Skip to content
PoliticalRepoPoliticalRepo

Subjects · European Union

Defence

Records whose title is actually about this topic. Use a country filter if the list is still too broad.

101 records in EU in 2020

All countriesUnited States · 41,745Ireland · 23,760United Kingdom · 15,991Germany · 5,706France · 4,098Netherlands · 3,840Austria · 3,566European Union · 2,430Belgium · 5Search this topic

Records

Record· CJCELEX 62019CJ0386_INFdecided

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 10 September 2020.#Hamas v Council of the European Union.#Appeal – Common foreign and security policy – Fight against terrorism – Restrictive measures taken against certain persons and entities – Freezing of funds – Common Position 2001/931/CFSP – Article 1(4) and (6) – Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 – Article 2(3) – Retention of an organisation on the list of persons, groups and entities involved in terrorist acts – Conditions – Competent authority equivalent to a judicial authority – Sentencing decision – Ongoing risk of involvement in terrorist activities – Obligation to state reasons – Rights of the defence – Right to effective judicial protection.#Case C-386/19 P.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 10 September 2020

Record· CJCELEX 62019CJ0386decided

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 10 September 2020.#Hamas v Council of the European Union.#Appeal – Common foreign and security policy – Fight against terrorism – Restrictive measures taken against certain persons and entities – Freezing of funds – Common Position 2001/931/CFSP – Article 1(4) and (6) – Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 – Article 2(3) – Retention of an organisation on the list of persons, groups and entities involved in terrorist acts – Conditions – Competent authority equivalent to a judicial authority – Sentencing decision – Ongoing risk of involvement in terrorist activities – Obligation to state reasons – Rights of the defence – Right to effective judicial protection.#Case C-386/19 P.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 10 September 2020

Report· CCCELEX 62019CC0152decided

Opinion of Advocate General Saugmandsgaard Øe delivered on 9 September 2020.#Deutsche Telekom AG v European Commission.#Appeal – Competition – Article 102 TFEU – Abuse of dominant position – Slovak market for broadband internet access services – Regulatory obligation on the part of operators with significant market power to grant access to the local loop – Conditions laid down by the incumbent operator for unbundled access by other operators to the local loop – Indispensability of the access – Imputability of a subsidiary’s conduct to the parent company – Rights of the defence.#Case C-152/19 P.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 9 September 2020

Record· TJCELEX 62020TJ0131_INFdecided

Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 2 September 2020.#IR v European Commission.#Civil service – Officials – Rights and obligations of officials – Secondment in the interests of the service – Article 37, first paragraph, heading (a), first indent, of the Staff Regulations – Article 38 of the Staff Regulations – Refusal to extend a secondment – Duty to have regard for the welfare of officials – Rights of the defence.#Case T-131/20.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 2 September 2020

Record· TOCELEX 62019TO0613decided

Order of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 2 September 2020.#European Network on Independent Living Brussels Office (ENIL Brussels Office) and Others v European Commission.#Action for annulment – ERDF – Operational programme ‘Regions in Growth’ – Priority Axis 5 (Regional social infrastructure) – Grant intended to support the deinstitutionalisation of services for elderly people and people with disabilities – Refusal to suspend the call for proposals at the request of organisations for the defence and representation of people with disabilities – Act not open to challenge – Inadmissibility.#Case T-613/19.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 2 September 2020

Record· TJCELEX 62020TJ0131decided

Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 2 September 2020.#IR v European Commission.#Civil service – Officials – Rights and obligations of officials – Secondment in the interests of the service – Article 37, first paragraph, heading (a), first indent, of the Staff Regulations – Article 38 of the Staff Regulations – Refusal to extend a secondment – Duty to have regard for the welfare of officials – Rights of the defence.#Case T-131/20.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 2 September 2020

