{"id":12302,"date":"2013-03-06T18:45:03","date_gmt":"2013-03-06T18:45:03","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/lawlegal.eu\/?p=12302"},"modified":"2013-03-06T18:45:03","modified_gmt":"2013-03-06T18:45:03","slug":"list-european-court-justice-judgments","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lawlegal.eu\/list-european-court-justice-judgments\/","title":{"rendered":"List of European Court of Justice Judgments"},"content":{"rendered":"

List of European Court of Justice Judgments and Decisions<\/h1>\n

This is a non-exhaustive list of judgements rendered by the Court.<\/p>\n

List of European Court of Justice Judgments by Topic<\/h2>\n

A classified list of EU Court of Justice judgments.<\/p>\n

Principles of Union Law<\/h2>\n

Primacy<\/h3>\n

Costa v ENEL 6\/64 [1964] ECR 585<\/p>\n

Simmenthal II 106\/77 [1978] ECR 629<\/p>\n

Marleasing C-106\/89 ECR I-7321<\/p>\n

Factortame I C-213\/89 [1990] ECR I-2433<\/p>\n

Direct effect<\/h3>\n

Treaties, Regulations and Decisions<\/h4>\n

Van Gend en Loos 26\/62 [1963] ECR 1<\/p>\n

Franz Grad 9\/70 [1970] ECR-825<\/p>\n

Commission v Italy 39\/72 [1973] ECR 101<\/p>\n

Reyners 2\/74 [1974] ECR 631<\/p>\n

Defrenne II [1976] ECR 455<\/p>\n

Amsterdam Bulb 50\/76 [1977] ECR 137<\/p>\n

Zaera 126\/86 [1987] ECR 3697<\/p>\n

Azienda Agricola C-403\/98 [2001] ECR I-103<\/p>\n

Directives<\/h4>\n

Van Duyn 41\/74 [1974] ECR 1337<\/p>\n

Ratti 148\/78 [1979] ECR 1629<\/p>\n

Becker 8\/81 [1982] ECR 53<\/p>\n

von Colson 14\/83 [1984] ECR 1891<\/p>\n

Kolpinghuis Nijmegen 80\/86 [1987] ECR 3969<\/p>\n

Fratelli Costanzo 103\/88 [1989] ECR 1839<\/p>\n

Foster C-188\/89 [1990] ECR I-3313<\/p>\n

Marshall v Southampton and South-West Hampshire Area Health Authority Case 152\/84 [1986] ECR I-4367<\/p>\n

Faccini Dori C-91\/92 [1994] ECR I-3325<\/p>\n

CIA Security C-194\/94 [1996] ECR I-2201<\/p>\n

Arcaro C-168\/95 [1996] ECR I-4705<\/p>\n

Unilever Italia C-443\/98 [2000] ECR I-7535<\/p>\n

Fundamental rights<\/h3>\n

Stauder 29\/69 [1969] ECR 419<\/p>\n

Internationale Handelsgesellschaft 11\/70 [1970] ECR 1125<\/p>\n

Nold 4\/73 [1974] ECR 491, \u00a713<\/p>\n

Carpenter C-60\/00 [2002] ECR I-6279<\/p>\n

Law of the institutions<\/h2>\n

Acts<\/h3>\n

Mandelli 3\/67 [1968] ECR 25<\/p>\n

Legislative process<\/h3>\n

Variola 34\/73 [1973] ECR 981<\/p>\n

Roquette Fr\u00e8res v Council 138\/79 [1980] ECR 3333<\/p>\n

Germany v Commission 24\/62 [1963] ECR 131<\/p>\n

Tariff Preferences case 45\/86 [1987] ECR 1493<\/p>\n

Beus 5\/67 [1968] ECR 83<\/p>\n

Tobacco Advertising case C-376\/98 [2000] ECR I-8419<\/p>\n

Opinion 2\/94 [1996] ECR I-1759<\/p>\n

Parliament v Council C-65\/93 [1995] ECR I-643<\/p>\n

Liability<\/h3>\n

Plaumann v Commission 25\/62 [1963] ECR 199<\/p>\n

Codorn\u00edu v Council C-309\/89 [1994] ECR I-1853<\/p>\n

Internal market<\/h2>\n

Free movement of goods<\/h3>\n

Definition of “goods”<\/h4>\n

Commission v Italy (“Italian Art”) 7\/68 [1968] ECR 423<\/p>\n

Commission v Belgium C-2\/90 [1992] ECR I-4431<\/p>\n

Commission v Italy (`Italian statistical data\u00b4) 24\/68 [1969] ECR 193<\/p>\n

