header-logo header-logo

24 April 2015
Issue: 7649 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

EU

Manea v Institutia Prefectului judetul Brasov—Serviciul Public Comunitar Regim de Permise de Conducere si Inmatriculare a Vehiculelor C-76/14, [2015] All ER (D) 75 (Apr)

The Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that Art 110 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be interpreted as: not precluding a member state from introducing a tax on motor vehicles which was levied on imported second-hand vehicles at the time of their first registration in that member state and on vehicles already registered in that member state at the time of the first transfer, within that member state, of the ownership of those vehicles; precluding that member state from exempting from that tax vehicles already registered and in respect of which a tax had previously been in force but found to be incompatible with EU law had been paid.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

DWF—11 appointments

DWF—11 appointments

DWF strengthens North West teams with 11 newly qualified solicitors

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll