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.

51 records in EU in 2019

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· TJCELEX 62018TJ0747decided

Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 12 December 2019.#Refan Bulgaria OOD v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#EU trade mark — Application for a three-dimensional EU trade mark — Shape of a flower — Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptiveness — Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Rights of the defence — Obligation to state reasons.#Case T-747/18.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 12 December 2019

Record· TJCELEX 62018TJ0747_INFdecided

Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 12 December 2019.#Refan Bulgaria OOD v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#EU trade mark — Application for a three-dimensional EU trade mark — Shape of a flower — Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptiveness — Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Rights of the defence — Obligation to state reasons.#Case T-747/18.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 12 December 2019

Record· CJCELEX 62018CJ0591_INFdecided

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 28 November 2019.#Brugg Kabel AG and Kabelwerke Brugg AG Holding 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 — Access to the file — Principle of the presumption of innocence — Distortion of the evidence.#Case C-591/18 P.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 28 November 2019

Record· CJCELEX 62018CJ0591decided

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 28 November 2019.#Brugg Kabel AG and Kabelwerke Brugg AG Holding 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 — Access to the file — Principle of the presumption of innocence — Distortion of the evidence.#Case C-591/18 P.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 28 November 2019

Record· TJCELEX 62017TJ0048_RESdecided

Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 7 November 2019.#Alliance for Direct Democracy in Europe ASBL (ADDE) v European Parliament.#Institutional law — European Parliament — Decision declaring certain expenditure of a political party ineligible for the purposes of a grant for 2015 — Decision awarding a grant for 2017 and providing for pre-financing at the rate of 33% of the maximum grant amount and the obligation to provide a bank guarantee — Obligation of impartiality — Rights of the defence — Financial Regulation — Rules of Application of the Financial Regulation — Regulation (EC) No 2004/2003 — Proportionality — Equal treatment.#Case T-48/17.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 7 November 2019

Record· TJCELEX 62017TJ0240decided

Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 7 November 2019.#Campine NV and Campine Recycling NV v European Commission.#Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Market for lead-acid car battery recycling — Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU — Fines — Value of purchases — Point 37 of the Guidelines on the method of setting fines — Obligation to state reasons — Rights of the defence — Evidence of the infringement — Concept of single or repeated infringement — Duration of the infringement — Interruption of participation in the infringement — Restriction of competition by object — Mitigating circumstances — Unlimited jurisdiction.#Case T-240/17.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 7 November 2019

Record· TJCELEX 62018TJ0431_INFdecided

Judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) of 7 November 2019.#WN v European Parliament.#Civil service — Accredited parliamentary assistants — Early termination of the contract — Breakdown in the relationship of trust — Rights of defence — Conciliation procedure — Manifest error of assessment — Discrimination on grounds of sex — Maternity leave — Duty to have regard for the welfare of officials.#Case T-431/18.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 7 November 2019

Record· TJCELEX 62018TJ0431decided

Judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) of 7 November 2019.#WN v European Parliament.#Civil service — Accredited parliamentary assistants — Early termination of the contract — Breakdown in the relationship of trust — Rights of defence — Conciliation procedure — Manifest error of assessment — Discrimination on grounds of sex — Maternity leave — Duty to have regard for the welfare of officials.#Case T-431/18.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 7 November 2019

Record· TJCELEX 62017TJ0240_INFdecided

Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 7 November 2019.#Campine NV and Campine Recycling NV v European Commission.#Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Market for lead-acid car battery recycling — Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU — Fines — Value of purchases — Point 37 of the Guidelines on the method of setting fines — Obligation to state reasons — Rights of the defence — Evidence of the infringement — Concept of single or repeated infringement — Duration of the infringement — Interruption of participation in the infringement — Restriction of competition by object — Mitigating circumstances — Unlimited jurisdiction.#Case T-240/17.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 7 November 2019

Record· TJCELEX 62017TJ0048decided

Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 7 November 2019.#Alliance for Direct Democracy in Europe ASBL (ADDE) v European Parliament.#Institutional law — European Parliament — Decision declaring certain expenditure of a political party ineligible for the purposes of a grant for 2015 — Decision awarding a grant for 2017 and providing for pre-financing at the rate of 33% of the maximum grant amount and the obligation to provide a bank guarantee — Obligation of impartiality — Rights of the defence — Financial Regulation — Rules of Application of the Financial Regulation — Regulation (EC) No 2004/2003 — Proportionality — Equal treatment.#Case T-48/17.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 7 November 2019

Report· CCCELEX 62018CC0507decided

Opinion of Advocate General Sharpston delivered on 31 October 2019.#NH v Associazione Avvocatura per i diritti LGBTI - Rete Lenford.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte suprema di cassazione.#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 · 31 October 2019

