Salzgitter Mannesmann Handel GmbH v SC Laminorul SA (Case C-157/12); [2013] WLR (D) 362
“Article 34(4) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ 2001 L12, p 1) was of no application to irreconcilable judgments given by courts of the same member states.”
WLR Daily, 26th September 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“Article 6(2) of Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment applied only to retirement or invalidity benefits under an occupational social security scheme.”
WLR Daily, 26th September 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“The principle of non-discrimination on grounds of age, enshrined in article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and given specific expression by Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation, and, in particular, articles 2 and 6(1) of that Directive, did not preclude an occupational pension scheme under which an employer paid, as part of pay, pension contributions which increased with age, provided that the difference in treatment on grounds of age that arose therefrom was appropriate and necessary to achieve a legitimate aim.”
WLR Daily, 26th September 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Proceedings concerning Texdata Software GmbH (Case C-418/11); [2013] WLR (D) 358
“National legislation prescribing the immediate imposition of a periodic penalty upon a branch of a capital company governed by the laws of another member state in consequence of the failure of that branch, within the statutory nine-month period, to disclose to the authorities of the member state concerned the documents and particulars required by articles 1 and 2 of the Eleventh Council Directive 89/666/EEC of 21 December 1989 concerning disclosure requirements in respect of branches opened in a member state by certain types of company governed by the law of another member state (OJ 1989 L395, p 36) without prior notice and without the company first having been given an opportunity to state its views on the alleged breach was not precluded by European law, provided that the domestic courts were satisfied that the system of penalties was effective, proportionate and dissuasive.”
WLR Daily, 26th September 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
United Kingdom v Council of the European Union (Case C-431/11); [2013] WLR (D) 357
“By adopting Council Decision 2011/407/EU, on the position to be taken by the European Union within the EEA Joint Committee concerning an amendment to Annex VI (social security) and Protocol 37 to the EEA Agreement, the Council of the European Union had ensured that free movement of persons was exercisable within the EEA under the same social conditions as within the Union, thereby supporting the development of the association established by the EEA Agreement between the European Union and the EFTA states and the realisation of the objectives pursued by the Agreement.”
WLR Daily, 26th September 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“You would have to be living under a rock to avoid Mr Milliband’s recent announcement that energy costs would, if he were elected in 2015, be capped for 20 months. Unsurprisingly, this has caused uproar on a political level between energy companies warning of blackouts and company failures and the Labour party who maintain it is a viable option. The question which really needs to be asked here is whether or not the government is legally entitled to do this?”
Halsbury’s Law Exchange, 27th September 2013
Source: www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk
“I did an initial post here summarising this opinion from the A-G to the CJEU saying that the UK was in breach of two EU Directives about environmental assessment and pollution control – the breaches concerned our system for litigation costs. It struck me that there was a lot in the opinion, and after some re-reads, I continue to think so. So I will deal in this post with one aspect, namely the finding that the UK is in breach, in requiring an undertaking as to damages by the claimant to back up the claimant’s interim injunction – in the jargon, a cross-undertaking.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 27th September 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations – guide”
Information Commissioner’s Office, 26th September 2013
Source: www.ico.org.uk
“New EU rules which will cap bankers’ bonuses will lead to an increase in fixed salaries, ‘undermining’ global reforms to promote greater responsibility in the banking sector, the UK Government has said.”
OUT-LAW.com, 27th September 203
Source: www.out-law.com
“The UK Treasury has launched a legal challenge against European Union (EU) plans to cap bankers’ bonuses.”
BBC News, 25th September 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
CHS Tour Services GmbH v Team4 Travel GmbH (Case C-435/11); [2013] WLR (D) 355
“If a commercial practice satisfied all the criteria set out in article 6(1) of Parliament and Council Directive 2005/29/EC (‘the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive’) for being categorised as a misleading practice in relation to the consumer, it was not necessary to determine whether such a practice was also contrary to the requirements of professional diligence as referred to in article 5(2)(a) of the Directive in order for it legitimately to be regarded as unfair and, therefore, prohibited in accordance with article 5(1).”
