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-452/09: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Corte di Appello di Firenze (Italy) lodged on 18 November 2009 — Tonina Enza Iaia, Andrea Moggio, Ugo Vassalle v Ministero dell'Istruzione dell'Università e della Ricerca, Ministero dell'Economia e delle Finanze, Università di Pisa

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62009CN0452

62009CN0452

January 1, 2009
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

30.1.2010

Official Journal of the European Union

C 24/32

(Case C-452/09)

(2010/C 24/58)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Tonina Enza Iaia, Andrea Moggio, Ugo Vassalle

Defendants: Ministero dell'Istruzione dell'Università e della Ricerca, Ministero dell'Economia e delle Finanze, Università di Pisa

Questions referred

1.Is it compatible with Community law that the Italian State may, in relation to the period preceding the adoption of the first national legislation implementing Directive 82/76/EEC, lawfully rely on five-year limitation or ten-year ordinary limitation, in respect of a right arising under that directive? — without thereby definitively preventing that right, relating to pay/essential needs, from being exercised, or, failing which, an action for compensation/damages from being brought?

2.Is it compatible with Community law, on the other hand, that all preliminary objections of limitation be precluded because they definitively prevent the above right from being exercised?

3.In the alternative, is it compatible with Community law that all preliminary objections of limitation be precluded until such time as the Court of Justice confirms the infringement of Community law (in the present case, up until 1999)?

4.In the further alternative, is it compatible with Community law that all preliminary objections of limitation be precluded in any event until such time as the directive establishing the right has been correctly and fully transposed into national law (which, in the present case, never occurred), as laid down in the judgment in Emmott?

Language of the case: Italian

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