EU Law Live

Mart van Hulten analyzes a case from the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) concerning the treatment of posted workers from Romania by a Romanian construction company operating in Germany and Austria. The Romanian government denied tax and social security advantages to these posted workers that would normally be available to employees working in Romania, aiming to address low salaries in the domestic construction sector. Now available at EU Law Live.

Now available, Evangelia Koumpiadi’s Analysis of a recent judgment from the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) regarding the obligations of national Data Protection Authorities (DPAs) under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The case involves a German savings bank where an employee unlawfully accessed a client's personal data. Although the bank reported the incident to the DPA, it did not inform the data subject, leading to a complaint. Read more at EU Law Live.

Don’t miss Carlos Santaló Goris’ Op-Ed analyzing the recent ruling by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in the case of Mirin (C-4/23), which addresses the issue of legal gender recognition across EU member states. It discusses the significant differences in how EU countries handle legal gender changes, ranging from self-determination procedures in places like Spain to more restrictive processes in others, like Romania. Read more at EU Law Live.

Marios Constantine Iacovides analyzes the Court of Justice of the European Union's ruling in the Booking case (C-264/23), which addresses the legality of price parity clauses used by online travel agents (OTAs) like Booking. The judgment is significant as it marks the first time the CJEU has dealt with parity clauses, which require hotels to offer the same or better prices on their own websites as those listed on OTAs. Iacovides explains that the case originated from concerns about competition law and how these clauses might restrict hotels' ability to sell rooms through alternative channels. Read more at EU Law Live.

We are pleased to announce the new contribution of our new Competition Corner´s Symposium at EU Law Live, covering the topic of " Article 102 Exclusionary Guidelines: Codification or restatement? ".  In his piece, Damien J. Neven argues that the Commission's Draft Guidelines on Article 102 TFEU, by emphasizing "competition on the merits" and de-emphasizing the As Efficient Competitor Test, risk providing unclear guidance and allowing greater discretion in enforcement of exclusionary abuse. This analysis suggests that the current approach may undermine effective, predictable rules for evaluating anti-competitive conduct. Read more at EU Law Live: https://lnkd.in/djDB64q4 #EU #competitionlaw #exclusionaryguidelines #article102 #TFEU

Francesca Bandini discusses the implications of the Court of Justice of the European Union's (CJEU) judgment in the Valančius case (C-119/23), which explores the concept of judicial independence in the context of the appointment procedures for judges and advocates general at the CJEU. In this case, a Lithuanian candidate, Mr. Valančius, challenged the Lithuanian government’s decision to appoint someone else despite his ranking as the top candidate in the selection process. The CJEU addressed two key questions: whether candidates must be selected solely based on professional ability and whether deviations from transparent selection practices undermine the legitimacy of appointments. Read more at EU Law Live.

The Op-Ed by Prof Albert Sanchez-Graells critiques a recent ruling by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) regarding the participation of third-country economic operators in EU public procurement. In the case Kolin Inşaat Turizm Sanayi ve Ticaret (C-652/22), the Court's decision marks a significant shift in EU procurement policy, leaning towards economic protectionism. Read more at EU Law Live.

Now available, Alba Ruiz Ortiz’s Op-Ed discussing a recent ruling by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in a case involving Real Madrid CF and the French newspaper Le Monde. The case centers on a 2006 article published by Le Monde that accused Real Madrid and FC Barcelona of doping, which the club disputed, leading to a series of legal actions. The Spanish courts initially ruled in favor of Real Madrid, ordering Le Monde to pay damages for harm to its reputation. However, when the enforcement of this ruling was challenged in France, the Paris Court of Appeal argued that the ruling conflicted with public policy and freedom of expression rights. Don’t miss it at EU Law Live.

Don’t miss Alma Dangy’s Analysis of recent rulings by the Court of Justice of the European Union regarding Germany's provision of unlawful state aid to large energy consumers through exemptions from network charges. The Court upheld the European Commission's decisions that these exemptions, granted between 2012 and 2013, constituted illegal state aid and ordered their recovery. Read more at EU Law Live.

Gloria Marín’s Op-Ed discusses the recent ruling by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) regarding legal professional privilege, particularly as it pertains to tax lawyers. The case referenced, Ordre des avocats du Barreau de Luxembourg (C-432/23), builds on previous judgments related to the exchange of tax-related information under EU directives. Read more at EU Law Live.