Sentences with phrase «national courts remains»

The chief motivation of national courts remains that of protecting the domestic rule of law rather than that of promoting global justice.

It should be remembered that, while the Court of Justice is dealing with the reference, the national court remains competent to take interim measures to preserve the situation of the parties in the main action.

Not exact matches

He said, «The National Caretaker Committee led by Makarfi has appealed the judgment of February 17, 2017 at the Supreme Court and in the eyes of the law, until the appeal is set aside by the Supreme Court, the National Caretaker Committee remains in charge of the affairs of the PDP.

As long as the European Court of Human Rights prevents us from deporting terror suspects, and we remain unwilling to ignore the Court's direction (as Italy has done on numerous occasions on this issue), we are reliant on control orders to safeguard national security.

He said, «The National Caretaker Committee led by Makarfi has appealed the Judgment of the February 17, 2017 at the Supreme Court and in the eyes of the law, until the Appeal is set aside by the Supreme Court, the National Caretaker Committee remains in charge of the affairs of the PDP.

According to statement, «the question remains, if not to mortify, dehumanize and break our National Publicity Secretary, who has been very vocal against the APC administration, and of course to send a signal to others critical of the government, what else would have informed the decision to produce him in court in handcuffs, even when his case does not border on security threat?»

«The staff of the PDP National Secretariat holds the Judiciary in high esteem and believe in it to remain unbiased and dispense justice that will maintain the sanctity and independence of the rule of law and the court.»

One final remark that arises from this case, is that although the Court is willing to use Article 47 CFR to provide greater access to justice before national courts, its approach towards standing in direct actions by individuals on the basis of Article 263 (4) TFEU appears to remain rather conservative, regardless of the inclusion of the Charter since Lisbon.

It remains unfortunate that the Court missed an opportunity to set out in more detail how the national court's assessment under Article 28 (3) of the Directive should differ from that under the other paragraphs of ArticlCourt missed an opportunity to set out in more detail how the national court's assessment under Article 28 (3) of the Directive should differ from that under the other paragraphs of Articlcourt's assessment under Article 28 (3) of the Directive should differ from that under the other paragraphs of Article 28.

For UK citizens in the EU, the means of challenging the Member States» own domestic implementations of the withdrawal agreement would remain within the architecture of claims before national courts of the remaining Member States which would if necessary be referred to the Court of Justice.

In the event the referring Dutch Supreme Court (Hoge Raad) comes to the conclusion that the national measure is disproportionate, will it then ask the CJEU to answer the remaining questions in a TBG Limited II - case?

The ECJ could not remain indifferent to the global trend to widen the category of crimes that «should not go unpunished», according to recent International Criminal Court (ICC) guidelines (see Policy Paper on Case Selection and Prioritisation of the Office of the Prosecutor, 15 September 2016), and therefore consider «serious» financial crimes as crimes against human rights, with the primary objective of ensuring «jointly with the relevant national jurisdictions, that the most serious crimes committed in each situation do not go unpunished» (ICC, Policy Paper, para. 1 (8)-RRB-, through the implementation of «effective» measures.

Nevertheless, other implications of the latter case remain undiscussed in Dano, in particular the finding of the Court in Brey that Member States may not automatically assume that an EU national claiming social assistance can no longer invoke the Citizenship Directive by reason of being a burden on the public funds of the home state.

29 That said, where a court of a Member State is called upon to review whether fundamental rights are complied with by a national provision or measure which, in a situation where action of the Member States is not entirely determined by European Union law, implements the latter for the purposes of Article 51 (1) of the Charter, national authorities and courts remain free to apply national standards of protection of fundamental rights, provided that the level of protection provided for by the Charter, as interpreted by the Court, and the primacy, unity and effectiveness of European Union law are not thereby compromised (see, in relation to the latter aspect, Case C - 399 / 11 Melloni [2013] ECR I - 0000, paragraphcourt of a Member State is called upon to review whether fundamental rights are complied with by a national provision or measure which, in a situation where action of the Member States is not entirely determined by European Union law, implements the latter for the purposes of Article 51 (1) of the Charter, national authorities and courts remain free to apply national standards of protection of fundamental rights, provided that the level of protection provided for by the Charter, as interpreted by the Court, and the primacy, unity and effectiveness of European Union law are not thereby compromised (see, in relation to the latter aspect, Case C - 399 / 11 Melloni [2013] ECR I - 0000, paragraphCourt, and the primacy, unity and effectiveness of European Union law are not thereby compromised (see, in relation to the latter aspect, Case C - 399 / 11 Melloni [2013] ECR I - 0000, paragraph 60).