Record· CJCELEX 62019CJ0104decided

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 9 July 2020.#Donex Shipping and Forwarding BV v Staatssecretaris van Financiën.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Common commercial policy – Dumping – Anti-dumping duty imposed on imports of certain iron or steel fasteners originating in the People’s Republic of China – Regulation (EC) No 91/2009 – Validity – Regulation (EC) No 384/96 – Article 2(10) and (11) – Rights of the defence.#Case C-104/19.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 9 July 2020

Record· TJCELEX 62018TJ0576_RESdecided

Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber, Extended Composition) of 8 July 2020.#Crédit agricole SA v European Central Bank.#Economic and monetary policy – Prudential supervision of credit institutions – Article 18(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 – Administrative pecuniary penalty imposed by the ECB on a credit institution – First subparagraph of Article 26(3) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 – Continued breach of capital requirements – Negligent breach – Retroactive application of less severe enforcement legislation – Absence – Rights of defence – Amount of the penalty – Obligation to state reasons.#Case T-576/18.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 8 July 2020

Record· TJCELEX 62018TJ0429_RESdecided

Judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 8 July 2020.#BRF SA and SHB Comércio e Indústria de Alimentos SA v European Commission.#Public health — Specific rules for the organisation of official controls on products of animal origin intended for human consumption — Amendment of the lists of third country establishments from which imports of specified products of animal origin are permitted, regarding certain establishments from Brazil — Article 12(4)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 854/2004 — Comitology — Obligation to state reasons — Rights of defence — Powers of the Commission — Equal treatment — Proportionality.#Case T-429/18.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 8 July 2020

Record· TJCELEX 62018TJ0577_INFdecided

Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber, Extended Composition) of 8 July 2020.#Crédit agricole Corporate and Investment Bank v European Central Bank.#Economic and monetary policy – Prudential supervision of credit institutions – Article 18(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 – Administrative pecuniary penalty imposed by the ECB on a credit institution – First subparagraph of Article 26(3) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 – Continued breach of capital requirements – Negligent breach – Rights of defence – Amount of the penalty – Obligation to state reasons.#Case T-577/18.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 8 July 2020

Record· TJCELEX 62019TJ0138_INFdecided

Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 8 July 2020.#WH v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#Civil service – Public officials – 2018 promotion exercise – Decision not to promote – Action for annulment – Disregard of the procedural requirements – Articles 76 and 78(6) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court – Admissibility – Rights of the defence – Obligation to state reasons – Comparison of the merits.#Case T-138/19.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 8 July 2020

Record· TJCELEX 62018TJ0578_INFdecided

Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber, Extended Composition) of 8 July 2020.#CA Consumer Finance v European Central Bank.#Economic and monetary policy – Prudential supervision of credit institutions – Article 18(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 – Administrative pecuniary penalty imposed by the ECB on a credit institution – First subparagraph of Article 26(3) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 – Continued breach of capital requirements – Negligent breach – Rights of defence – Amount of the penalty – Obligation to state reasons.#Case T-578/18.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 8 July 2020

Record· TJCELEX 62018TJ0577decided

Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber, Extended Composition) of 8 July 2020.#Crédit agricole Corporate and Investment Bank v European Central Bank.#Economic and monetary policy – Prudential supervision of credit institutions – Article 18(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 – Administrative pecuniary penalty imposed by the ECB on a credit institution – First subparagraph of Article 26(3) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 – Continued breach of capital requirements – Negligent breach – Rights of defence – Amount of the penalty – Obligation to state reasons.#Case T-577/18.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 8 July 2020

Record· TJCELEX 62018TJ0578decided

Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber, Extended Composition) of 8 July 2020.#CA Consumer Finance v European Central Bank.#Economic and monetary policy – Prudential supervision of credit institutions – Article 18(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 – Administrative pecuniary penalty imposed by the ECB on a credit institution – First subparagraph of Article 26(3) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 – Continued breach of capital requirements – Negligent breach – Rights of defence – Amount of the penalty – Obligation to state reasons.#Case T-578/18.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 8 July 2020

