- 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-603/11: Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 21 November 2012 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juridiction de Proximité, Chartres — France) — Hervé Fontaine v Mutuelle Générale de l’Éducation Nationale (Competition — Articles 101 TFEU and 102 TFEU — Supplementary health insurance — Mutual companies entering into state health service agreements with the practitioners of their choice — Difference in treatment — Manifest inadmissibility)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62011CB0603
62011CB0603
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
13.4.2013
Official Journal of the European Union
C 108/5
(Case C-603/11)(1)
(Competition - Articles 101 TFEU and 102 TFEU - Supplementary health insurance - Mutual companies entering into state health service agreements with the practitioners of their choice - Difference in treatment - Manifest inadmissibility)
2013/C 108/08
Language of the case: French
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Hervé Fontaine
Defendant: Mutuelle Générale de l'Éducation Nationale
Re:
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Juridiction de Proximité, Chartres — Interpretation of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU — Competition — National legislation prohibiting mutual companies providing supplementary health insurance from varying their benefits according to the conditions for issuing certificates and the services provided — Prohibition on the mutual companies entering into state health service agreements with practitioners of their choice — Difference of treatment in relation to other health insurance companies and institutions governed by the Code des Assurances or the Code de la Sécurité Sociale — Restrictions
Operative part of the order
The reference for a preliminary ruling submitted by the Juge de proximité, Chartres, by decision of 17 November 2011, is manifestly inadmissible.
(1)
OJ C 39, 11.2.2012.