interests of creditors, minority shareholders and staff - Prevention of abusive practices and artificial arrangements - Proportionality)
(C/2024/3565)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Corte suprema di cassazione

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Edil Work 2 Srl, S.T. Srl

Defendant: STE Sàrl

Intervening party: CM

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 49 and 54 TFEU
must be interpreted as precluding legislation of a Member State which provides generally for its national law to apply to the acts of management of a company established in another Member State but carrying on the main part of its activities in the first Member State.


(1)  
            OJ C 266, 11.7.2022.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3565/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-106/24 R: Order of the President of the General Court of 25 April 2024 – Corporate & Public Management Consulting International v Commission
Date: 2024-04-25
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Georgia, award of contract, bilateral agreement, public procurement, services contract, tendering








C_202403475EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/3475


10.6.2024






Order of the President of the General Court of 25 April 2024 – Corporate & Public Management Consulting International v Commission


(Case T-106/24 R)

(Interim relief - Public supply contracts - Technical services provided in support of the EU-Georgia bilateral agreements - Application for interim measures - No prima facie case)
(C/2024/3475)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Corporate & Public Management Consulting International OÜ (Tallinn, Estonia) (represented by: C. Ginter, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: S. Romoli and T. Van Noyen, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its application based on Articles 278 and 279 TFEU, the applicant seeks, in essence, first, suspension of operation of Commission Decision Ares(2024) 1081885 of 13 February 2024 relating to the call for tenders NEAR/TBS/2023/EA-RP/0125, entitled ‘EU-Georgia European Union Integration, DCFTA implementation and SME Development Facility’, rejecting the applicant’s tender as inadmissible and, second, suspension of the signature of the contracts between the European Commission and the other tenderers in the context of that procurement procedure.

Operative part of the order







1.


The application for interim measures is dismissed.










2.


The order of 23 February 2024, Corporate & Public Management Consulting International v Commission (T-106/24 R), is cancelled.










3.


The costs are reserved.






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3475/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Action brought on 25 April 2024 by the EFTA Surveillance Authority against Iceland (Case E-9/24)
Date: 2024-04-25
Institutions: EFTA Court
Subjects: European Economic Area, Iceland, access to a profession, job creation, national implementing measure, principle of proportionality, professional qualifications, provision of services, simplification of legislation, single market








C_202403641EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/3641


6.6.2024






Action brought on 25 April 2024 by the EFTA Surveillance Authority against Iceland
(Case E-9/24)
(C/2024/3641)

An action against Iceland was brought before the EFTA Court on 25 April 2024 by the EFTA Surveillance Authority, represented by Hildur Hjörvar, Sigrún Ingibjörg Gísladóttir and Melpo-Menie Joséphidès, acting as Agents of the EFTA Surveillance Authority, Avenue de Arts 19H, 1000 Brussels, Belgium.
The EFTA Surveillance Authority requests the EFTA Court to:






1.


Declare that Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Act referred to at point 1c of Chapter A of Annex VII to the EEA Agreement (Directive (EU) 2018/958 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 June 2018 on a proportionality test before adoption of new regulation of professions), as adapted by Protocol 1 to the EEA Agreement, and under Article 7 of the EEA Agreement, by failing to adopt the measures necessary to implement the Act within the time prescribed, or in any event, by failing to inform the EFTA Surveillance Authority thereof, and










2.


Order Iceland to bear the costs of these proceedings.





Legal and factual background and pleas in law adduced in support:







—


By this application, the EFTA Surveillance Authority (‘ESA’) seeks a declaration from the Court that Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Act referred to at point 1c of Chapter A of Annex VII to the EEA Agreement, as adapted by Protocol 1 to that Agreement, and under Article 7 EEA, by failing to adopt the measures necessary to implement the Act within the time prescribed, or in any event, by failing to inform ESA thereof.










—


In a reply dated 25 January 2024 to ESA’s reasoned opinion of 6 December 2023, Iceland stated that the complexity of the issue at hand and unforeseen circumstances had delayed implementation.










—


When the deadline for Iceland to comply with the reasoned opinion expired on 31 January 2024, ESA had received no notification that Iceland had implemented the Act. Nor was ESA in possession of any other information which indicated that the Act had been made part of Iceland’s internal legal order.










—


ESA notes that, at the point of lodging the present application, it had not been notified, and did not have any other information to suggest, that Iceland had implemented the Act into its national legal order.






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3641/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)