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-472/07: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d'État (Belgium) lodged on 24 October 2007 — Association Générale de l'Industrie du Médicament ASBL, Bayer SA, Pfizer SA, Servier Benelux SA, Sanofi-Aventis Belgium SA v Belgian State

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62007CN0472

62007CN0472

January 1, 2007
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

Official Journal of the European Union

JUDGMENT OF 6. 3. 2025 – CASE C-41/24 WALTHAM ABBEY RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION

26.1.2008

C 22/22

(Case C-472/07)

(2008/C 22/41)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Association Générale de l'Industrie du Médicament ASBL, Bayer SA, Pfizer SA, Servier Benelux SA, Sanofi-Aventis Belgium SA

Defendant: Belgian State

Questions referred

1.Since the period for transposition of Council Directive of 21 December 1988 relating to the transparency of measures regulating the prices of medicinal products for human use and their inclusion in the scope of national health insurance systems (89/105/EEC) expired on 31 December 1989, must Article 4(1) of that directive be considered to be directly applicable in the domestic legal systems of the Member States?

2.May Article 4(1) of Directive 89/105/EEC of 21 December 1988 be interpreted as meaning that the resumption for one year, after an absence of 18 months, of a general price freeze in respect of refundable medicinal products which had lasted eight years exempts the Member State from carrying out a review, when the freeze is resumed, of the macro-economic conditions affected by that freeze?

3.Is the review of macro-economic conditions referred to in Article 4(1) of Council Directive 89/105/EEC of 21 December 1988, cited above, to be understood as meaning only review as to whether healthcare expenditure is manageable, or must it also extend to macro-economic conditions in the pharmaceutical industry sector whose products are liable to be made subject to a price freeze?

4.May the review of macro-economic conditions referred to in Article 4(1) of Council Directive 89/105/EEC of 21 December 1988, cited above, be based on a general trend or trends, such as, for example, ensuring balance in healthcare, or must it be based on more specific criteria?

(1) OJ L 40 of 11.2.1989, p. 8.

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