C 84/18
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
21.2.2022
Parties to the main proceedings Applicant: V.М.А.
Defendant: Stolichna obshtina, rayon ‘Pancharevo’
Operative part of the judgment Article 4(2) TEU, Articles 20 and 21 TFEU and Articles 7, 24 and 45 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, read in conjunction with Article 4(3) of Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC, must be interpreted as meaning that, in the case of a child, being a minor, who is a Union citizen and whose birth certificate, issued by the competent authorities of the host Member State, designates as that child’s parents two persons of the same sex, the Member State of which that child is a national is obliged (i) to issue to that child an identity card or a passport without requiring a birth certificate to be drawn up beforehand by its national authorities, and (ii) to recognise, as is any other Member State, the document from the host Member State that permits that child to exercise, with each of those two persons, the child’s right to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States.
(1)
OJ C 433, 14.12.2020.
Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 21 December 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte suprema di cassazione — Italy) — Randstad Italia SpA v Umana SpA, Azienda USL Valle d’Aosta, IN.
VA SpA, Synergie Italia agenzia per il Lavoro SpA (Case C-497/20) (1) (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU — Obligation of Member States to provide remedies sufficient to ensure effective legal protection in the fields covered by Union law — Public procurement — Directive 89/665/EEC — Article 1(1) and (3) — Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Judgment of a Member State’s highest administrative court declaring inadmissible, in breach of the case-law of the Court of Justice, an action brought by a tenderer excluded from a public procurement procedure — No remedy against that judgment before the highest court in that Member State’s judicial order — Principles of effectiveness and equivalence) (2022/C 84/21) Language of the case: Italian Referring court Corte suprema di cassazione
Parties to the main proceedings Applicant: Randstad Italia SpA Defendants: Umana SpA, Azienda USL Valle d’Aosta, IN.
VA SpA, Synergie Italia agenzia per il Lavoro SpA
Operative part of the judgment Article 4(3) and Article 19(1) TEU, and Article 1(1) and (3) of Council Directive 89/665/EEC of 21 December 1989 on the coordination of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the application of review procedures to the award of public supply and public works contracts, as amended by Directive 2014/23/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014, read in the light of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as not precluding a provision of a Member State’s domestic law which, according to national case-law, has the effect that individual parties, such as tenderers who participated in a procedure for the award of a public