- 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-620/18: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 8 December 2020 — Hungary v European Parliament, Council of the European Union (Action for annulment — Directive (EU) 2018/957 — Freedom to provide services — Posting of workers — Terms and conditions of employment — Remuneration — Duration of posting — Determination of the legal basis — Articles 53 and 62 TFEU — Amendment of an existing directive — Article 9 TFEU — Misuse of powers — Principle of non-discrimination — Necessity — Principle of proportionality — Extent of the principle of freedom to provide services — Road transport — Article 58 TFEU — Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 — Scope — Principles of legal certainty and legislative clarity)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62018CA0620
62018CA0620
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
C 44/3
(Case C-620/18) (*)
(Action for annulment - Directive (EU) 2018/957 - Freedom to provide services - Posting of workers - Terms and conditions of employment - Remuneration - Duration of posting - Determination of the legal basis - Articles 53 and 62 TFEU - Amendment of an existing directive - Article 9 TFEU - Misuse of powers - Principle of non-discrimination - Necessity - Principle of proportionality - Extent of the principle of freedom to provide services - Road transport - Article 58 TFEU - Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 - Scope - Principles of legal certainty and legislative clarity)
(2021/C 44/03)
Language of the case: Hungarian
Parties
Applicant: Hungary (represented by: M.Z. Fehér, G. Tornyai, and M.M Tátrai, acting as Agents)
Defendants: European Parliament (represented by: M. Martínez Iglesias, L. Visaggio and A. Tamás, acting as Agents), Council of the European Union (represented: initially by A. Norberg, M. Bencze and E. Ambrosini, then by A. Norberg, E. Ambrosini, A. Sikora-Kalėda and Zs. Bodnár, acting as Agents)
Interveners in support of the European Parliament: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: J. Möller and S. Eisenberg, acting as Agents), French Republic (represented by: E. de Moustier, A. L. Desjonquères, C. Mosser and R. Coesme, acting as Agents), Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: M.K. Bulterman, C. Schillemans and J. Langer, acting as Agents), European Commission (represented by: L. Havas, M. Kellerbauer, B. R. Killmann and A. Szmytkowska, acting as Agents)
Interveners in support of the Council of the European Union: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: J. Möller and S. Eisenberg, acting as Agents), French Republic (represented by: E. de Moustier, A. L. Desjonquères, C. Mosser and R. Coesme, acting as Agents), Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: M.K. Bulterman, C. Schillemans and J. Langer, acting as Agents), Kingdom of Sweden (represented by: C. Meyer-Seitz, H. Shev and H. Eklinder, acting as Agents), European Commission (represented by: L. Havas, M. Kellerbauer, B. R. Killmann and A. Szmytkowska, acting as Agents)
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
1.Dismisses the action;
2.Orders Hungary to bears its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union;
3.Orders the Federal Republic of Germany, the French Republic, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the Kingdom of Sweden and the European Commission to bear their own costs.
(*) Language of the case: Hungarian.
(OJ C 427, 26.11.2018)
ECLI:EU:C:2021:140
15