Record· TJCELEX 62019TJ0138decided

Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 8 July 2020.#WH v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#Civil service – Public officials – 2018 promotion exercise – Decision not to promote – Action for annulment – Disregard of the procedural requirements – Articles 76 and 78(6) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court – Admissibility – Rights of the defence – Obligation to state reasons – Comparison of the merits.#Case T-138/19.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 8 July 2020

Record· TJCELEX 62018TJ0429decided

Judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 8 July 2020.#BRF SA and SHB Comércio e Indústria de Alimentos SA v European Commission.#Public health — Specific rules for the organisation of official controls on products of animal origin intended for human consumption — Amendment of the lists of third country establishments from which imports of specified products of animal origin are permitted, regarding certain establishments from Brazil — Article 12(4)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 854/2004 — Comitology — Obligation to state reasons — Rights of defence — Powers of the Commission — Equal treatment — Proportionality.#Case T-429/18.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 8 July 2020

Record· CJCELEX 62019CJ0014_RESdecided

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 25 June 2020.#European Union Satellite Centre v KF.#Appeal — Staff of the European Union Satellite Centre (SatCen) — Member of SatCen’s contract staff — Complaints of psychological harassment — Administrative investigation — Request for assistance — Suspension of the staff member — Disciplinary proceedings — Removal of the staff member — SatCen’s Appeals Board — Conferral of exclusive jurisdiction in relation to SatCen staff disputes — Action for annulment — First and fifth paragraphs of Article 263 TFEU — Actions for damages — Article 268 TFEU — Jurisdiction of the EU judicature — Admissibility — Acts open to challenge — Contractual nature of the dispute — Articles 272 and 274 TFEU — Effective judicial protection — Final sentence of the second subparagraph of Article 24(1) TEU — First paragraph of Article 275 TFEU — Principle of equal treatment — General Court’s obligation to state reasons — Distortion of the facts and evidence — Rights of the defence — Principle of sound administration.#Case C-14/19 P.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 25 June 2020

Record· TJCELEX 62019TJ0295_RESdecided

Judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 25 June 2020.#Oleksandr Viktorovych Klymenko v Council of the European Union.#Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures taken having regard to the situation in Ukraine — Freezing of funds — List of persons, entities and bodies covered by the freezing of funds and economic resources — Maintenance of the applicant’s name on the list — Council’s obligation to verify that the decision of an authority of a third State was taken in accordance with the rights of the defence and the right to effective judicial protection.#Case T-295/19.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 25 June 2020

Record· CJCELEX 62019CJ0131_INFdecided

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 25 June 2020.#European Commission v CX.#Appeal – Civil service – Disciplinary proceedings – Rights of defence – Right to be heard – Annex IX of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union – Article 4 – Opportunity for the official who cannot be heard to comment in writing or to be represented – Article 22 – Hearing of the official by the Appointing Authority prior to the adoption of the disciplinary penalty – Alleged inability of the official to be heard and to make written submissions or to be represented – Assessment of the medical evidence – Failure of the General Court of the European Union to reply to arguments raised at first instance.#Case C-131/19 P.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 25 June 2020

Record· CJCELEX 62019CJ0014decided

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 25 June 2020.#European Union Satellite Centre v KF.#Appeal — Staff of the European Union Satellite Centre (SatCen) — Member of SatCen’s contract staff — Complaints of psychological harassment — Administrative investigation — Request for assistance — Suspension of the staff member — Disciplinary proceedings — Removal of the staff member — SatCen’s Appeals Board — Conferral of exclusive jurisdiction in relation to SatCen staff disputes — Action for annulment — First and fifth paragraphs of Article 263 TFEU — Action for damages — Article 268 TFEU — Jurisdiction of the EU judicature — Admissibility — Acts open to challenge — Contractual nature of the dispute — Articles 272 and 274 TFEU — Effective judicial protection — Final sentence of the second subparagraph of Article 24(1) TEU — First paragraph of Article 275 TFEU — Principle of equal treatment — General Court’s obligation to state reasons — Distortion of the facts and evidence — Rights of the defence — Principle of sound administration.#Case C-14/19 P.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 25 June 2020

