CELEX: 62014CN0271
Language: en
Date: 2014-06-04 00:00:00
Title: Case C-271/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État (France) lodged on 4 June 2014  — LFB Biomédicaments, Association des déficitaires en Alpha 1 Antitrypsine (Association ADAAT Alpha 1-France) v Ministre du travail, de l’emploi et de la santé, Ministre du budget, des comptes publics et de la réforme de l’État

25.8.2014   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 282/23
            
         Request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État (France) lodged on 4 June 2014 — LFB Biomédicaments, Association des déficitaires en Alpha 1 Antitrypsine (Association ADAAT Alpha 1-France) v Ministre du travail, de l’emploi et de la santé, Ministre du budget, des comptes publics et de la réforme de l’État
   (Case C-271/14)
   2014/C 282/28
   Language of the case: French
   
      Referring court
   
   Conseil d’État
   
      Parties to the main proceedings
   
   
      Applicants: LFB Biomédicaments, Association des déficitaires en Alpha 1 Antitrypsine (Association ADAAT Alpha 1-France)
   
      Defendants: Ministre du travail, de l’emploi et de la santé, Ministre du budget, des comptes publics et de la réforme de l’État
   
      Question referred
   
   Does Article 6(5) of Council Directive 89/105/EEC of 21 December 1988 relating to the transparency of measures regulating the pricing of medicinal products for human use and their inclusion in the scope of national health insurance systems (1) require that a statement of reasons be given for a decision to remove a proprietary medicinal product from the list of medicinal products provided to inpatients in health establishments which may be covered by compulsory health insurance schemes in addition to services relating to hospital treatment covered in the context of fixed payments in respect of periods of hospitalisation and hospital care determined in accordance with diagnosis-related groups?
   
      (1)  OJ L 40, p. 8.