Diamantarbeiders 2\/69 and 3\/69 [1969] ECR 211<\/p>\n

Bresciani 87\/75 [1976] ECR 129<\/p>\n

Commission v Germany 18\/87 [1988] ECR 5427<\/p>\n

Humblot 112\/84 [1985] ECR 1367<\/p>\n

Quantitative restrictions<\/h4>\n

Geddo v Ente 2\/73 [1973] ECR 865<\/p>\n

Procureur du Roi v Dassonville 8\/74 [1974] ECR 837<\/p>\n

Commission v Ireland 249\/81 [1982] ECR 4005<\/p>\n

Commission v UK 207\/83 [1985] ECR 1201<\/p>\n

Cassis de Dijon 120\/78 [1979] ECR 649<\/p>\n

Henn and Darby 34\/79 [1979] ECR 3795<\/p>\n

Keck and Mithouard C-267\/91 and C-268\/91 [1993] ECR I-6097<\/p>\n

Torfaen Borough Council C-145\/88 [1989] ECR 3851<\/p>\n

Free movement of persons<\/h3>\n

Workers<\/h4>\n

Hoekstra 75\/63 [1964] ECR 347<\/p>\n

Sotgiu 152\/73 [1974] ECR 153<\/p>\n

Van Duyn 41\/74 [1974] ECR 1337<\/p>\n

Levin 53\/81 [1982] ECR 1035<\/p>\n

Lawrie-Blum 66\/85 [1986] ECR 2121<\/p>\n

Bettray 344\/87 [1989] ECR 1621<\/p>\n

Groener C-379\/87 [1989] ECR 3967<\/p>\n

Antonissen C-292\/89 [1991] ECR I-745<\/p>\n

Bosman C-415\/93[1995] ECR I-4921<\/p>\n

Angonese C-281\/98 [2000] ECR I-4139<\/p>\n

Citizenship<\/h4>\n

Grzelczyk C-184\/99 [2001] ECR I-6193<\/p>\n

Garcia Avello C-148\/02 [2003] ECR I-11613<\/p>\n

Collins C-138\/02 [2004] ECR I-2703<\/p>\n

Zhu and Chen C-200\/02 [2004] ECR I-9925<\/p>\n

Metock and Others C-127\/08 [2008] ECR I-6241<\/p>\n

Freedom of establishment and freedom to provide services<\/h3>\n

Establishment<\/h4>\n

Reyners 2\/74 [1974] ECR 631<\/p>\n

Thieffry 71\/76 [1977] ECR 765<\/p>\n

Factortame II C-221\/89 [1991] ECR I-3905<\/p>\n

Vlassopoulou 340\/89 [1991] ECR 2357<\/p>\n

Centros C-212\/97 [1999] ECR I-1459<\/p>\n

\u00dcberseering C-208\/00 [2002] ECR I-9919<\/p>\n

Services<\/h4>\n

van Binsbergen 33\/74 [1974] ECR 1299<\/p>\n

Cowan 186\/87 [1989] ECR 195<\/p>\n

Rush Portuguesa C-113\/89 [1990] ECR I-1417<\/p>\n

Gebhard C-55\/94 [1995] ECR I-4165<\/p>\n

Bosman C-415\/93[1995] ECR I-4921<\/p>\n

Competition<\/h2>\n

External Relations<\/h2>\n

Commission v Council (ERTA) [1971] ECR 263<\/p>\n

State liability<\/h2>\n

Francovich and Bonifaci C-6\/90 and C-9\/90 [1991] ECR I-5357<\/p>\n

Brasserie du P\u00eacheur \/ Factortame III C-46\/93 and C-48\/93 [1996] ECR I-1029<\/p>\n

British Telecom C-392\/93 [1996] ECR I-1631<\/p>\n

Faccini Dori C-91\/92 [1994] ECR I-3325<\/p>\n

K\u00f6bler C-224\/01 [2003] ECR I-10239<\/p>\n

Social policy<\/h2>\n

Defrenne III 149\/77 [1978] ECR 1365<\/p>\n

Alphabetical Index<\/h2>\n

A<\/p>\n

Abrahamsson and Anderson v Fogelqvist
\nAllianz SpA v West Tankers
\nAllonby v Accrington and Rossendale College
\nApostolides v Orams<\/p>\n

B<\/p>\n

Barber v Guardian Royal Exchange Assurance Group
\nBilka-Kaufhaus GmbH v Weber von Hartz
\nBodil Lindqvist v \u00c5klagarkammaren i J\u00f6nk\u00f6ping
\nBosman ruling<\/p>\n

C<\/p>\n

Cartesio Oktat\u00f3 \u00e9s Szolg\u00e1ltat\u00f3 bt
\nCentros Ltd v Erhvervs- og Selskabsstyrelsen
\nChac\u00f3n Navas v Eurest Colectividades SA
\nChen case
\nCiar\u00e1n Tobin extradition case
\nColeman v Attridge Law
\nCommission v United Kingdom
\nCosta v ENEL<\/p>\n

D<\/p>\n

Deckmyn vs Vandersteen
\nDefrenne v Sabena (No 2)<\/p>\n

E<\/p>\n

Enderby v Frenchay Health Authority
\nEuropean Union Microsoft competition case<\/p>\n