Record· TJCELEX 62019TJ0295decided

Judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 25 June 2020.#Oleksandr Viktorovych Klymenko v Council of the European Union.#Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures taken having regard to the situation in Ukraine — Freezing of funds — List of persons, entities and bodies covered by the freezing of funds and economic resources — Maintenance of the applicant’s name on the list — Council’s obligation to verify that the decision of an authority of a third State was taken in accordance with the rights of the defence and the right to effective judicial protection.#Case T-295/19.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 25 June 2020

Record· CJCELEX 62019CJ0131decided

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 25 June 2020.#European Commission v CX.#Appeal – Civil service – Disciplinary proceedings – Rights of defence – Right to be heard – Annex IX of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union – Article 4 – Opportunity for the official who cannot be heard to comment in writing or to be represented – Article 22 – Hearing of the official by the Appointing Authority prior to the adoption of the disciplinary penalty – Alleged inability of the official to be heard and to make written submissions or to be represented – Assessment of the medical evidence – Failure of the General Court of the European Union to reply to arguments raised at first instance.#Case C-131/19 P.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 25 June 2020

Report· XGCELEX 52020XG0603(01)open

The following information is brought to the attention of: AL NASSER, Abdelkarim Hussein Mohamed, AL-YACOUB, Ibrahim Salih Mohammed, BOUYERI, Mohammed, IZZ-AL-DIN, Hasan, MOHAMMED, Khalid Shaikh, SHAHLAI Abdul Reza, SHAKURI Ali Gholam, COMMUNIST PARTY OF THE PHILIPPINES, including NEW PEOPLES ARMY (NPA), Philippines, Hizballah Military Wing, EJÉRCITO DE LIBERACIÓN NACIONAL, POPULAR FRONT FOR THE LIBERATION OF PALESTINE (PFLP), POPULAR FRONT FOR THE LIBERATION OF PALESTINE-GENERAL COMMAND, ‘DEVRIMCI HALK KURTULUȘ PARTISI CEPHESI’ – ‘DHKP/C’, ‘SENDERO LUMINOSO’ – ‘SL’ (‘Shining Path’) and ‘TEYRBAZEN AZADIYA KURDISTAN’ – ‘TAK’ – persons and groups included on the list of persons, groups and entities subject to Articles 2, 3 and 4 of Council Common Position 2001/931/CFSP on the application of specific measures to combat terrorism and to Council Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism (see Annexes to Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/20 and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/19) 2020/C 183/01

European Union · Council of the European Union · 3 June 2020

Record· COCELEX 62020CO0017_INFdecided

Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 28 May 2020.#MC v U.T.G. - Prefettura di Foggia.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 53(2) and Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Manifest inadmissibility – General principles of EU law – Right to good administration – Right of defence – Right to be heard – Measure adopted by the prefecture aimed at prohibiting an activity on account of alleged mafia infiltration – Legislation not providing for an adversarial administrative procedure.#Case C-17/20.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 28 May 2020

Record· COCELEX 62020CO0017decided

Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 28 May 2020.#MC v U.T.G. - Prefettura di Foggia.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per la Puglia.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 53(2) and Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Manifest inadmissibility – General principles of EU law – Right to good administration – Right of defence – Right to be heard – Measure adopted by the prefecture aimed at prohibiting an activity on account of alleged mafia infiltration – Legislation not providing for an adversarial administrative procedure.#Case C-17/20.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 28 May 2020

