Prikaz vseh zadetkov portala ZDSS.....

CELEX:62020CJ0197: Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 28 October 2021.#KAHL G.m.b.H. & Co. K.G. and C.E. Roeper GmbH v Hauptzollamt Hannover and Hauptzollamt Hamburg.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Customs union – Common Customs Tariff – Tariff classification – Combined Nomenclature – Tariff subheadings 1521 90 91 and 1521 90 99 – Interpretation of the Explanatory Notes to subheading 1521 90 99 – Beeswax melted down and solidified prior to import.#Joined Cases C-197/20 and C-216/20.
Več o... »
CELEX:62020CJ0462: Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 28 October 2021.#Associazione per gli Studi Giuridici sull’Immigrazione (ASGI) and Others v Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri – Dipartimento per le politiche della famiglia and Ministero dell’Economia e delle Finanze.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Directive 2003/109/EC – Status of third-country nationals who are long-term residents – Article 11 – Directive 2011/98/EU – Rights of third-country workers who hold a single permit – Article 12 – Directive 2009/50/EC – Rights of third-country nationals who hold an EU Blue Card – Article 14 – Directive 2011/95/EU – Rights of beneficiaries of international protection – Article 29 – Equal treatment – Social security – Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 – Coordination of social security systems – Article 3 – Family benefits – Social assistance – Social protection – Access to goods and services – Legislation of a Member State excluding third-country nationals from eligibility for a ‘family card’.#Case C-462/20.
Več o... »
CELEX:62020CJ0221: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 28 October 2021.#Proceedings brought by A Oy and B Oy.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Taxation – Directive 92/83/EEC – Excise duty – Beer – Article 4(2) – Possibility to apply reduced rates of excise duty to beer brewed by independent small breweries – Treatment as a single independent small brewery or as two or more small breweries – Obligation to transpose.#Joined Cases C-221/20 and C-223/20.
Več o... »
CELEX:62019CJ0636: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 28 October 2021.#Y v CAK.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Cross-border healthcare – Concept of ‘insured person’ – Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 – Article 1(c) – Article 2 – Article 24 – Right to the benefits in kind provided by the Member State of residence at the expense of the Member State responsible for paying the pension – Directive 2011/24/EU – Article 3(b)(i) – Article 7 – Reimbursement of the costs of healthcare received in a Member State other than the Member State of residence and the Member State responsible for paying the pension – Conditions.#Case C-636/19.
Več o... »
CELEX:62020CJ0324: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 28 October 2021.#Finanzamt B v X-Beteiligungsgesellschaft mbH.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Directive 2006/112/EC – Value added tax (VAT) – Supply of services – Articles 63 – Chargeability of VAT – Articles 64(1) – Concept of ‘supplies which give rise to successive payments’ – One-time supply remunerated by means of payment in instalments – Articles 90(1) – Reduction of the taxable amount – Concept of ‘non-payment of the price’.#Case C-324/20.
Več o... »
Sodba II Ips 325/2007
Po presoji revizijskega sodišča je tožnik zadostil svojemu trditvenemu bremenu in je tožba sklepčna. Navedba o popolnem propadu vozila namreč po svoji vsebini vključuje tudi delen propad, torej škodo bodisi zaradi popolne bodisi zaradi delne manjvrednosti vozila. Ob tem je dodati še, da je sodišče druge stopnje, ki ob enaki materialnopravni podlagi izpodbijane sodbe ni utemeljilo z enakimi razlogi kot prvostopenjsko sodišče (tj. z neizkazanostjo nedopustnega ravnanja, temveč z neizkazanostjo višine škode), pri tem pa je glede višine škode preseglo zaključke prvostopenjskega sodišča, ki je trditveno podlago tožbe štelo za zadostno in višino tožniku nastale škode ugotovilo do zneska natančno, postopalo v škodo pritožnika, saj ga je postavilo v slabši pravni položaj od tistega, ki mu ga je dajala prvostopenjska sodba.
Več o... »
Sodba II Ips 169/2008
Višje sodišče ni sledilo pritožbeni graji dejanskega stanja, da je tožnik oseba, ki izkazuje manjše razumevanje stvari. Vrhovno sodišče je v tej fazi postopka vezano na ugotovljeno dejansko stanje in njegovo izpodbijanje ni več dovoljeno (prim. 3. odstavek 370. člena ZPP), zato so vsi tisti revizijski očitki, ki merijo na drugačen dokazni zaključek, neupoštevni.
Več o... »