WLR Daily, 19th September 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Betriu Montull v Instituto Nacional de la Seguridad Social (INSS) (Case C-5/12); [2013] WLR (D) 354
“Council Directives 92/85/EEC of 19 October 1992 on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health at work of pregnant workers and workers who have recently given birth or are breastfeeding and 76/207/EEC of 9 February 1976 on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women as regards access to employment, vocational training and promotion, and working conditions did not preclude a national measure which provided that the father of a child, who was an employed person, was entitled, with the consent of the mother, who was also an employed person, to take maternity leave for the period following the compulsory leave of six weeks which the mother had to take after childbirth except where her health would be at risk, whereas a father of a child who was an employed person was not entitled to take such leave where the mother of his child was not an employed person and was not covered by a State social security scheme.”
WLR Daily, 19th September 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“A payment made at the behest of debtor subject to insolvency proceedings to one of the latter’s creditors did not fall within the scope of article 24(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 of 29 May 2000 on insolvency proceedings. That provision enabled a person who honoured an obligation ‘for the benefit of’ a debtor, who was subject to insolvency proceedings opened in another member state , when it should have been honoured for the benefit of the liquidator, to be deemed to have discharged it if he was unaware of the opening of proceedings.”
WLR Daily, 19th September 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Pensionsversicherungsanstalt v Brey (Case C-140/12); [2013] WLR (D) 352
“European Union law—in particular, articles 7(1)(b), 8(4) and 24(1) and (2) of Parliament and Council Directive 2004/38/EC 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—precluded national legislation which, even in relation to the period following the first three months of residence, automatically barred the grant of a social security benefit to a national of another member state who was not economically active, on the grounds that, despite having been issued with a certificate of residence, he did not meet the necessary requirements for obtaining the legal right to reside on the territory of the first member state for a period of longer than three months, since obtaining that right of residence was conditional upon that national having sufficient resources not to apply for the benefit.”
WLR Daily, 19th September 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Revenue and Customs Commissioners v Sunico ApS and others (Case C-49/12); [2013] WLR (D) 347
“The concept of ‘civil and commercial matters’ within the meaning of article 1(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 covered an action whereby a public authority of one member state claimed, as against natural and legal persons resident in another member state, damages for loss caused by a tortious conspiracy to commit value added tax fraud in the first member state.”
WLR Daily, 12th September 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“In this most recent case concerning access by private individuals to environmental information held by public authorities, the AG grasps the nettlish question of what precisely a public authority is. The issue was a subject of debate because the request for information had been addressed to private companies which manage a public service relating to the environment. The question therefore was whether, even though the companies concerned are private, they may be regarded as ‘public authorities’ for the purposes of the Directive governing access to environmental information (Directive 2003/4).”
UK Human Rights Blog, 17th September 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“The Government is not guaranteed a ‘favourable outcome’ in its appeal of a tribunal’s finding that consultation requirements under the collective redundancy rules were triggered when retailers made redundancies in multiple shops, an expert has said.”
OUT-LAW.com, 17th September 2013
Source: www.out-law.com
“The European Union could be given powers to ban dangerous psychoactive substances known as ‘legal highs’ within weeks of them hitting the market, under new proposals unveiled by the bloc’s legislative branch today.”
The Independent, 17th September 2013
Source: www.independent.co.uk
Schlecker (trading as Firma Anton Schlecker) v Boedeker: (Case C-64/12); [2013] WLR (D) 346
“Article 6(2) of the Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations, opened for signature in Rome on 19 June 1980, meant that even where an employee carried out the work in performance of the contract habitually, for a lengthy period and without interruption in the same country, the national court could, under the concluding part of that provision, disregard the law of the country where the work was habitually carried out, if it appeared from the circumstances as a whole that the contract was more closely connected with another country.”
WLR Daily, 12th September 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024