- 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-630/16: Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 14 December 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Helsingin hallinto-oikeus — Finland) — Proceedings brought by Anstar Oy (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Harmonised conditions for the marketing of construction products — Harmonised standard EN 1090-1:2009+A1:2011 — Criteria for determining the scope of a standard adopted by the European Committee for Standardisation (CEN) in accordance with a mandate of the European Commission — Anchors to be fixed into concrete before it sets and used for fastening facade elements and masonry supports to the building frame)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62016CA0630
62016CA0630
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
12.2.2018
Official Journal of the European Union
C 52/11
(Case C-630/16) (<span class="super note-tag">1</span>)
((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Harmonised conditions for the marketing of construction products - Harmonised standard EN 1090-1:2009+A1:2011 - Criteria for determining the scope of a standard adopted by the European Committee for Standardisation (CEN) in accordance with a mandate of the European Commission - Anchors to be fixed into concrete before it sets and used for fastening facade elements and masonry supports to the building frame))
(2018/C 052/14)
Language of the case: Finnish
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Other party: Turvallisuus- ja kemikaalivirasto (Tukes)
Operative part of the judgment
Harmonised standard EN 1090-1:2009+A1:2011, ‘Execution of steel structures and aluminium structures — Part 1: Requirements for conformity assessment of structural components’, must be interpreted as meaning that products, such as those at issue in the main proceedings, intended to be fixed into concrete before it sets fall within its scope if they have a structural function, in the sense that their removal from a structure would immediately reduce its resistance.
Language of the case: Finnish.
* * *
(<span class="super note-tag">1</span>) OJ C 63, 27.2.2017.