- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case C-163/24, Statul Român – Ministerul Finanţelor Publice and Curtea de Apel Bucureşti: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel București (Romania) lodged on 1 March 2024 – BX v Statul Român – Ministerul Finanțelor Publice, Curtea de Apel București
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62024CN0163
62024CN0163
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/2024/3737
(Case C-163/24, Statul Român – Ministerul Finanţelor Publice and Curtea de Apel Bucureşti)
(C/2024/3737)
Language of the case: Romanian
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Appellant-applicant: BX
Respondent-defendant: Statul Român – Ministerul Finanțelor Publice, Curtea de Apel București
Questions referred
1.Does Article 20(1) of [Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003] of 29 September 2003 establishing common rules for direct support schemes under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers (in the version applicable prior to its repeal by [Regulation (EC) No 73/2009]) constitute a provision of EU law conferring specific rights on individuals, where infringement of those rights could give rise to State liability as a result of a decision of a national court of last instance?
2.Should the concept of ‘factually correct information’ in Article 68(1) [of Commission Regulation (EC) No 796/2004 of 21 April 2004 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of cross-compliance, modulation and the integrated administration and control system provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003] be interpreted as including both the correct declaration of land areas by the farmer and the correct identification of the parcel of land used and its boundaries?
3.Given the circumstances of the case, does the failure of the national court of last instance to refer the matter to the Court of Justice of the European Union for a ruling on the interpretation of Article 68 of Regulation No 796/2004 constitute a manifest and sufficiently serious breach such as to render the State liable for the damage allegedly caused by that court’s judgment?
*
Language of the case: Romanian
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3737/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
—