- 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: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Helsingin hallinto-oikeus (Finland) lodged on 7 December 2016 — Anstar Oy
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62016CN0630
62016CN0630
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
27.2.2017
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 63/17
(Case C-630/16)
(2017/C 063/24)
Language of the case: Finnish
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Anstar Oy
Other party: Turvallisuus- ja kemikaalivirasto (Tukes)
Questions referred
1.Are mandate M/120 and harmonised standard EN 1090-1 (:2009+A1:2011) drawn up on the basis of that mandate to be interpreted as meaning that the products to be fixed into concrete before it sets (suspension system products used for fixing shell elements and brickwork supports to the building frame, and certain foundation bolts, fastening plates and standard steel parts, bracing systems, column shoes and wall shoes, and balcony connections) listed in points 1 to 4 of the decision of Tukes do not fall within their scope?
2.Do the Construction Products Regulation, the Commission mandates mentioned in the present case, or EU law otherwise preclude Tukes’s interpretation that the aforesaid products are outside the scope of mandate M/120 and standard EN 1090-1?
Regulation (EU) No 305/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2011 laying down harmonised conditions for the marketing of construction products and repealing Council Directive 89/106/EEC (OJ 2011 L 88, p. 5).
* * *