junij 05, 2026 0 0 CELEX:62024CJ0560: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 4 June 2026.#R.S. v Minister for Justice.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Citizenship of the Union – Right to move and reside freely in the territory of the Member States – Directive 2004/38/EC – Article 3(1) – Beneficiaries – Family members of a Union citizen – Derived right of residence of a third-country national – Subsequent naturalisation of that national – Article 35 – Fraud or abuse of rights – Marriage of convenience – Temporal scope – Power of investigation of the competent national authorities into the existence of a marriage of convenience.#Case C-560/24.
junij 05, 2026 0 0 CELEX:62024CJ0560_RES: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 4 June 2026.#R.S. v Minister for Justice.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Citizenship of the Union – Right to move and reside freely in the territory of the Member States – Directive 2004/38/EC – Article 3(1) – Beneficiaries – Family members of a Union citizen – Derived right of residence of a third-country national – Subsequent naturalisation of that national – Article 35 – Fraud or abuse of rights – Marriage of convenience – Temporal scope – Power of investigation of the competent national authorities into the existence of a marriage of convenience.#Case C-560/24.
januar 29, 2026 0 0 CELEX:62024CJ0562: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 29 January 2026.##Reference for a preliminary ruling – Judicial cooperation in criminal matters – Mutual recognition of confiscation orders – Framework Decision 2006/783/JHA – Article 8(2)(d) – Reason for non-recognition or non-execution – Rights of interested parties – Bona fide third parties – Mortgage creditor – Immovable property constituting the proceeds of the offence – Procedure for recognition and execution of a confiscation order – Judgment mortgage registered before the adoption of that order.#Case C-562/24.
januar 29, 2026 0 0 CELEX:62024CJ0562_RES: Arrêt de la Cour (cinquième chambre) du 29 janvier 2026.##Renvoi préjudiciel – Coopération judiciaire en matière pénale – Reconnaissance mutuelle des décisions de confiscation – Décision-cadre 2006/783/JAI – Article 8, paragraphe 2, sous d) – Motif de non-reconnaissance et de non-exécution – Droits des parties intéressées – Tiers de bonne foi – Créancier hypothécaire – Bien immobilier constituant le produit de l’infraction – Procédure de reconnaissance et d’exécution d’une décision de confiscation – Hypothèque judiciaire enregistrée avant l’adoption de cette décision.#Affaire C-562/24. This document does not exist in English.
november 15, 2025 0 0 CELEX:62024CJ0563: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 13 November 2025.#Verband Sozialer Wettbewerb eV v PB Vi Goods GmbH.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Potsdam.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Definition, description, presentation, labelling and protection of spirit drinks – Regulation (EU) 2019/787 – Article 10(7) – Prohibition on using legal names for any beverage that does not comply with the requirements of the relevant categories – Gin – Beverage named ‘non-alcoholic gin’ – Article 12(1) – Allusions – Validity of Article 10(7) – Article 16 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Freedom to conduct a business – Principle of proportionality.#Case C-563/24.
december 17, 2025 0 0 CELEX:62024CJ0563_SUM: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 13 November 2025.#Verband Sozialer Wettbewerb eV v PB Vi Goods GmbH.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Potsdam.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Definition, description, presentation, labelling and protection of spirit drinks – Regulation (EU) 2019/787 – Article 10(7) – Prohibition on using legal names for any beverage that does not comply with the requirements of the relevant categories – Gin – Beverage named ‘non-alcoholic gin’ – Article 12(1) – Allusions – Validity of Article 10(7) – Article 16 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Freedom to conduct a business – Principle of proportionality.#Case C-563/24.
marec 05, 2026 0 0 CELEX:62024CJ0564: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 5 March 2026.#Eisenberger Gerüstbau GmbH v JK.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Consumer protection – Directive 2011/83/EU – Distance contract concluded between a consumer and a trader – Concept of ‘consumer’ – Contact established between the consumer and the trader by another trader commissioned by the consumer – Article 2(7) – Right of withdrawal of the consumer – Article 9(1) – Abuse of rights.#Case C-564/24.
marec 05, 2026 0 0 CELEX:62024CJ0564_RES: Arrêt de la Cour (cinquième chambre) du 5 mars 2026.#Eisenberger Gerüstbau GmbH contre JK.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Protection des consommateurs – Directive 2011/83/UE – Contrat à distance conclu entre un consommateur et un professionnel – Notion de “consommateur” – Établissement du contact entre le consommateur et le professionnel par un autre professionnel mandaté par le consommateur – Article 2, point 7 – Droit de rétractation du consommateur – Article 9, paragraphe 1 – Abus de droit.#Affaire C-564/24. This document does not exist in English.
november 28, 2025 0 0 CELEX:62024CJ0567: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 27 November 2025.#YO v SVEMA TRADE, d. o. o.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Company law – Directive 2004/25/EC – Mandatory takeover bid – Squeeze-out of holders of securities – Minority shareholder protection – Third subparagraph of Article 15(5) – Consideration offered in the bid presumed to be fair – Rebuttable presumption.#Case C-567/24.
april 17, 2026 0 0 CELEX:62024CJ0568: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 16 April 2026.#Sof Medica S.A. v Spitalul Clinic Judeţean de Urgenţă Cluj-Napoca.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Public procurement – Directive 2014/24/EU – Article 18 – Principles of procurement – Equal treatment and transparency – Article 42 – Technical specifications – Discretion of the contracting authority – Definition of need – Reference to a type or to a specific production – Situations in which such a reference must be accompanied by the words ‘or equivalent’.#Case C-568/24.