Supreme Site Services v. Shape (C.J.E.U.)

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Salim S. Sleiman
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Eu Regulation ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
Dutch Supreme ◽  
Brussels Regulation

On September 3, 2020, following a request from the Dutch Supreme Court, the First Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) rendered its preliminary ruling in Supreme Site Services and Others v. SHAPE on the interpretation of Articles 1(1) and 24(5) of the European Union (EU) Regulation 1215/2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (Recast Brussels Regulation).

ANTI-SUIT INJUNCTIONS IN ARBITRAL AWARDS: ENFORCEMENT IN EUROPE

2015 ◽  
Vol 74 (3) ◽  
pp. 412-415
Author(s):  
Ewelina Kajkowska
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Member State ◽  
State Courts ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Status ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Brussels Regulation

THE status of anti-suit injunctions in Europe has long given rise to controversy. The decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union in Case C-536/13, Gazprom OAO [2015] All E.R. (EC) 711 sheds a new light on the relationship between anti-suit injunctions and the European jurisdiction regime embodied in the Brussels Regulation (Regulation No. 44/2001 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters). In this much anticipated judgment, the Court of Justice confirmed that, by virtue of the arbitration exclusion in Article 1(2)(d) of the Brussels Regulation, Member State courts are not precluded from enforcing anti-suit injunctions issued by arbitration tribunals and aimed at restraining the proceedings before Member State courts. Although the decision was given before the Recast Brussels Regulation came into force (Regulation No. 1215/2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, effective from 10 January 2015), it can be assumed that the same conclusion would have been reached under the new law.

scholarly journals Is a Municipal Sales Tax Compatible with VAT?

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 26-33
Author(s):  
Benja Angles Juanpere
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Value Added ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Sales Tax ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Local Finance ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Spanish Legislation

This paper analyses the Judgement of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) of 7 August 2018, case C-475/17, on the request for a preliminary ruling made by the Estonia Supreme Court on the compatibility between the municipal sales tax, which said country’s legislation allows municipalities to establish, and value added tax (VAT), which is Community-wide in scope. Pursuant to its interpretation of the VAT Directive, the CJEU concluded that this municipal tax is compatible with VAT and therefore endorses its levying. Based on an analysis of said Judgement, this paper assesses its potential transference into domestic Spanish legislation, be this within the current legal framework or as a possible new tax type within a future reform of the local finance system.

Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments in Europe

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hartley Trevor C
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Brussels Regulation ◽  
Extensive Reference

This book offers comprehensive coverage and analysis of the relationship between the three instruments governing civil jurisdiction and judgments in Europe: the Brussels Regulation, the Lugano Convention, and the Hague Choice of Court Convention. The text provides a practical explanation of how the instruments operate, focusing on real-life litigation problems, and including extensive reference to the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union. The work is specifically designed for ease of navigation and is split into four parts. Part I offers an introduction to the features and scope of each of the instruments. Part II goes on to examine the issue of jurisdiction whilst Part III tackles recognition and enforcement. Finally, Part IV addresses procedural and systematic problems. A detailed table of contents and extensive cross-referencing throughout make it simple to home in on the relevant sections.

scholarly journals The Use of the Preliminary Ruling Procedure by Czech Courts: Historical Retrospective and Beyond

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 150-172
Author(s):  
Václav Stehlík ◽  
David Sehnálek
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Lower Courts ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The article analyses the use of the preliminary ruling procedure by the Czech courts in the 15 years of the Czech membership in the European Union. It presents statistics of cases lodged to the EU Court of Justice and refers to the most important decisions. The article compares the practise of both lower courts as well as courts of last instance, namely the Supreme Court and the Supreme Administrative Court. It also outlines the attitude of the Czech Constitutional Court towards this procedure.

The Google Ireland Case and the Legal Battle over Digital Taxes in the European Union

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 209-220
Author(s):  
Giulio Allevato ◽  
Fernando Pastor-Merchante
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Digital Economy ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Topical Issue ◽  
Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Legal Battle ◽  
The Way

The preliminary ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Google Ireland case turned on the compatibility with the rules on free movement of some of the administrative arrangements put in place by Hungary in order to administer its controversial advertisement tax (namely, the obligation to register and the penalties attached to the failure to comply with that obligation). The preliminary ruling offers some interesting insights on the way in which the Court assesses the compatibility with the freedom to provide services of national administrative arrangements aimed at ensuring the effective collection of taxes. This is a topical issue in the context of the recent efforts made by Member States to tax the digital economy more effectively.

Court of Justice of the European Union (Seventh Chamber) Kerly Del Rosario Martinez Silva v Instituto nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS) Comune di Genova

2018 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 357-363
Author(s):  
Bjarney Friðriksdóttir
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Report ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Equal Treatment ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Labour Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights

Abstract This case report provides an account of the issues addressed in the preliminary ruling of the CJEU in Martinez Silva vs. Italy. The case centres on the limitations Member States of the European Union are permitted to apply in granting third-country nationals in employment equal treatment with nationals in social security rights according to Directive 2011/98/EU (the Single Permit Directive). Additionally, the preliminary ruling of the Court is discussed is discussed in the context of the human rights principle of equal treatment as it is enshrined in EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and International Labour Law.

scholarly journals Support Schemes in Renewable Energy: Commentary to Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 13 September 2017, ENEA S.A. v. Prezes Urzędu Regulacji Energetyki

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 171-183
Author(s):  
Nevin Alija
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Renewable Energy ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Environmentally Friendly ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Financial Penalty ◽  
The Eu

In its September 13th 2017 decision,1 the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) decided on a request for a preliminary ruling by the Supreme Court of Poland (Sąd Najwyższy) in proceedings between ENEA S.A. (ENEA) and the president of the Urzędu Regulacji Energetyki (Office for the regulation of energy, URE) on the imposition by the latter of a financial penalty on ENEA for breach of its obligation to supply electricity produced by cogeneration. The judgment of the Court of Justice follows many decisions of the European Commission and judgments of the EU courts assessing the involvement of State resources in support schemes in energy, particularly with the aim of switching towards more environmentally friendly sources. This case reaffirms that support schemes may, in certain circumstances, fall outside the scope of the EU State aid rules.

40. References to the Court of Justice of the European Union

2019 ◽  
pp. 443-447
Author(s):  
Stuart Sime
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
English Court ◽  
Court Of Justice

An English court faced with a question of EU law may sometimes decide it itself, or may refer it to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in Luxembourg for a preliminary ruling. If a reference is made, the English proceedings will be stayed pending the ruling of the CJEU. Once it is made, the ruling is binding on the English court, but it is only a preliminary ruling, in that the English court is left to apply the ruling to the facts of the case and to give judgment. This chapter discusses the questions which may be referred to the CJEU; mandatory references; discretionary references; procedures in England; procedure in the CJEU; and costs of the parties in seeking a ruling from the CJEU.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document