Theses will replace our popular Drop-In sessions, which unfortunately, we. When working out entitlement to UC, the minimum income floor is the amount that the government expects a self-employed person to be earning every month.
Have a listen to it now! Our next episode will be airing soon. Stay tuned! Find out more about us by: — Visiting our website www. Between 15 December and 29 November , Ascendi, a capital company, increased its share capital four times through the conversion into capital of the claims of shareholders owing to their provision, before those share capital increases, of ancillary services to that company.
In respect of those share capital increases, Ascendi paid a total amount of EUR That claim was refused by the contested decision. That provision did not relate to the share capital increases at issue in the main proceedings, carried out other than by cash contribution. In fact, as at 1 July , national law provided, in respect of such transactions, for the levying of a stamp duty at a rate higher than 0.
Indeed, that increase, contrary to those at issue in the main proceedings, was exempt from stamp duty on 1 July In the main proceedings, it appears from the information provided in the order for reference that the arbitration tribunals dealing with taxation have been established by law. The arbitration tribunals are included in the list of national courts in Article of the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic. In addition, as an element of the system of judicial resolution of tax disputes, arbitration tribunals dealing with taxation meet the requirement of permanence.
However, the Court has held admissible preliminary questions referred to it by an arbitration tribunal, where that tribunal had been established by law, its decisions were binding on the parties and its jurisdiction did not depend on their agreement order in Merck Canada EU:C , paragraph 18 and the case-law cited. Moreover, Article 8 1 of that decree-law specifies, as an impediment to the exercise of the function of arbitrator, the existence of any personal or professional relationship between the arbitrator and one of the parties to the dispute.
It is clear from all the foregoing considerations that the referring body possesses all the characteristics necessary in order to be regarded as a court or tribunal of a Member State for the purposes of Article TFEU. The Court therefore has jurisdiction to reply to the question referred by the referring court. The question referred for a preliminary ruling. According to Ascendi, transactions such as those at issue in the main proceedings were already exempt from stamp duty on 1 July , pursuant to the applicable national law.
However, despite the wording of Article 4 1 , it is apparent from Article 7 of that directive that there is no obligation to subject to capital duty transactions falling under the former provision. In the light of that objective, it is clear from the third recital that it was only by reason of the budgetary difficulties they would be faced with if capital duty were abolished that Member States which had not waived the levying of that duty could maintain such a duty see, to that effect, Logstor ROR Polska EU:C , paragraph The intention of the Union legislature was in fact to abolish capital duty, the possibility of maintaining it only being an exception motivated by the fear of loss of revenue by Member States.
Therefore, even if the loss of budget revenue could justify maintaining capital duty beyond 1 July , within the limits set in Article 7 2 of the directive, it could not justify reintroducing such duty see, to that effect, Logstor ROR Polska EU:C , paragraphs 37 to Accordingly, the answer to the question referred is that Articles 4 1 c and 7 1 and 2 must be interpreted as precluding the reintroduction by a Member State of capital duty on increases of share capital of a company falling under the first of those provisions, which were subject to such duty on 1 July , but which were later exempted from that duty.
Since these proceedings are, for the parties to the main proceedings, a step in the action pending before the national court, the decision on costs is a matter for that court. The Court may sit as a full Court with 27 judges, in a Grand Chamber of 15 judges or in chambers of three or five judges. The institution is financed from the EU budget, where it has its own dedicated section Section 4. General practice. Its judgment of 15 July in the Costa v ENEL case was fundamental in defining Community law as an independent system taking precedence over national legal provisions.
Other significant judgments concerning the protection of human rights include the judgment of 14 May in the Nold case, in which the Court stated that fundamental human rights are an integral part of the general principles of law that it upholds 4. In specific matters. One of the great merits of the Court has been its statement of the principle that the Treaties must not be interpreted rigidly but must be viewed in the light of the state of integration and of the objectives of the Treaties themselves.
In , cases were brought before the Court of Justice, of which concerned preliminary ruling proceedings, 41 direct actions and appeals against decisions of the General Court.
Member States from which the most requests originate are Germany , Italy 70 , Spain 64 and Romania The average duration of proceedings was Their term of office is six years, and is renewable. The judges may be called upon to perform the task of Advocate-General as, unlike the Court of Justice, the General Court does not have permanent advocates-general. For appointment to the General Court, candidates must possess the abilities required for appointment to high judicial office.
Appointment procedure. Organisation and operation. The judges appoint their President from among their number for a period of three years and their Registrar for a six-year term of office, although the General Court uses the services of the Court of Justice for its administrative and linguistic requirements.
The General Court sits in chambers of three or five judges. Its Rules of Procedure determine when the General Court sits as a full court or in a Grand Chamber or is constituted by a single judge. Parliament and the Council may establish specialised courts attached to the General Court to hear and determine at first instance certain categories of actions or proceedings brought in specific areas, e. To establish these courts, Parliament and the Council act under the ordinary legislative procedure regulations based either on a proposal from the Commission after consultation of the Court of Justice or at the request of the Court of Justice after consultation of the Commission.
In , cases were brought before the General Court and cases were completed, of which concerned direct actions on State aid and competition, on intellectual and industrial property, on the EU civil service and on other direct actions.
A party that is unable to meet the costs of proceedings may apply for free legal aid 55 cases in Established in , the European Union Civil Service Tribunal was responsible for ruling on disputes between the EU institutions and their staff where these were not the responsibility of a national court.
Cases pending before the Civil Service Tribunal on 31 August were transferred to the General Court with effect from 1 September The General Court continues to deal with those cases as found at that date, with the procedural steps taken by the former Civil Service Tribunal remaining applicable.
As early as , a Court of Justice ruling on a case brought by Parliament as part of the legislative procedure on the adoption of health measures to be taken following the Chernobyl nuclear accident granted Parliament the right to bring before the Court of Justice actions to have decisions declared void for the purpose of safeguarding its prerogatives under the legislative procedure.
0コメント