Web-Companion "Essential EU Law in Charts"
Details...Dear Reader of "Essential EU Law in Charts, 2nd Lisbon edition, 2010". Please take note of the following updates and corrigenda:
Typographical error | p. 318
Regarding the box entitled “Sufficiently serious breach” (middle, on the right-hand side), second-last bullet point, the reference to Schneider should read as follows:
Sufficiently serious breach
Test based on the discretion available to the institution: “whether the […] institution concerned manifestly and gravely disregarded the limits on its discretion”; Brasserie du Pêcheur (1996).
- Therefore: the fact that a legislative act is null and void is not by itself sufficient; Bayerische HNL (1978).
- But: where the institution has only a considerably reduced, or even no, discretion, the mere infringement of EU law may be sufficient; Bergaderm (2000), Fresh Marine (2003).
Some positive examples:
- Agricultural decision by the Commission (bananas); Camar (2000, 2002, 2005);
- Merger decision (refusal) by the Commission; Schneider (2007, 2009);
- Delay by the GC in rendering a judgment; Der Grüne Punkt (2009)