The fact remains, though, that it is up to national courts to shed more light on the somewhat vague notion «same situation of law and fact» (cf. cases C - 98 / 06 Freeport and C - 145 / 10 Painer).

Furthermore, although it is true that the procedure laid down in Article 267 TFEU is an instrument for cooperation between the Court of Justice and the national courts, by means of which the former provides the latter with the points of interpretation of EU law necessary in order for them to decide the disputes before them, the fact remains that when there is no judicial remedy under national law against the decision of a court or tribunal of a Member State, that court or tribunal is, in principle, obliged to bring the matter before the Court of Justice under the third paragraph of Article 267 TFEU where a question relating to the interpretation of EU law is raised before Court of Justice and the national courts, by means of which the former provides the latter with the points of interpretation of EU law necessary in order for them to decide the disputes before them, the fact remains that when there is no judicial remedy under national law against the decision of a court or tribunal of a Member State, that court or tribunal is, in principle, obliged to bring the matter before the Court of Justice under the third paragraph of Article 267 TFEU where a question relating to the interpretation of EU law is raised before court or tribunal of a Member State, that court or tribunal is, in principle, obliged to bring the matter before the Court of Justice under the third paragraph of Article 267 TFEU where a question relating to the interpretation of EU law is raised before court or tribunal is, in principle, obliged to bring the matter before the Court of Justice under the third paragraph of Article 267 TFEU where a question relating to the interpretation of EU law is raised before Court of Justice under the third paragraph of Article 267 TFEU where a question relating to the interpretation of EU law is raised before it...

If it turns out that EU law can not come to the rescue, there will still remain the possibility for the Spanish Constitutional Court to declare the new fees contrary to the national Constitution.

National legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, pursuant to which compulsory removal from the VAT register of a company whose dissolution has been ordered by a court decision results, even where the dissolved company remains party to contracts in force and states that it has not ceased its activity during the period of its liquidation, in the obligation to calculate the input VAT due or paid on available assets on the date of that dissolution and to pay it to the State.

Although international arbitration has grown more complex, it remains a more effective and less costly option than national courts for many types of international business disputes.

In this case, the European bundle patent will remain in the jurisdiction of national courts.

The current system of patents granted by the EPO and validated in individual member states will remain available, though these European bundle patents may be subject to the jurisdiction of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) instead of the national courts of each member state.

But the Court remained sensitive to its subsidiary role in fact - finding — noting whether the methods are sufficiently reliable on scientific grounds is a factual assessment issue and should be reserved to national courts (para. 58).

These terms have not been defined, and so the owners of prestigious brands may still have a battle ahead to enforce their trade mark rights as it remains to be seen how broadly national courts will interpret the ECJ's judgment.

We at IAALS are deeply involved in this work, along with our colleagues at the National Center for State Courts and others, to ensure America's courts remain vital, trusted, and trustwCourts and others, to ensure America's courts remain vital, trusted, and trustwcourts remain vital, trusted, and trustworthy.

The following questions have been referred to the European Court of Justice: (i) «If a European Union citizen, present in a Member State of which she is not a national, was, prior to the transposition of Council Directive (EC) 2004/38, the holder of a residence permit validly issued pursuant to art 4 (2) of Council Directive (EEC) 68/360, but was for a period of time during the currency of the permit voluntarily unemployed, not self - sufficient and outside the qualifications for the issue of such a permit, did that person by reason only of her possession of the permit, remain during that time someone who «resided legally» in the host Member State for the purpose of later acquiring a permanent right of residence under art 16 (1) of Directive 2004/38»

It is true that immediately thereafter the ECJ makes reference to Melloni, by clarifying that «in that respect, the national authorities and courts remain free to apply national standards of protection of fundamental rights, provided that the level of protection provided for by the Charter, as interpreted by the Court, and the primacy, unity and effectiveness of EU law are not thereby compromised».

The finding of domestic violence remains a part of the court's record, and the defendant's name will remain on the National Domestic Violence Registry.