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-421/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākā tiesa (Senāts) (Latvia) lodged on 22 June 2022 — SIA DOBELES AUTOBUSU PARKS, AS CATA, SIA VTU VALMIERA, SIA JELGAVAS AUTOBUSU PARKS, SIA Jēkabpils autobusu parks v Iepirkumu uzraudzības birojs, Valsts SIA Autotransporta direkcija

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62022CN0421

62022CN0421

June 22, 2022
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

29.8.2022

Official Journal of the European Union

C 326/12

(Case C-421/22)

(2022/C 326/17)

Language of the case: Latvian

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellants in cassation: SIA DOBELES AUTOBUSU PARKS, AS CATA, SIA VTU VALMIERA, SIA JELGAVAS AUTOBUSU PARKS, SIA Jēkabpils autobusu parks

Other parties to the proceedings: Iepirkumu uzraudzības birojs, Valsts SIA Autotransporta direkcija

Question referred

Do the second subparagraph of Article 1(1), Article 2a(2) and Article 3(2) of Regulation No 1370/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2007 on public passenger transport services by rail and road and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) Nos 1191/69 and 1107/70, (1) as amended by Regulation (EU) No 2016/2338 (2) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 2016, permit a compensation scheme which does not impose on the competent authority an obligation to compensate a public transport service provider in full, by periodically index-linking the fare chargeable under the contract (the compensation sum), for any increase in the costs connected with providing the service which fall outside the service provider’s control, and which, therefore, does not entirely eliminate the risk that the service provider will incur non-compensable losses?

Language of the case: Latvian.

* * *

(1) OJ 2007 L 315, p. 1.

(2) OJ 2016 L 354, p. 22.

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