EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case C-286/25, BRANDL: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Győri Törvényszék (Hungary) lodged on 15 April 2025 – BRANDL Mezőgazdasági, Kereskedelmi és Szolgáltató Kft. v Agrárminisztérium

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62025CN0286

62025CN0286

April 15, 2025
With Google you find a lot.
With us you find everything. Try it now!

I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!

Valentina R., lawyer

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

C series

C/2025/3868

21.7.2025

(Case C-286/25, BRANDL)

(C/2025/3868)

Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: BRANDL Mezőgazdasági, Kereskedelmi és Szolgáltató Kft.

Defendant: Agrárminisztérium

Questions referred

Must Article 63 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 17 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union be interpreted as meaning that the legislation of a Member State which, following the restoration of a right of usufruct over a plot of agricultural land, which was previously cancelled contrary to EU law, awards the usufructuary financial compensation that does not take into consideration the significant increase in the market value of the properties in respect of which the right of usufruct was cancelled, in the years for which the right was cancelled, is consistent with those articles?

Does the legislation of a Member State which, following the restoration of a right of usufruct over a plot of agricultural land, which was previously cancelled contrary to EU law, awards the usufructuary financial compensation that does not take into consideration the significant increase in the market value of the properties in respect of which the right of usufruct was cancelled, in the years for which the right was cancelled, satisfy the concept of fair compensation contained in Article 17 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and in the judgment given in Case C-235/17?

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/3868/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia