Monitoring References to the Court of Justice of the European Union
Field of law
75 case reports
Italy's competition authority found that Autostrade per l'Italia engaged in an unfair commercial practice by charging full tolls while the service fell short because of its own lack of diligence, where drivers had no real alternative. The Consiglio di Stato asks whether the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive stretches that far — or whether a price that should have been cut is a matter for contract law.
In June the General Court annulled Meta's gatekeeper designation for Marketplace but upheld it for Messenger. Meta now appeals the half it lost, on a single ground: that Messenger is the chat function of Facebook, not a separate number-independent communications service. The answer decides how the Digital Markets Act carves a company's products into services.
A Belgian user is suing Apple over loot boxes in games sold through the App Store. Belgium treats loot boxes as gambling; the E-Commerce Directive excludes gambling from its scope, and its hosting safe harbour protects only a provider that does not control what it hosts. The Antwerp court asks whether Apple can shelter behind Article 14 for apps it reviews and approves.
The Digital Services Act lets the Commission bill very large platforms for the cost of supervising them, using a methodology it must lay down by delegated act. When it set Meta's and TikTok's fees it counted their users its own way, explained in an annex. The General Court annulled both decisions. The Commission appeals, saying an explanation is not a methodology.
Zalando told the Commission that 83 million people visit its store each month but that only 37% of what they see comes from third-party sellers — so only 31 million are 'recipients' of a platform. The Commission counted all of them. The General Court agreed. Zalando's appeal asks whether exposure to third-party content must be proved or may be presumed.
Amazon was designated a very large online platform under the Digital Services Act and lost its challenge in November 2025. It now tells the Court that a marketplace carries none of the 'systemic risks' the Act was written for, and that treating it like a social network breaches the Charter. The Commission has cross-appealed, saying the General Court should never have looked.
TikTok met every numerical threshold in the Digital Markets Act and was designated a gatekeeper in the Act's first wave. ByteDance says the presumptions can be rebutted and that the General Court made them impossible to rebut. The first DMA appeal to reach the Court of Justice will say how much a designated company may argue.
The Unfair Commercial Practices Directive bans calling a product 'free' if the consumer has to pay anything. Germany's consumer federation says Facebook charges in personal data. The Bundesgerichtshof asks the Court, in a single sentence, whether data and consent are a 'cost'.
A Chrome extension from one Spanish legal database injects instructions into the pages of another, halts browsing and offers to carry the reader across to its own content. The Tribunal Supremo asks whether that is 'alteration' of a computer program — a question that would move the fight from unfair competition into copyright.
If the statutory default interest on a late commercial payment works out at less than one cent — and Finnish rounding rules turn it into zero — is the creditor still owed anything under the Late Payment Directive? The Finnish Supreme Court asks.
The Luxembourg General Court gave Google a pass in September 2024, knocking out the Commission’s whopping €1.49 bn fine; honestly, many of us in the tech risk sector expected a quick confirmation of the penalty, making this annulment a massive … Continue reading →
On 14 June 2017 the Court ruled (ECLI:EU:C:2017:458) that designations such as "milk", "butter", "cheese" and "cream" are reserved by Regulation 1308/2013 for products of animal origin, and purely plant-based products cannot use them even with clarifying…
By judgment of 25 January 2018 (ECLI:EU:C:2018:37) the Court held that Mr Schrems had not lost his consumer status for his own Facebook account through his books, lectures and campaigning, so he could sue Facebook in Vienna.
By judgment of 20 December 2017 (ECLI:EU:C:2017:992) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “1.
