Only one week left to vote for Innovation Radar Prize 2016

There is only a week left to support our benefactor EuroCases, whose component EULinksChecker is nominated for the Innovation Radar Prize 2016. Innovation Radar is an initiative of the European Commission, which identifies and supports innovative projects, funded by EU and the innovators behind them.

Nominees are grouped into four categories:

  • ICT for Society – recognising digital technologies impacting society and citizens
  • Excellent Science – the cutting-edge of science underpinning tomorrow’s digital advances
  • Industrial & Enabling technologies – the next generation of tech and components supporting the digitisation of industry
  • Horizon 2020 ICT Innovator – innovative excellence in Horizon 2020’s digital research and innovation projects

This public vote will decide on 4 innovators from each category. The 16 finalists will get to pitch their plans for going to market to a jury of experts at the ICT Proposers Day event in Bratislava at 13:00 on 26 September 2016.

The jury will decide on one winner from each category, and an overall winner who will be featured on a euronews programme about their innovation and its market potential.

If you would like to support EULinksChecker, you can do so by visiting the website of the European Commission and vote for it (https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/innovators/apis-innovation-radar).

...

The French Council of State (Conseil d’Etat) clarified in which conditions French taxpayers may invoke judgments of the European Court of Justice in order to challenge national taxes

(Conseil d’État, 10ème chambre jugeant seule, 02/05/2016, 375579, Inédit au recueil Lebon)

 In the present case the Council of State (Conseil d’Etat) had to clarify the procedural rules governing tax recovery claims and to specify under which conditions a ruling of the European Court of Justice could serve as a legal basis for a tax recovery claim.

(more…)

...

The Administrative court of appeal of Marseille ruled that contractual public and private agents could be subject to different remuneration conditions

(CAA de MARSEILLE, 9ème chambre – formation à 3, 27/05/2016, 15MA02698, Inédit au recueil Lebon)

In the present case, the Administrative court of appeal of Marseille (Cour administrative d’appel de Marseille) had to decide on the issue concerning the violation of Directive 2000/78/EC, of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR) and the Charter of fundamental rights of the European Union (CFR).

(more…)

...

Transnational criminality – The French Court of cassation (Cour de cassation) examined the permanent ban from French territory in the light of the ECHR and EU law

Cour de cassation, criminelle, Chambre criminelle, 25 mai 2016, 14-84.333, Inédit

In the present case, the Court of Cassation had to decide on the issue concerning the criminal judge compliance with Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR), Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), Article 45 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (CFR) and Article 27 of Directive 2004/38/EC.

(more…)

...

ECJ: preliminary ruling does not give grounds for the disqualification of the national court

JUDGMENT OF THE ECJ (Grand Chamber) 5 July 2016, ECLI:EU:C:2016:514

By judgment of 28 November 2012, Mr. O., a Bulgarian national, was convicted of murder and aggravated theft by a Danish court and sentenced to a cumulative fifteen years imprisonment. After having served part of his sentence of imprisonment in Denmark he was handed over to the Bulgarian authorities to serve the remainder of his sentence in Bulgaria.

By a request for a preliminary ruling, of 25 November 2014 brought in Case C‑554/14, repeated and thereafter supplemented by two requests of 15 December 2014, the Sofia City Court referred to the Court various questions on the interpretation of Council Framework Decision 2008/909/JHA of 27 November 2008 .

(more…)

...

The French Court of Cassation has developed an extensive interpretation of the non-systematic nature of identity checks

Cour de cassation, civile, Chambre civile 1, 25 mai 2016, 15-50.065, Inédit

The present case concerned the rules regarding the identity check.
Mr. X., a Senegalese national, having been illegally in France, was placed in administrative detention as a result of an identity check carried out in Paris at the train station ‘‘gare de Lyon ‘‘by the department head of the brigade of railway networks, a judicial police officer. The latter had ordered identity checks for a period of four hours in order to verify the compliance with the retention of documents for transit and residence.

(more…)

...

A syndicate of co-owners can not be considered as a ‘consumer’

Cour de cassation, civile, chambre civile 1, 1 juin 2016, 15-20.119, Inédit

In the present case the Court of Cassation (Cour de cassation) ruled that syndicates of co-owners were not consumers and, consequently, they could not bring actions for injunctions of unfair terms previewed by Articles 1 and 2 of Directive 2009/22/EC.

(more…)

...

Maintenance obligations towards a minor residing in Austria: Co-ordination of social security systems

Austrian Supreme Court of Justice (Oberstergerichtshof) 10Ob67/14x

The case concerned is about a minor who lives in Austria and is under the care of his mother. The father lives in Switzerland. Both parents are Swiss nationals. The child’s request for advances on maintenance payments in Austria was rejected, because neither parent had social security in Austria and the minor was privately insured in Austria.

(more…)

...

The French Council of State obliged loss-making non-resident companies to pay their withholding tax on dividends

Conseil d’État, 8ème SSJS, 10/02/2016, 361179, Inédit au recueil Lebon

In the present case the Council of State (Conseil d’Etat) examined the French tax procedure rules governing the withholding tax on dividends.

X, a French company, distributed dividends to its parent company Y established in Belgium. The operation gave rise to the withholding tax in France. Y, which incurred losses, challenged the imposition and claimed that the French legislation was discriminatory as it entitled loss-making companies established in France to delay the tax payment until their balance returned to a surplus.

(more…)

...