Record· COCELEX 62019CO0058decided

Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 22 October 2019.#Mykola Yanovych Azarov v Council of the European Union.#Appeal — Restrictive measures taken having regard to the situation in Ukraine — Freezing of funds and economic resources — List of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources — Maintenance of the appellant’s name — Decision by an authority of a third State — Obligation of the Council of the European Union to verify that that decision was taken in accordance with the rights of the defence and the right to effective judicial protection — Obligation to state reasons.#Case C-58/19 P.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 22 October 2019

Record· COCELEX 62019CO0058_INFdecided

Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 22 October 2019.#Mykola Yanovych Azarov v Council of the European Union.#Appeal — Restrictive measures taken having regard to the situation in Ukraine — Freezing of funds and economic resources — List of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources — Maintenance of the appellant’s name — Decision by an authority of a third State — Obligation of the Council of the European Union to verify that that decision was taken in accordance with the rights of the defence and the right to effective judicial protection — Obligation to state reasons.#Case C-58/19 P.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 22 October 2019

Record· CJCELEX 62018CJ0189decided

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 16 October 2019.#Glencore Agriculture Hungary Kft. v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság.#Reference for a preliminary ruling — Value added tax (VAT) — Directive 2006/112/EC– Articles 167 and 168 — Right to deduct VAT — Refusal — Fraud — Taking of evidence — Principle of respect for the rights of the defence — Right to be heard — Access to the file — Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Effective judicial review — Principle of equality of arms — Inter partes principle — National legislation or practice according to which, when checking the right to deduct VAT exercised by a taxable person, the tax authorities are bound by the findings of fact and the legal classifications which they have made in the context of related administrative procedures to which that taxable person was not a party.#Case C-189/18.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 16 October 2019

Record· CJCELEX 62018CJ0011decided

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 26 September 2019.#Oleksandr Viktorovych Klymenko v Council of the European Union.#Appeal — Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in Ukraine — Freezing of funds and economic resources — List of persons, entities and bodies covered by the freezing of funds and economic resources — Maintenance of the appellant’s name — Decision by an authority of a third State — Council’s obligation to verify that that decision was taken in accordance with the rights of the defence and the right to effective judicial protection — Obligation to state reasons.#Case C-11/18 P.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 26 September 2019

Record· TJCELEX 62018TJ0301decided

Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 24 September 2019.#Oleksandr Viktorovych Yanukovych v Council of the European Union.#Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in Ukraine — Freezing of funds — List of persons, entities and bodies subject to 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-301/18.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 24 September 2019

Record· TJCELEX 62018TJ0300decided

Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 24 September 2019.#Viktor Feodorovych Yanukovych v Council of the European Union.#Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in Ukraine — Freezing of funds — List of persons, entities and bodies subject to 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-300/18.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 24 September 2019

Record· TJCELEX 62017TJ0476_RESdecided

Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 19 September 2019.#Arysta LifeScience Netherlands BV v European Commission.#Plant protection products — Active substance diflubenzuron — Review of approval — Article 21 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 — Rights of the defence — Ultra vires — Manifest error of assessment — Procedure for renewal of approval — Article 14 of Regulation No 1107/2009 — Imposition, in the context of the review procedure, of additional restrictions limiting the use of the active substance at issue without waiting for the outcome of the renewal procedure — Proportionality.#Case T-476/17.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 19 September 2019

Record· TJCELEX 62017TJ0476decided

Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 19 September 2019.#Arysta LifeScience Netherlands BV v European Commission.#Plant protection products — Active substance diflubenzuron — Review of approval — Article 21 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 — Rights of the defence — Ultra vires — Manifest error of assessment — Procedure for renewal of approval — Article 14 of Regulation No 1107/2009 — Imposition, in the context of the review procedure, of additional restrictions limiting the use of the active substance at issue without waiting for the outcome of the renewal procedure — Proportionality.#Case T-476/17.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 19 September 2019

Record· TJCELEX 62018TJ0286decided

Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 September 2019.#Mykola Yanovych Azarov v Council of the European Union.#Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in Ukraine — Freezing of funds — List of persons, entities and bodies subject to 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-286/18.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 11 September 2019

Record· TJCELEX 62018TJ0308_RESdecided

Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 4 September 2019.#Hamas v Council of the European Union.#Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures against persons, groups and entities with a view to combating terrorism – Freezing of funds – Whether an authority of a third State can be classified as a competent authority within the meaning of Common Position 2001/931/CFSP – Factual basis of the decisions to freeze funds – Obligation to state reasons – Error of assessment – Principle of non-interference – Rights of the defence – Right to effective judicial protection – Authentication of the Council measures.#Case T-308/18.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 4 September 2019

