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-747/18 P: Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 19 December 2019 — Lux-Rehab Foglalkoztató Non-Profit Kft. (Lux-Rehab Non-Profit Kft.) v European Commission (Appeal — Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — State aid — Aid implemented by Hungary in favour of companies employing disabled workers — Action for annulment — Alleged decisions not to raise objections — Lack of locus standi — Person not individually concerned — Action not brought in order to safeguard procedural rights — Inadmissibility of the action at first instance — Appeal manifestly unfounded)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62018CB0747

62018CB0747

December 19, 2019
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

C 68/22

(Case C-747/18 P) (<span class="super note-tag">1</span>)

(Appeal - Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - State aid - Aid implemented by Hungary in favour of companies employing disabled workers - Action for annulment - Alleged decisions not to raise objections - Lack of locus standi - Person not individually concerned - Action not brought in order to safeguard procedural rights - Inadmissibility of the action at first instance - Appeal manifestly unfounded)

(2020/C 68/22)

Language of the case: Hungarian

Parties

Appellant: Lux-Rehab Foglalkoztató Non-Profit Kft. (Lux-Rehab Non-Profit Kft.) (represented by: L. Szabó, ügyvéd)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: V. Bottka and C. Georgieva-Kecsmar, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the order

1.The appeal is dismissed as being manifestly unfounded.

(<span class="note"> <a id="ntr1-C_2020068EN.01002202-E0001" href="#ntc1-C_2020068EN.01002202-E0001">*1</a> </span>) OJ C 112, 25.3.2019.

* * *

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