By judgment of 12 October 2017 (ECLI:EU:C:2017:758) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “Article 28(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 of 28 June 2007 on organic production and labelling of organic products and repealing Regulation…
By judgment of 23 January 2018 (ECLI:EU:C:2018:26) the Court held that the European Firearms Pass provisions of the Firearms Directive do not apply to the territory of Gibraltar, as the Directive's travel-facilitation rules concern the free movement of…
By Grand Chamber judgment of 17 October 2017 (ECLI:EU:C:2017:766) the Court held that a legal person claiming injury from online publications may sue for its entire damage where it has its centre of interests, and that claims for rectification and removal…
On 6 December 2017 the Court ruled (ECLI:EU:C:2017:941) that a selective distribution system for luxury goods designed to preserve their prestige image is compatible with Article 101(1) TFEU, and that a clause prohibiting authorised retailers from selling…
By judgment of 30 March 2017 (ECLI:EU:C:2017:243) the Court held that a printed advertisement for products sold through an online platform may, within the limits imposed by the medium, refer consumers to the website for part of the mandatory information —…
On 5 June 2018 the Grand Chamber ruled (ECLI:EU:C:2018:388) that the administrator of a Facebook fan page is a joint controller, together with Facebook, of the processing of visitors' data through the Insights statistics — and that the German supervisory…
By judgment of 20 October 2016 (ECLI:EU:C:2016:790) the Court held that the terms of protection in the Term Directive do not apply to copyright that had been extinguished before 1 July 1995, and that EU law does not preclude national legislation under…
By judgment of 21 December 2016 (ECLI:EU:C:2016:976) the Court held that in an action for breach of an online-resale prohibition in a selective distribution network, the "place where the damage occurred" under Article 5(3) of Brussels I is the Member State…
On 27 September 2017 the Court ruled (ECLI:EU:C:2017:724) that where co-defendants in different Member States are sued over the same supply chain, a Community-design court can grant remedies with EU-wide effect against both.
By judgment of 18 May 2017 (ECLI:EU:C:2017:390) the Court held that a legally distinct second-tier subsidiary with a seat in a Member State is an "establishment" of its non-EU parent for Article 97(1) of the Community Trade Mark Regulation where it is a…
By judgment of 22 June 2016 (ECLI:EU:C:2016:468) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “1.
On 14 June 2017 the Court ruled (ECLI:EU:C:2017:456) that the operators of The Pirate Bay themselves make a communication to the public by indexing and managing torrents of protected works, despite the content sitting on users' machines.
On 7 July 2016 the Court ruled (ECLI:EU:C:2016:528) that the operator of a physical marketplace which sublets pitches to traders selling counterfeits is an "intermediary" under Article 11 of the Enforcement Directive, and injunctions against it are subject…
By order of 27 October 2016 (ECLI:EU:C:2016:830) the Court declared the Brussels commercial court's reference manifestly inadmissible for failure to set out the factual and legal context required by Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure.
By judgment of 15 March 2017 (ECLI:EU:C:2017:214) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “1.
By judgment of 25 January 2017 (ECLI:EU:C:2017:38) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “Articles 41(1) and 44(1) of Directive 2007/64/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 November 2007 on payment services in the internal…
By order of 8 September 2016 (ECLI:EU:C:2016:672) the Court declared the reference from the Regional Administrative Court for Lazio manifestly inadmissible for failure to set out the factual and legal context with the precision Article 94 of the Rules of…
On 20 December 2017 the Grand Chamber ruled (ECLI:EU:C:2017:981) that UberPop is not an information-society service but a "service in the field of transport": Uber exercises decisive influence over the conditions under which non-professional drivers supply…
By judgment of 7 September 2016 (ECLI:EU:C:2016:633) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “1.
By judgment of 16 November 2016 (ECLI:EU:C:2016:878) the Court held that the French scheme licensing digital exploitation of out-of-print books precluded authors' exclusive rights: consent may sometimes be implicit, but only where every author is actually…
On 1 March 2017 the Court ruled (ECLI:EU:C:2017:144) that Article 9 of the InfoSoc Directive — provisions concerning "access to cable of broadcasting services" — does not cover national legislation permitting the immediate retransmission by cable,…
On 10 November 2016 the Court ruled (ECLI:EU:C:2016:856) that the public-lending exception can cover the lending of e-books on the one-copy-one-user model, digital lending being within the Rental and Lending Directive.
