The court must check compliance with EU law

Victor Boolen

The court must check compliance with EU law

Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n Ar3n

These are the conclusions of the decision of the tribunal in Luxembourg from Monday. It is a pending case before a Slovenian court regarding the confiscation of a vehicle containing Red Bull cans. According to the manufacturer, who has rights to this brand, the drink is fake. The company importing the energy equipment insisted that the decision on its seizure be withdrawn. The dispute eventually reached the Supreme Court of Slovenia. As the context indicates, he plans to dismiss the review appeal. At the same time, however, the applicant requests a preliminary ruling The Court of Justice of the EU to verify the compliance of national law with EU law. The court asks whether it is obliged to grant such a request and, if so, whether it must give reasons for its decision when rejecting it.

The CJEU answered both questions in the affirmative. According to him in this case courtswhich are the highest instance and whose decisions are not subject to appeal, it is necessary to assess whether the preliminary inquiry is well-founded, even if the appeal itself is rejected. Otherwise, there will be a risk of inconsistency between the national interpretation and the EU interpretation.

Source

Leave a Comment

s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3. s3.