Monitoring References to the Court of Justice of the European Union
Tag
30 case reports
By judgment of 2 October 2018 (ECLI:EU:C:2018:788) the Court held that police access limited to the identity data of SIM-card holders is not a serious interference with fundamental rights and may therefore be justified for investigating offences that are…
By judgment of 26 July 2017 (ECLI:EU:C:2017:597) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “1.
By judgment of 14 September 2017 (ECLI:EU:C:2017:689) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “1.
By judgment of 21 December 2016 (ECLI:EU:C:2016:974) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “1.
By judgment of 4 April 2017 (ECLI:EU:C:2017:255) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “Article 6(1)(d) of Council Directive 2004/114/EC of 13 December 2004 on the conditions of admission of third-country nationals for the purposes of…
By judgment of 26 July 2017 (ECLI:EU:C:2017:593) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “1.
Joined with Tele2 Sverige and decided by Grand Chamber judgment of 21 December 2016 (ECLI:EU:C:2016:970): yes, Digital Rights Ireland's standards bind national regimes — Article 15(1) of the e-Privacy Directive, read with the Charter, precludes general and…
On 14 June 2017 the Court ruled (ECLI:EU:C:2017:456) that the operators of The Pirate Bay themselves make a communication to the public by indexing and managing torrents of protected works, despite the content sitting on users' machines.
By judgment of 15 March 2017 (ECLI:EU:C:2017:214) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “1.
By judgment of 19 October 2016 (ECLI:EU:C:2016:780) the Court held that the Framework Directive does not prevent a Member State from merging its telecoms regulator into a multi-sector authority, but dismissing the NRA's president and board before the end…
By order of 8 September 2016 (ECLI:EU:C:2016:672) the Court declared the reference from the Regional Administrative Court for Lazio manifestly inadmissible for failure to set out the factual and legal context with the precision Article 94 of the Rules of…
By judgment of 28 July 2016 (ECLI:EU:C:2016:608) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “Article 3 of Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on a common regulatory framework for electronic…
On 20 December 2017 the Grand Chamber ruled (ECLI:EU:C:2017:981) that UberPop is not an information-society service but a "service in the field of transport": Uber exercises decisive influence over the conditions under which non-professional drivers supply…
On 1 March 2017 the Court ruled (ECLI:EU:C:2017:144) that Article 9 of the InfoSoc Directive — provisions concerning "access to cable of broadcasting services" — does not cover national legislation permitting the immediate retransmission by cable,…
On 21 December 2016 the Grand Chamber ruled in the joined Tele2/Watson cases (ECLI:EU:C:2016:970) that Article 15(1) of the e-Privacy Directive, read with the Charter, precludes national legislation imposing general and indiscriminate retention of traffic…
By judgment of 22 September 2016 (ECLI:EU:C:2016:717) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “EU law, in particular Article 5(2)(b) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of…
By judgment of 19 October 2016 (ECLI:EU:C:2016:779) the Court held that a dynamic IP address registered by a website operator is personal data where the operator has legal means to have the visitor identified via the access provider.
On 15 September 2016 the Court ruled (ECLI:EU:C:2016:689) that a shopkeeper offering free open Wi-Fi provides a "mere conduit" service and cannot be held liable in damages for users' infringements.
On 6 October 2015 the Grand Chamber declared the Safe Harbour adequacy decision invalid (ECLI:EU:C:2015:650): a regime permitting generalised access by US authorities to transferred data compromised the essence of Article 7 of the Charter, and the absence…
On 6 October 2015 the Grand Chamber declared the Safe Harbour adequacy decision invalid (ECLI:EU:C:2015:650): a regime permitting generalised access by US authorities to transferred data compromised the essence of Article 7 of the Charter, and the absence…
By judgment of 19 November 2015 (ECLI:EU:C:2015:764) the Court held that a broadcaster which transmits its programme signals exclusively by direct injection to distributors, without the signals being accessible to the public during that transmission, does…
By judgment of 20 November 2014 (ECLI:EU:C:2014:2388) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “1. The Combined Nomenclature in Annex 1 to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the…
By judgment of 17 September 2015 (ECLI:EU:C:2015:610) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “1. EU law must be interpreted as allowing a relevant national authority to impose a tariff obligation, such as that at issue in the main…
By judgment of 11 June 2015 (ECLI:EU:C:2015:378) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “Directive 2002/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic…
By judgment of 11 September 2014 (ECLI:EU:C:2014:2194) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “1.
By judgment of 16 July 2015 (ECLI:EU:C:2015:477) the Court laid down the framework that has governed FRAND litigation ever since: the holder of a standard-essential patent who gave a FRAND commitment does not abuse its dominance by seeking an injunction…
By judgment of 30 April 2014 (ECLI:EU:C:2014:285) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “1.
Does the EU’s Authorisation Directive 2002/20 mean that Vodafone Omnitel, Sky and other companies can avoid paying millions of euro to the Italian regulatory body, AgCom? Facts The Italian telecoms and broadcasting sector has a regulatory body known as AgCom (Autorità per le Garanzie nelle…
On 6 March 2014 the Court ruled (ECLI:EU:C:2014:124) that the Transfers Directive applies only where the transferred part of the undertaking was a functionally autonomous economic unit before the transfer; absent that, the Directive does not require…
By judgment of 19 June 2014 (ECLI:EU:C:2014:2009) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “1.