By judgment of 29 October 2015 (ECLI:EU:C:2015:735) the Court held that geographical data extracted from a topographic map retain sufficient autonomous informative value to be "independent materials", so a map can constitute a database within the Database…
On 28 July 2016 the Court ruled (ECLI:EU:C:2016:612) that in a collective injunction action the law applicable to assessing contract terms is determined by the Rome I Regulation even though the action itself falls under Rome II.
On 8 September 2016 the Court ruled (ECLI:EU:C:2016:644) that posting a hyperlink to works published online without the rightholder's consent is a communication to the public where the poster knew or ought to have known of the illegality.
Canada and the EU have negotiated a new Passenger Name Record Agreement. A plank of the Agreement involves the transfer and processing of data. The European Parliament is asking the CJEU for a legal opinion on the compatibility of that … Continue reading → Continue reading →
By judgment of 19 October 2016 (ECLI:EU:C:2016:779) the Court held that a dynamic IP address registered by a website operator is personal data where the operator has legal means to have the visitor identified via the access provider.
By judgment of 7 July 2016 (ECLI:EU:C:2016:527) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “Article 3 of Directive 98/6/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 1998 on consumer protection in the indication of the prices of…
On 15 September 2016 the Court ruled (ECLI:EU:C:2016:689) that a shopkeeper offering free open Wi-Fi provides a "mere conduit" service and cannot be held liable in damages for users' infringements.
By judgment of 21 October 2015 (ECLI:EU:C:2015:709) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “1.
Is the Council of Europe’s Draft Convention against the Manipulation of Sports Competitions compatible with EU law? Facts On 11 July 2014, the Maltese Government issued a press release announcing that it was asking the CJEU for an Advisory Opinion on the Council of Europe’s Draft Convention against…
By judgment of 1 October 2015 (ECLI:EU:C:2015:639) the Court gave "establishment" a broad, flexible reading: even minimal real and effective activity through stable arrangements — a Hungarian-language property site, a local representative, a Hungarian bank…
On 6 October 2015 the Grand Chamber declared the Safe Harbour adequacy decision invalid (ECLI:EU:C:2015:650): a regime permitting generalised access by US authorities to transferred data compromised the essence of Article 7 of the Charter, and the absence…
On 6 October 2015 the Grand Chamber declared the Safe Harbour adequacy decision invalid (ECLI:EU:C:2015:650): a regime permitting generalised access by US authorities to transferred data compromised the essence of Article 7 of the Charter, and the absence…
On 21 January 2016 the Court ruled (ECLI:EU:C:2016:42) that travel agencies using a common booking platform can be presumed to participate in a concerted practice from the moment they knew of the administrator's message capping discounts — but the…
By judgment of 11 June 2015 (ECLI:EU:C:2015:385) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “The Combined Nomenclature in Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common…
By judgment of 17 September 2015 (ECLI:EU:C:2015:610) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “1. EU law must be interpreted as allowing a relevant national authority to impose a tariff obligation, such as that at issue in the main…
By judgment of 12 November 2015 (ECLI:EU:C:2015:750) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “1.
