Vertaling van "Court case " (Engels → Nederlands) :

However, as Court case C-648/11 was pending with the Court of Justice and the outcome of that case would contain the guiding principle for shaping the rule of Article 8(4), the co-legislators agreed that the rule to be decided by the Court would eventually become the final new rule in Article 8(4).

Your rapporteur considers that an exchange of views on best practices among Member States would promote proportionality of relevant national provisions and help to take appropriate measures. In this context, your rapporteur refers to several Court cases of the Court of Justice of the European Union (notably on cases C-142/05 and C-433/05).

In addition, it follows from the third paragraph of that article that the Member States, whether or not they were parties to the case at first instance, do not have to show interest in order to bring an appeal against a judgment of the General Court (Case C‑49/92 P Commission v Anic Partecipazioni [1999] ECR I‑4125, paragraph 171).

11. Acknowledges the successful results achieved by the financial incentives provided for by the Bulgarian law on mediation; recognises, however, that these are also due to the long-standing interest in mediation shown by the Bulgarian legal system in that the mediation community has been in existence since 1990 and the Settlement Centre – staffed by mediators working in shifts – has since 2010 been providing free mediation services and information for parties in pending court cases on a daily basis; notes that in Bulgaria two thirds of the cases referred were mediated and half of those cases were brought to a successful conclusion in ...[+++]mediation;

To put it simply, we had the Cassis de Dijon decision in 1979. Since then we have had 300 court cases to show that mutual recognition does not work.

8. Notes the Secretary-General's statement that at present no disciplinary proceedings are pending within Parliament's administration; welcomes the fact that on 1 December 1999, i.e. even before the deliberations on the discharge for 1998, the Bureau, at the proposal of the Secretary-General, started an administrative inquiry; notes the Bureau decision of 13 June 2000, in connection with the Frederiksen case, not to seek redress as provided for by Article 22 of the Staff Regulations; notes that this decision is based on the consideration that the administrative inquiry did not reveal evidence of "serious misconduct" by individuals as referred to in Article 22 of the Staff Regulations; points out, however, that the administrative inquiry ...[+++] revealed both problems with internal decision-making procedures and a tendency to neglect risks associated with court cases in relation to alleged considerations of "principle"; concludes from the course of events that it would have been appropriate to review the case and reappraise the risks associated with legal proceedings at a considerably earlier stage; recalls paragraph 23 of its above-mentioned resolution of 13 April 2000, calling on the Legal Service to inform the Bureau about the risks of court cases before the Bureau takes its decisions, particularly in the light of previous judgements on staff matters; welcomes the Bureau decision of 13 June 2000 instructing Vice-Presidents Lienemann and Provan to examine whether further internal administrative reforms are needed in order to avoid similar outcomes; instructs its Bureau to inform the competent committees about its conclusions on this matter;