List of European Court of Justice rulings

"The [European Economic] Community constitutes a new legal order of international law for the benefit of which the [Member] States have limited their sovereign rights".

Notwithstanding the Kolpinghuis ruling, the creation of any other kind of legal disadvantage of detriment, save for criminal liability, is very well possible.

[5] In the absence of such a system,It is clear from the case-law that ... it is for the domestic legal system of each Member State to designate the courts and tribunals having jurisdiction and to lay down the detailed procedural rules governing actions for safeguarding rights which individuals derive from Community law, provided, first, that such rules are not less favourable than those governing similar domestic actions (principle of equivalence) and, secondly, that they do not render virtually impossible or excessively difficult the exercise of rights conferred by Community law (principle of effectiveness) (Joined Cases C-430/93 and C-431/93 Van Schijndel and van Veen [1995] ECR I-4705, paragraph 17, and Case C-129/00 Commission v Italy [2003] ECR I-14637, paragraph 25).

In this case the court took a more liberal approach than the restrictive Plaumann test for establishing individual concern, which was, however, not followed in judgements thereafter.

The commission had been aware of an alleged breach of the procurement directives in October 1993, and had referred on 8 February 1994 to its "intention" to seek the suspension of a public supplies contract, but did not apply for an interim order until 11 March 1994.

Articles 23 and 25 EC prohibit as between Member States all "customs duties on imports and exports and of all charges having equivalent effect".

Quantitative restrictions are "measures which amount to a total or partial restraint of, according to the circumstances, imports, exports or goods in transit."

[32] The Product Liability Directive aims to ensure undistorted competition between economic operators, to facilitate the free movement of goods and to avoid differences in levels of consumer protection.

[33] Taxation barrister Philip Simpson refers to "the three main ECJ cases" on VAT groups as: Skandia America Corporation was a company incorporated in the United States, with a fixed establishment (a branch) in Sweden.

Skandia disagreed on the grounds that these were intra-company transactions and consequently not supplies for VAT purposes, following the decision in FCE Bank (C-210/04).

So the provision of IT services by the head office to its branch was a supply between 2 separate taxable persons and so liable to VAT.

[88] The following is the official list of fifty-seven cases that were translated in preparation for new member states who joined the European Union in 2004.