By judgment of 11 June 2015 (ECLI:EU:C:2015:378) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “Directive 2002/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic…
By judgment of 26 February 2015 (ECLI:EU:C:2015:119) the Court held that the Resale Right Directive does not preclude the person liable for the artist's royalty, designated by national law, from agreeing with anyone else — including the buyer — that the…
By judgment of 15 January 2015 (ECLI:EU:C:2015:10) the Court held that the Database Directive does not apply to a database protected neither by copyright nor by the sui generis right, so its user-freedom guarantees (Articles 6, 8 and 15) do not override…
By judgment of 16 July 2015 (ECLI:EU:C:2015:485) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “Article 8(3)(e) of Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights…
Electronic auctions can be used to award contracts in the water, energy, transport and postal sectors of the economy. These auctions are governed by an EU Directive that stipulates contracting entities must simultaneously communicate information to all tenderers so that the tenderers can ascertain…
By judgment of 13 May 2015 (ECLI:EU:C:2015:315) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “Article 4(1) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and…
On 22 January 2015 the Court ruled (ECLI:EU:C:2015:27) that distribution-right exhaustion applies only to the tangible object placed on the market with the rightholder's consent — transferring the ink of a lawfully bought paper poster onto canvas creates a…
By judgment of 6 February 2014 (ECLI:EU:C:2014:55) the Court held that customs may seize a counterfeit watch bought by an EU resident from a non-EU online shop: the sale itself constitutes "distribution to the public" and "use in the course of trade", with…
By reasoned order of 21 October 2014 (ECLI:EU:C:2014:2315) the Court applied Svensson to framing: embedding a work already freely available online with the rightholder's consent is not a communication to a new public and needs no fresh authorisation,…
By judgment of 11 September 2014 (ECLI:EU:C:2014:2209) the Court held that the E-Commerce Directive covers an online newspaper remunerated by advertising, but that a publisher which knows of and controls the information it posts is not a "mere conduit",…
On 26 March 2015 the Court ruled (ECLI:EU:C:2015:199) that Article 3(2) of the InfoSoc Directive does not preclude Member States from extending broadcasters' related rights to communications to the public such as live internet transmissions of sporting…
By judgment of 16 July 2015 (ECLI:EU:C:2015:477) the Court laid down the framework that has governed FRAND litigation ever since: the holder of a standard-essential patent who gave a FRAND commitment does not abuse its dominance by seeking an injunction…
By judgment of 30 April 2014 (ECLI:EU:C:2014:285) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “1.
Does the EU’s Authorisation Directive 2002/20 mean that Vodafone Omnitel, Sky and other companies can avoid paying millions of euro to the Italian regulatory body, AgCom? Facts The Italian telecoms and broadcasting sector has a regulatory body known as AgCom (Autorità per le Garanzie nelle…
On 13 February 2014 the Court ruled (ECLI:EU:C:2014:76) that a clickable link to a work freely available on another website is not a communication to a "new public" and therefore needs no authorisation; it is otherwise where the link circumvents access…
By judgment of 5 March 2015 (ECLI:EU:C:2015:144) the Court accepted that private-copying levies may be charged on multifunctional media such as mobile-phone memory cards, subject to a battery of conditions: harm above a minimal threshold, no levy where…
By judgment of 11 July 2013 (ECLI:EU:C:2013:515) the Court held that indiscriminately levying blank media placed on the market for business purposes is permissible only if the scheme provides an effective and non-excessive right to reimbursement; a…
On 10 April 2014 the Court ruled (ECLI:EU:C:2014:254) that the private-copying exception does not cover reproductions from unlawful sources, and that levy systems must not factor unlawful copying into the fair compensation collected from everyone — a Dutch…
On 27 March 2014 the Court ruled (ECLI:EU:C:2014:192) that an access provider whose services are used to infringe copyright is an "intermediary" that may be enjoined, and that an outcome-based blocking injunction — leaving the choice of measures to the ISP…
On 13 May 2014 the Grand Chamber delivered one of the most consequential judgments in EU law (ECLI:EU:C:2014:317): a search engine is a controller processing personal data when it indexes the web, the Directive reached Google through its Spanish…
By judgment of 3 October 2013 (ECLI:EU:C:2013:635) the Court held that in online copyright cases Article 5(3) of Brussels I gives jurisdiction to the courts of a Member State which protects the copyright relied on and where the website is accessible — no…
By judgment of 19 December 2013 (ECLI:EU:C:2013:850) the Court held that a dedicated meta search engine which translates users' queries in real time into the search engine of a protected database re-utilises the whole or a substantial part of that database…
On 11 July 2013 the Court ruled (ECLI:EU:C:2013:516) that "advertising" in the Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive covers the use of a competitor-referencing domain name and of metatags invisible to the eye but read by search engines — while…