Traduction de «Sentenza della corte » (Italien → Anglais) :

EUROPA - EU law and publications - EUR-Lex - EUR-Lex - 62012CA0293 - EN - Joined Cases C-293/12 and C-594/12: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 8 April 2014 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the High Court of Ireland (Ireland) and the Verfassungsgerichtshof (Austria)) — Digital Rights Ireland Ltd (C-293/12) v Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, The Commissioner of the Garda Síochána, Ireland and the Attorney General, and Kärntner Landesregierung, Michael Seitlinger, Christof Tschohl and Others (C-594/12) (Electronic communications — Directive 2006/24/EC — ...[+++]Publicly available electronic communications services or public communications networks services — Retention of data generated or processed in connection with the provision of such services — Validity — Articles 7, 8 and 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union) // (Joined Cases C-293/12 and C-594/12) - ( // ((Electronic communications - Directive 2006/24/EC - Publicly available electronic communications services or public communications networks services - Retention of data generated or processed in connection with the provision of such services - Validity - Articles 7, 8 and 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union))

Decides, for all the institutions apart from the Council, as well as for the European Schools, to restore (or in the case of the Court of Justice, add) in reserve the amounts corresponding to the 1,7 % 2011 salary adjustment for budget year 2013, pending the Court's ruling; underlines that this is sound budgeting, given the likelihood of a ruling in favour of the Commission, and warns the Council that, in such event, the budgetary authority will need to accommodate the retroactive effect of such ruling also for years 2011 and 2012, including late interest;

Irrespective of the answer to Question 2, if the ‘first Member State’ referred to therein is a Member State whose asylum system displays systemic deficiencies equivalent to those described in the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 21 January 2011, M.S.S., 30.696/09, is it necessary to come to a different assessment of the Member State with primary responsibility within the meaning of Regulation (EC) No 343/2003, notwithstanding the judgment of the European Court of Justice of 21 December 2011 in Joined Cases C-411/10 and C-493/10 [NS v Secretary of State for the Home Department and ME and Others v Refugee Applications Comm ...[+++]issioner]?

It must admittedly be observed that neither the Statute of the Court of Justice nor the Rules of Procedure of the Civil Service Tribunal, nor indeed the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice or those of the General Court, provide for the imposition of a sanction in the case of refusal to comply with such an order, the only possible response to a refusal being for the court to draw the appropriate inferences from that refusal in the decision closing the case (see, to that effect, Case 155/78 M. v Commission [1980] ECR 1797, paragraphs 20 and 21), which is what the Civil Service Tribunal did in the judgment under appeal.

On 1 October 2009, the Court of Justice in its judgment in case C-141/08 P (‘the Court of Justice judgment’) set aside the previous judgment of the General Court of 29 January 2008.

Where aid is deemed incompatible with the common market, the Commission requires the Member State to reclaim it from the recipient (Commission communication of 24 November 1983 (2); see also the judgments of the Court of Justice in Case 70/72 Commission v. Germany (3) and Case 310/85 Deufil v. Commission (4)).