header-logo header-logo

22 February 2013
Issue: 7549 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

European Union

Belov v CHEZ Elektro Balgaria AD and others C-394/11 [2013] All ER (D) 105 (Feb)

According to settled case-law, in order to determine whether a body making a reference was a court or tribunal for the purposes of Art 267 TFEU, which was a question governed by EU law alone, the court took account of a number of factors, such as whether the body was established by law, whether it was permanent, whether its jurisdiction was compulsory, whether its procedure was inter partes, whether it applied rules of law and whether it was independent. Further, a national court might refer a question to the court only if there was a case pending before it and if it was called upon to give judgment in proceedings intended to lead to a decision of a judicial nature. Accordingly, it was appropriate to determine whether a body might refer a case to the court on the basis of criteria relating both to the constitution of that body and to its function. In that connection, a national body might be

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

Seddons GSC—Ben Marks

Seddons GSC—Ben Marks

Partner joins residential real estate team

Winckworth Sherwood—Shazia Bashir

Winckworth Sherwood—Shazia Bashir

Social housing team announces partner appointment

University of Manchester: The LLM driving tech-focused career growth

University of Manchester: The LLM driving tech-focused career growth

Manchester’s online LLM has accelerated career progression for its graduates

NEWS
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
Operational resilience is no longer optional. Writing in NLJ this week, Emma Radmore and Michael Lewis of Womble Bond Dickinson explain how UK regulators expect firms to identify ‘important business services’ that could cause ‘intolerable levels of harm’ if disrupted
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
back-to-top-scroll