Search for: "Matter of Francovich"
Results 1 - 9
of 9
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Dec 2017, 4:38 am
One of those conditions (and the one that mattered in this case) was that to qualify for an award of damages the breach of the Directive must be “sufficiently serious”. [read post]
2 Mar 2017, 5:30 am
The Court will also consider whether a failure to seek interim relief preventing the conclusion of the contract with the successful bidder pending determination of a claim for damages could not, as a matter of law, break the chain of causation between breach and loss. [read post]
20 Apr 2013, 2:24 pm
Sir Robin eagerly hoped that someone might be deprived of an entitlement to protection under a right guaranteed by European Union law and might thus make a Francovich claim against the UK government. [read post]
15 Aug 2016, 7:05 am
The panel’s explanations for this ranged from the fact that copyright owners enjoy a much stronger and more coordinated lobby, to the idea that the problem is instinctively clearer in relation to copyright, where the ISP is directly involved in “piping” the copyright-protected material to the end user, unlike with physical branded goods whose actual delivery the ISP merely facilitates.The panel discussion at Simmons & Simmons(photo courtesy of Nedim Malovic)Eleonora Rosati… [read post]
27 Feb 2017, 1:00 am
On Wednesday 1 March, the Supreme Court will hand down the judgment in In the matter of EV (a child) (Scotland); In the matter of EV (a child) (No 2) (Scotland). [read post]
12 Apr 2011, 10:00 pm
The matter therefore fell within the restriction on availability of judicial review (Rule of Court 58.3(2). [read post]
15 Jan 2010, 10:06 am
One possibility as noted above is that simply that Italy's domestic law is in breach of EC law (in which case Google should have a Francovich claim for damages against the Italian government, though that may not be much comfort to the men awaiting trial.) [read post]
16 Aug 2016, 8:18 am
"Article 8(3) injunctions as a regulatory orderThis said, and having thus crossed the "legal Rubicon of vesting the High Court with a jurisdiction to grant an injunction against a non-infringing ISP" [para 63], "then what follows is really all merely a matter of degree. [read post]
10 Apr 2017, 1:00 am
This appeal considered whether, in a claim for damages under the Public Contracts Regulations 2006, the Francovich condition that the infringement be ‘sufficiently serious’ must be met, and whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the respondent’s failure to issue proceedings before the contract was concluded did not break the chain of causation between the breach and the loss. [read post]
