Search for: "PAMMER"
Results 1 - 20
of 32
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 May 2010, 11:23 pm
The Opinion of Advocate General Ms Verica Trstenjak in Case C-585 / 08 (Pammer) and Case C-144 / 09 (Hotel Alpenhof) was presented on May 18, 2010. [read post]
11 Dec 2010, 5:31 am
The voyage booked by Mr Pammer was descried on the website of the company. [read post]
7 Dec 2010, 2:01 pm
But Reederei Karl Schlüter reimbursed only a part of what Mr Pammer had paid. [read post]
18 May 2012, 1:43 am
Following the ECJ’s decisions in Pammer and Alpenhof which dealt with the targeted activity-criterion of Article 15 I lit. c) Brussels I, the questions are meant to shed light on the provisions’ nexus-requirement: 1. [read post]
22 Dec 2011, 7:27 am
Axa and Pammer/Hotel Alpenhof: Marielle Koppenol-Laforce, Herschikking Brussel I: litispendentie en forumkeuze, een positieve stap voorwaarts!? [read post]
6 May 2011, 9:21 am
This issue includes two casenotes, one in Dutch and one in French, commenting on the Pammer / Alpenhof case. [read post]
18 Mar 2011, 10:20 am
USA: Oklahoma's lawsuit against online travel companies dismissedGermany: Montreal liabilty limit for lost baggage applies per passenger regardless of number of checked pieces of baggageUNWTO: tourism a vehicle for gender equalityEgypt: Minister of Tourism initiates new tourism campaignIreland: Eyjafjallajökull eruption referred to the ECJFinland: new reference for ECJ preliminary ruling regarding Reg. 261/2004 and "denied boarding"Austria: Supreme Court refers Pammer… [read post]
9 Dec 2021, 4:16 am
In this regard, the framework in Article 5 Rome Convention is a better solution, according to which package travel contracts can be expressly included in Article 17 Brussels Ibis/Article 6 Rome I as follows: Notwithstanding Article 17(3) Brussels Ibis/Article 6(4)(b) Rome I, this Section/article shall apply to a contract relating to package travel within the meaning of Council Directive 2015/2302/EU of 25 November 2015 on package travel and linked travel arrangements. [1] The predecessor of Articles… [read post]
4 Jun 2012, 2:13 pm
Neither the history of the provision, nor its purpose nor the decision of the ECJ in Pammer and Alpenhof required that the contract be concluded at a distance. [read post]
17 Nov 2014, 7:57 am
However, there is no mention of more recent stances (read: Pinckney, or the Opinion of Advocate General Cruz Villalon in Pez Hejduk) in which the CJEU purportedly departed from this criterion, at least in the context of establishing jurisdiction].Birss J especially relied on the CJEU decision in Pammer to consider whether the defendants' activity was targeted at the UK. [read post]
14 Jun 2013, 7:51 am
We'll see whether the CJEU decides to follow AG Jääskinen's Opinion, although this Kat suspects that it is unlikely that it will depart significantly from it, especially after exciting judgments like Sportradar, Pammer and Donner. [read post]
28 Nov 2018, 6:50 am
The Guidelines reaffirm that the CJEU’s analysis in Pammer is helpful in interpreting the GDPR. [read post]
24 Sep 2013, 8:33 am
I produce a decision they made earlier: Pammer/Hotel Alpenhof. [read post]
8 Nov 2018, 10:53 am
” TME’s website stated that when a trademark applicant submits an application directly to the USPTO, the applicant’s “email and phone number will be available for all to see,” including “[s]pammers, solicitors and anyone else,” but that, for a monthly fee of $5, TME would provide its email and phone number to the USPTO. [read post]
19 Dec 2014, 12:35 am
The present judgment follows the decision of the Court of Justice of the European (CJEU) in Pammer, as regards the circumstances defining when the acts of communication are targeted at the public on a certain territory. [read post]
29 Nov 2018, 2:03 am
These include Football Dataco v Sportradar GmbH & Sportradar AG, C-173/11, and Peter Pammer v Reederei Karl Sclüter GmbH & Co.KG, C-585/08. [read post]
7 Jan 2018, 11:30 pm
The court may decide that an advertisement is directed at the UK in light of some of the non-exhaustive list of matters referred to by the Court of Justice in Pammer at paragraph [93]. [read post]
25 Jul 2009, 8:03 am
It also introduces the Austrian reference on Art. 15(3) ‘Brussels I' in the "Pammer" case (now also Case C-144/09, Alpenhof v. [read post]
22 Oct 2013, 5:57 am
In doing so, it also marked a discontinuity from recent case law (notably, Joined Cases C‑585/08 and C‑144/09 Peter Pammer, Case C-5/11 Titus Donner (Katpost here), and Case C-173/11 Sportradar (Katposts here and here) which employed the notion of ‘intention to target’ in the context of online infringements. [read post]
2 May 2023, 3:24 am
The court mentioned the following non-exhaustive list of indicia from the Pammer and Hotel Alpenhof judgment on Art. 17(1)(c) Brussels I Recast Regulation to be relevant in assessing whether activity is directed to a particular EU Member State: International nature of the activity; Use of a language or a currency other than the language or currency generally used in the EU Member State in which the business is established; Mention of telephone numbers with an international code; Paying an… [read post]
