- 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-510/24, PROFIL-COPY 2002: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Törvényszék (Hungary) lodged on 23 July 2024 – PROFIL-COPY 2002 Irodatechnikai Kft. v Közigazgatási és Területfejlesztési Minisztérium
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62024CN0510
62024CN0510
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/2024/6403
(Case C-510/24, PROFIL-COPY 2002)
(C/2024/6403)
Language of the case: Hungarian
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: PROFIL-COPY 2002 Irodatechnikai Kft.
Defendant: Közigazgatási és Területfejlesztési Minisztérium
Questions referred
1.Does the beneficiary of a grant have the right to an effective remedy before a tribunal, established in Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, vis-à-vis an enforceable declaration by the managing authority requiring the beneficiary to repay the EU grant that has been paid?
2.If the managing authority, by means of an enforceable declaration, requires the beneficiary to repay an EU grant that has been paid, and that beneficiary, in the absence of other means of redress, brings a civil action in order to avoid the consequences of that declaration, must that civil action be considered to be a remedy before a tribunal within the meaning of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union?
3.Is a remedy considered to be effective for the purposes of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union where it is not capable of avoiding the real risk of the person concerned becoming insolvent as a result of the measure which is under review in the appeal but is enforced before that appeal has been determined?
4.What can the national court do if the answer to the third question referred for a preliminary ruling is in the negative but it finds that the national legislation does not allow it to avoid the real risk of the person concerned becoming insolvent as a result of the measure which is under review in the appeal but is enforced before that appeal has been determined? Can the national court order interim measures to avoid the risk of the party becoming insolvent until final judgment has been given in the proceedings, where it is the only means of ensuring an effective remedy, even if it finds that national law does not allow it to do so?
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/6403/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
—