Record· TJCELEX 62016TJ0008decided

Judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 12 July 2019 (Extracts).#Toshiba Samsung Storage Technology Corp. and Toshiba Samsung Storage Technology Korea Corp. v European Commission.#Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Market for optical disk drives — Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement — Collusive agreements relating to procurement events organised by two computer manufacturers — Breach of essential procedural requirements and of the rights of the defence — Jurisdiction of the Commission — Geographic scope of the infringement — Single and continuous infringement — Principle of good administration — 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines.#Case T-8/16.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 12 July 2019

Record· TJCELEX 62016TJ0008_RESdecided

Judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 12 July 2019 (Extracts).#Toshiba Samsung Storage Technology Corp. and Toshiba Samsung Storage Technology Korea Corp. v European Commission.#Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Market for optical disk drives — Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement — Collusive agreements relating to procurement events organised by two computer manufacturers — Breach of essential procedural requirements and of the rights of the defence — Jurisdiction of the Commission — Geographic scope of the infringement — Single and continuous infringement — Principle of good administration — 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines.#Case T-8/16.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 12 July 2019

Record· TJCELEX 62015TJ0772_RESdecided

Judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 12 July 2019 (Extracts).#Quanta Storage, Inc. v European Commission.#Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Market for optical disk drives — Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement — Collusive agreements relating to bidding events concerning optical disk drives for notebook and desktop computers — Rights of the defence — Obligation to state reasons — Principle of good administration — Fines — Single and continuous infringement — 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines.#Case T-772/15.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 12 July 2019

Record· TJCELEX 62015TJ0772decided

Judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 12 July 2019 (Extracts).#Quanta Storage, Inc. v European Commission.#Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Market for optical disk drives — Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement — Collusive agreements relating to bidding events concerning optical disk drives for notebook and desktop computers — Rights of the defence — Obligation to state reasons — Principle of good administration — Fines — Single and continuous infringement — 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines.#Case T-772/15.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 12 July 2019

Record· TJCELEX 62015TJ0762_RESdecided

Judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 12 July 2019 (Extracts).#Sony Corporation and Sony Electronics, Inc v European Commission.#Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Market for optical disk drives — Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement — Collusive agreements relating to bidding events concerning optical disk drives for notebook and desktop computers — Infringement by object — Rights of the defence — Obligation to state reasons — Principle of good administration — Fines — Single and continuous infringement — 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines.#Case T-762/15.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 12 July 2019

Record· TJCELEX 62015TJ0762decided

Judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 12 July 2019 (Extracts).#Sony Corporation and Sony Electronics, Inc v European Commission.#Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Market for optical disk drives — Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement — Collusive agreements relating to bidding events concerning optical disk drives for notebook and desktop computers — Infringement by object — Rights of the defence — Obligation to state reasons — Principle of good administration — Fines — Single and continuous infringement — 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines.#Case T-762/15.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 12 July 2019

Record· TJCELEX 62015TJ0763_INFdecided

Judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 12 July 2019.#Sony Optiarc, Inc and Sony Optiarc America, Inc v European Commission.#Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Market for optical disk drives — Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement — Collusive agreements relating to bidding events concerning optical disk drives for notebook and desktop computers — Infringement by object — Rights of the defence — Obligation to state reasons — Principle of good administration — Fines — Single and continuous infringement — 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines.#Case T-763/15.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 12 July 2019

Record· TJCELEX 62015TJ0763decided

Judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 12 July 2019.#Sony Optiarc, Inc and Sony Optiarc America, Inc v European Commission.#Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Market for optical disk drives — Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement — Collusive agreements relating to bidding events concerning optical disk drives for notebook and desktop computers — Infringement by object — Rights of the defence — Obligation to state reasons — Principle of good administration — Fines — Single and continuous infringement — 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines.#Case T-763/15.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 12 July 2019

Record· TJCELEX 62018TJ0305decided

Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 July 2019.#Andriy Klyuyev v Council of the European Union.#Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in Ukraine — Freezing of funds — List of persons, entities and bodies subject to 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-305/18.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 11 July 2019

Record· TJCELEX 62018TJ0284decided

Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 July 2019.#Sergej Arbuzov v Council of the European Union.#Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in Ukraine — Freezing of funds — List of persons, entities and bodies subject to 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-284/18.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 11 July 2019

Record· TJCELEX 62016TJ0245decided

Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 July 2019.#Oleksandr Viktorovych Yanukovych v Council of the European Union.#Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in Ukraine — Freezing of funds — List of persons, entities and bodies subject to 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-245/16.

European Union · Court of Justice of the European Union · 11 July 2019

Page 1 of 2Next