- 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-276/13: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil de Pontevedra (Spain) lodged on 21 May 2013 — Pablo Acosta Padín v Hijos de J. Barreras, S.A.
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62013CN0276
62013CN0276
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
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 207/32
(Case C-276/13)
2013/C 207/54
Language of the case: Spanish
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Pablo Acosta Padín
Defendant: Hijos de J. Barreras, S.A.
Questions referred
1.Are Article 101 TFEU (formerly Article 81 of the EC Treaty, read in conjunction with Article 10 thereof) and Article 4(3) TEU compatible with rules such as those laid down in the regulation on the tariff for Procuradores de los Tribunales (Real Decreto 1373/2003 of 7 November 2003), under which procuradores are remunerated in accordance with a minimum tariff or scale, which can be varied, upwards or downwards, only by 12 % — in light of the fact that it is not really possible for the authorities of the Member State, including the courts, to depart from the minimum levels laid down in the statutory scale if exceptional circumstances arise?
2.For the purposes of applying the tariff without applying the minimum levels laid down therein: may the fact that the fees payable under the scale or tariff are markedly disproportionate to the work actually carried out be regarded as exceptional circumstances?
3.Is Article 56 TFEU (formerly Article 49 [of the EC Treaty]) compatible with Real Decreto 1373/2003 of 7 November 2003, the regulation on the tariff applying to procuradores?
4.Do those rules meet the requirements of necessity and proportionality referred to in Article 15(3) of Directive 2006/123/EC? (1)
5.Does Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, entrenching the right to a fair trial, encompass the right to be able to mount a proper defence in a situation where the figure at which the fees of a procurador are set is disproportionately high and does not reflect the work actually carried out?
6.If so, is the Spanish Ley de Enjuiciamiento Civil compatible with Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights in so far as it prevents the party ordered to pay costs from challenging the fees claimed by the procurador on the grounds that they are excessively high and do not reflect the work actually carried out?
Directive 2006/123/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on services in the internal market (OJ 2006 L 376, p. 36).
* * *