On Obesity as a Disability

2015 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 145-150 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katharina Ó Cathaoir
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
General Principle ◽  
Professional Life ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Individual

Case C-354/13, Fag og Arbejde (FOA) v Kommunernes Landsforening (KL) [2014] (not yet reported)There is no general principle under European Union law prohibiting discrimination on the basis of obesity in regard to employment and occupation. Obesity alone is not a disability but can constitute a disability where it is accompanied by a limitation resulting from long term physical, mental or psychological impairments which in interaction with various barriers may hinder the full and effective participation of the individual in professional life on an equal basis with other workers (official headnote).In December 2014, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued a preliminary ruling addressing, firstly, whether obesity is a protected ground of non–discrimination, and, secondly, whether obesity can amount to a disability. This piece begins with an introduction to the topic of obesity, followed by the facts of the case, the CJEU's judgment and a comment on the decision.

scholarly journals Court of Justice of the European Union (Ninth Chamber), WT v Subdelegación del Gobierno en Guadalajara

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 457-462
Author(s):  
Diego Acosta
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Report ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Criminal Offence ◽  
Residence Permit ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Domestic Courts ◽  
State Liability

Abstract This case report provides an account of the issues in the preliminary ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in the WT case. The case centres on the elements that need to be considered under Directive 2003/109 before expelling a third-country national, holding a long-term residence permit, who has committed a criminal offence. This case report discusses the interpretation of Article 12 of Directive 2003/109, in particular the concept of threat to public policy, describes the incorrect previous reading by the Spanish Supreme Court of that provision, the possible case for a state liability claim against Spain as a result of that, and the importance of the dialogue between lower-level domestic courts and the Court of Justice on migration matters.

scholarly journals El arbitraje de inversión en España tras la reciente doctrina del Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea = Investment arbitration in Spain in light of recent jurisprudence from the European Union Court of Justice

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 866
Author(s):  
Ibon Hualde López ◽  
Victoria Sánchez Pos
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Arbitration Clause ◽  
Investment Arbitration ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
German Court

  Resumen: El pasado mes de marzo el Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea abrió una vía favo­rable para España al declarar, mediante la sentencia resolutoria de una petición de decisión prejudicial planteada por el Tribunal de casación alemán, que la cláusula de arbitraje incluida en el Tratado para el Fomento y la Protección Recíprocos de las Inversiones celebrado en 1991 entre el Reino de los Países Bajos y la República Federal Checa y Eslovaca (TBI) no es compatible con el Derecho de la Unión Europea. El presente trabajo tiene por objeto realizar un análisis de la mencionada sentencia, recaída el 6 de marzo de 2018, con el objetivo de valorar su incidencia en el arbitraje de inversión en nuestro país.Palabras clave: Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea, petición de decisión prejudicial, arbitra­je de inversión, cláusula de arbitraje, Derecho de la Unión Europea.Abstract: This past March, the European Union Court of Justice provided a favorable opening for Spain when it held (by its judgement on a request for a preliminary ruling submitted by the German Court of Cassation) that the arbitration clause which had been included in the “Treaty on the Reciprocal Promotion and Protection of Investments” signed in 1991 between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the Czech and Slovak Federative Republic (BIT) was not compatible with European Union law. This paper aims at analyzing the above-mentioned judgment, which was issued on 6 March 2018 (Case C-284/16), assessing its impact on investment arbitration in our country.Keywords: European Union Court of Justice, request for a preliminary ruling, investment arbitra­tion, arbitration clause, European Union Law. 

scholarly journals Characteristics of Precedent: The Case Law of the European Court of Justice in Three Dimensions

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 1073-1098 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mattias Derlén ◽  
Johan Lindholm
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Three Dimensions ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Number Of Factors ◽  
The One

AbstractThe case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) is one of the most important sources of European Union law. However, case law's role in EU law is not uniform. By empirically studying how the Court uses its own case law as a source of law, we explore the correlation between, on the one hand, the characteristics of a CJEU case—type of action, actors involved, and area of law—and, on the other hand, the judgment's “embeddedness” in previous case law and value as a precedent in subsequent cases. Using this approach, we test, confirm, and debunk existing scholarship concerning the role of CJEU case law as a source of EU law. We offer the following conclusions: that CJEU case law cannot be treated as a single entity; that only a limited number of factors reliably affect a judgment's persuasive or precedential power; that the Court's use of its own case law as a source of law is particularly limited in successful infringement proceedings; that case law is particularly important in preliminary references—especially those concerning fundamental freedoms and competition law; and that initiating Member State and the number of observations affects the behavior of the Court.

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).

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 Determining the moment and form of concluding a passenger transport contract based on the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union in joined cases C-349/18 to C-351/18

2020 ◽  
pp. 23-26
Author(s):  
Karol Lange
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Passenger Transport ◽  
Railway Transport ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Railway Systems ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Moment

The article focuses on discussing the norms of Polish transport law and European Union regulations on the correctly defined of the moment and form of concluding a contract of passengers transport in railway systems. The article also describes the problem of discourse between the content of these legal norms and the jurisprudence practice and doctrine opinion. Moreover, was performed to present a comparative analysis of the relation of the Court of justice of the European Union judgment to the norms of Polish and European law and the case law. Commented on the practices of carriers in regulating the said matter. Internal law acts applicable to the means of transport of Polish railway companies were also analyzed. Keywords: Transport law; Contract of passenger transport; European Union law; Railway transport

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document