F<\/p>\n

R (Factortame Ltd) v Secretary of State for Transport
\nFoster v British Gas plc
\nFrancovich v Italy<\/p>\n

G<\/p>\n

Gasser v MISAT
\nGoogle Spain v AEPD and Mario Costeja Gonz\u00e1lez
\nGravier v City of Liege
\nGrzegorz Dorobek case<\/p>\n

H<\/p>\n

Handels-og Kontorfunktionaerernes Forbund I Danmark v Dansk Arbejdsgiverforening, acting on behalf of Danfoss
\nHer Majesty’s Revenue and Customs v Stringer
\nH\u00f6fner and Elser v Macrotron GmbH<\/p>\n

I<\/p>\n

Infopaq International A\/S v Danske Dagblades Forening
\nIntel Corporation Inc. v. CPM United Kingdom Ltd
\nInternational Transport Workers Federation v Viking Line ABP<\/p>\n

J<\/p>\n

Johnston v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary<\/p>\n

K<\/p>\n

Kalanke v Freie Hansestadt Bremen
\nKamer van Koophandel en Fabrieken voor Amsterdam v Inspire Art Ltd
\nKolpak ruling
\nTanja Kreil
\nK\u00fcc\u00fckdeveci v Swedex GmbH & Co KG
\nKutz-Bauer v Freie und Hansestadt Hamburg<\/p>\n

L<\/p>\n

Landeshauptstadt Kiel v Jaeger
\nLaval Un Partneri Ltd v Svenska Byggnadsarbetareforbundet
\nLawrie-Blum v Land Baden-W\u00fcrttemberg
\nList of LGBT-related cases before international courts and quasi-judicial bodies<\/p>\n

M<\/p>\n

Marleasing SA v La Comercial Internacional de Alimentacion SA
\nMarschall v Land Nordrhein Westfalen
\nMax Schrems
\nMeca-Medina ruling
\nMeroni doctrine
\nMetock case
\nMonsanto Technology LLC v Cefetra BV and Others
\nMurphy v Media Protection Services Limited<\/p>\n

N<\/p>\n

Nimz v Freie und Hansestadt Hamburg
\nNordsee case<\/p>\n

O<\/p>\n

Oy Liikenne Ab v Pekka Liskoj\u00e4rvi and Pentti Juntunen<\/p>\n

P<\/p>\n

Palacios de la Villa v Cortefiel Servicios SA<\/p>\n

Pammer and Alpenhof cases
\nPeter Paul and Others v Bundesrepublik Deutschland
\nPfeiffer v Deutsches Rotes Kreuz
\nProcter & Gamble Co. v. OHIM
\nProcureur du Roi v Dassonville<\/p>\n

Q<\/p>\n

Yasin al-Qadi<\/p>\n

R<\/p>\n

R (BECTU) v Department of Trade and Industry
\nR (Seymour-Smith) v Secretary of State for Employment
\nRalf Sieckmann v Deutsches Patent und Markenamt
\nRe Badeck’s application
\nRegeling v Bestuur van de Bedrijfsvereniging voor de Metaalnijverheid
\nRewe-Zentral AG v Bundesmonopolverwaltung f\u00fcr Branntwein
\nRinner-K\u00fchn v FWW Spezial-Geb\u00e4udereinigung GmbH & Co KG
\nRobins v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
\nRobinson-Steele v RD Retail Services Ltd
\nRoquette Fr\u00e8res v Council<\/p>\n

S<\/p>\n

Shield Mark BV vs Joost Kist
\nSindicato de M\u00e9dicos de Asistencia P\u00fablica v Conselleria de Sanidad y Consumo de la Generalidad Valenciana
\nSirdar v The Army Board
\nSurinder Singh route<\/p>\n

T<\/p>\n

Test-Achats v Council of Ministers<\/p>\n

U<\/p>\n

\u00dcberseering BV v Nordic Construction Company Baumanagement GmbH<\/p>\n

V<\/p>\n

Van Duyn v Home Office
\nVan Gend en Loos v Nederlandse Administratie der Belastingen<\/p>\n

W<\/p>\n

Webster ruling
\nWerhof v Freeway Traffic Systems GmbH & Co KG
\nWindsurfing Chiemsee Produktions v. Boots<\/p>\n

Z<\/p>\n

Zentralbetriebsrat der Landeskrankenh\u00e4user Tirols<\/p>\n

See Also<\/h2>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

List of European Court of Justice Judgments and Decisions This is a non-exhaustive list of judgements rendered by the Court. List of European Court of Justice Judgments by Topic A classified list of EU Court of Justice judgments. Principles of Union Law Primacy Costa v ENEL 6\/64 […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[254,52],"tags":[360],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12302"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=12302"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12302\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=12302"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=12302"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=12302"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}