However, the person concerned must be duly informed of the decision imposing the fine and be allowed sufficient time to bring an appeal and prepare a defence.
AFMB, a company established on 11 May 2011 in Cyprus, entered into contracts with transport undertakings and drivers resident in the Netherlands. A dispute has arisen between, on the one hand, AFMB and those drivers and, on the other hand, the Raad van bestuur van de Sociale verzekeringsbank (Board of Management of the Social Insurance Bank; ‘RSVB’, Netherlands) concerning the latter’s decision that the Netherlands social security legislation applies to those drivers and not the Cypriot social security legislation.
The fundamental right to liberty may be limited only on the basis of a law which clearly provides for such a possibility in respect of those officials, which does not appear to be the case in Germany.
In the judgment European Commission v Ireland (C-261/18), delivered on 12 November 2019, the Grand Chamber of the Court imposed pecuniary penalties on Ireland for failing to give concrete effect to the judgment of 3 July 2008, Commission v Ireland,
in so far as the Court had held in that judgment that Ireland had infringed Directive 85/337 as a result of the construction of a wind farm at Derrybrien (Ireland) without a prior environmental impact assessment having been carried out.
Judgment in Joined Cases C-349/18 to 351/18 Nationale Maatschappij der Belgische Spoorwegen (NMBS) v Mbutuku Kanyeba and Others.
On 7 March 2012, France requested the Commission to delay the deadline imposed for compliance with the nitrogen dioxide limit values set by the Air Quality Directive. 1 That request concerned the annual limit values in 24 zones of the French territory and the hourly limit values in three of those zones. The Commission raised objections to that delay request. France did not challenge those objections and was, therefore, under an obligation to comply with the nitrogen dioxide limit values, calculated by hour or by calendar year, as from 1 January 2010.
In addition EU law does not preclude such an injunction from producing effects worldwide, within the framework of the relevant international law which it is for Member States to take into account
Judgment in Case C-18/18 Eva Glawischnig-Piesczek v Facebook Ireland Limited
A number of environmental activists, members of the group ‘Voluntary Reapers of GMOs, Ariège’, have been prosecuted for damaging cans of weed-killer containing glyphosate (and more specifically ‘Roundup’) in shops in the towns of Pamiers, Saint-Jean du Falga and Foix (France). The activists have been accused of defacing and damaging the property of another.
A pre-ticked checkbox is therefore insufficient.
Judgment in Case C-673/17 Planet49 GmbH.
In the context of a request for de-referencing, a balance must be struck between the fundamental rights of the person requesting the de-referencing and those of internet users potentially interested in that information.
Judgment in Case C-136/17 GC and Others v Commission nationale de l’informatique et des libertés (CNIL)
The Community design of the Chinese company Zhejiang’s scooter remains registered.
Judgment in Case T-219/18 Piaggio & C. SpA v EUIPO and Zhejiang Zhongneng Industry Group Co. Ltd
It is, however, required to carry out that de-referencing on the versions corresponding to all the Member States and to put in place measures discouraging internet users from gaining access, from one of the Member States, to the links in question which appear on versions of that search engine outside the EU.
Judgment in Case C-507/17 Google LLC, successor in law to Google Inc. v Commission nationale de l’informatique et des libertés (CNIL).
The entry into office of the additional judges will be the third stage of the reform of the judicial structure of the European Union.
Designs must constitute the expression of original works if they are to qualify for such protection.
Judgment in Case C-683/17 Cofemel – Sociedade de Vestuário, SA v G-Star Raw CV.
The General Court finds that the principle of solidarity is not referred to in the 2016 decision and that it does not appear that the Commission, as a matter of fact, conducted an examination of that principle.