Report· CCCELEX 62019CC0238decided

Opinion of Advocate General Sharpston delivered on 28 May 2020.#EZ v Bundesrepublik Deutschland.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Hannover.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Area of freedom, security and justice – Asylum policy – Directive 2011/95/EU – Conditions for granting refugee status – Refusal to perform military service – Article 9(2)(e) – Law of the country of origin which does not provide for the right to conscience objection – Protection of persons who have fled their country of origin after the expiry of the period for suspending military service – Article 9(3) – Connection between the reasons mentioned in Article 10 of that directive and the prosecution and punishment referred to in Article 9(2)(e) of that directive – Evidence.#Case C-238/19.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 28 May 2020

Record· CJCELEX 62018CJ0607_INFdecided

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 14 May 2020.#NKT Verwaltungs GmbH and NKT A/S v European Commission.#Appeal – Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – European market for underground and submarine power cables – Market allocation in connection with projects – Fines – Rights of the defence – Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 – Article 27(1) – Consistency between the statement of objections and the decision at issue – Access to the file – Single and continuous infringement – Burden of proof – Distortion of arguments and evidence.#Case C-607/18 P.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 14 May 2020

Record· CJCELEX 62018CJ0607decided

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 14 May 2020.#NKT Verwaltungs GmbH and NKT A/S v European Commission.#Appeal – Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – European market for underground and submarine power cables – Market allocation in connection with projects – Fines – Rights of the defence – Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 – Article 27(1) – Consistency between the statement of objections and the decision at issue – Access to the file – Single and continuous infringement – Burden of proof – Distortion of arguments and evidence.#Case C-607/18 P.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 14 May 2020

Record· TJCELEX 62018TJ0290_INFdecided

Judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) of 13 May 2020.#Agmin Italy SpA v European Commission.#Financial Regulation — Exclusion from procurement and grant award procedures covered by the general EU budget and by the European Development Fund for a two-year period — Principle of impartiality — Rights of the defence — Error of assessment — Manifest error of assessment — Proportionality.#Case T-290/18.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 13 May 2020

Record· TJCELEX 62018TJ0290decided

Judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) of 13 May 2020.#Agmin Italy SpA v European Commission.#Financial Regulation — Exclusion from procurement and grant award procedures covered by the general EU budget and by the European Development Fund for a two-year period — Principle of impartiality — Rights of the defence — Error of assessment — Manifest error of assessment — Proportionality.#Case T-290/18.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 13 May 2020

Record· TJCELEX 62019TJ0073decided

Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 29 April 2020.#Bergslagernas Järnvaruaktiebolag v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#Community design — Invalidity proceedings — Registered Community design representing a wood-splitting tool — Earlier national design — Ground for invalidity — No individual character — No different overall impression — Article 6(1) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 — Infringement of the rights of the defence — Article 62 of Regulation No 6/2002.#Case T-73/19.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 29 April 2020

Record· TJCELEX 62019TJ0073_INFdecided

Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 29 April 2020.#Bergslagernas Järnvaruaktiebolag v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#Community design — Invalidity proceedings — Registered Community design representing a wood-splitting tool — Earlier national design — Ground for invalidity — No individual character — No different overall impression — Article 6(1) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 — Infringement of the rights of the defence — Article 62 of Regulation No 6/2002.#Case T-73/19.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 29 April 2020

Record· CJCELEX 62018CJ0507_RESdecided

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 23 April 2020.#NH v Associazione Avvocatura per i diritti LGBTI - Rete Lenford.#Reference for a preliminary ruling — Equal treatment in employment and occupation — Directive 2000/78/EC — Article 3(1)(a), Article 8(1) and Article 9(2) — Prohibition of discrimination based on sexual orientation — Conditions for access to employment or to occupation — Concept — Public statements ruling out recruitment of homosexual persons — Article 11(1), Article 15(1) and Article 21(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Defence of rights — Sanctions — Legal entity representing a collective interest — Standing to bring proceedings without acting in the name of a specific complainant or in the absence of an injured party — Right to damages.#Case C-507/18.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 23 April 2020

PreviousPage 2 of 3Next