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-562/12: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tartu Ringkonnakohus (Estonia) lodged on 5 December 2012 — MTÜ Liivimaa Lihaveis v Eesti-Läti programmi 2007–2013 Seirekomitee

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62012CN0562

62012CN0562

December 5, 2012
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

9.2.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 38/14

(Case C-562/12)

2013/C 38/18

Language of the case: Estonian

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: MTÜ Liivimaa Lihaveis

Defendant: Eesti-Läti programmi 2007–2013 Seirekomitee

Third party: Eesti Vabariigi Siseministeerium

Questions referred

(a)Are the rules of procedure of a monitoring committee jointly set up by two Member States, such as the Programme Manual adopted by the Monitoring Committee for the Estonia-Latvia Programme 2007–2013, which provide that ‘The decisions of the Monitoring Committee are not appealable at any place of jurisdiction’ (Chapter 6.6.4 of the Programme Manual) compatible with Article 63(2) of Council Regulation No 1083/2006 in conjunction with Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union?

(b)If Question (a) is to be answered in the negative, must point (b) of the first paragraph of Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union be interpreted as meaning that Chapter 6.6.4 of the Programme Manual adopted by the Monitoring Committee for the Estonia-Latvia Programme 2007-2013 is an act of an institution, body, office or agency of the Union which must be declared invalid?

(c)If Question (a) is to be answered in the negative, must the second sentence of the first paragraph of Article 263 in conjunction with Article 256(1) and Article 274 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union be interpreted as meaning that the General Court of the European Union or the competent court under national law has jurisdiction to hear and determine actions against decisions of the Monitoring Committee for the Estonia-Latvia Programme 2007-2013?

Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 of 11 July 2006 laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 (OJ 2006 L 210, p. 25).

* * *

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