LegalPost.eu

According to the Judgment (30.1.2024) of the Court of Justice in Case C-442/22 [1] , an employee using her employer’s details to issue fake invoices is liable for the amount of the taxes entered on them. That is the case provided that the employer, who is a taxable person for VAT purposes, has exercised the due diligence reasonably required to monitor the conduct of its employee. Between January 2010 and April 2014, the employee of a company established in Poland operating a petrol station issued 1,679 invoices that did not reflect actual sales of goods, for a total amount (expressed in Polish zlotys) of approximately €320,000. To that end, she used the details of her employer, a taxable person for value added tax (VAT) purposes, without its knowledge or consent. The fake invoices were not recorded in that company’s tax returns. They were used by those who received them to obtain an undue refund of VAT, without the corresponding tax having been paid into the State budget. Follow

Following a significant number of complaints concerning the use by the European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) of remote testing in selection procedures to recruit EU civil servants, the European Ombudsman carried out an own-initiative inquiry to look into the issues raised. The Ombudsman’s inquiry identified various issues in how EPSO organised and oversaw the remote tests, including regarding the requirements it put in place. The inquiry also identified shortcomings in the information provided by EPSO to applicants and candidates, as well as how it dealt with complaints and the rescheduling of tests. To address these, the Ombudsman made suggestions aimed at improving EPSO’s rules and administrative practices. The Ombudsman  closed the inquiry , as no further inquiries were justified. However, she urged EPSO to ensure it provides clear and consistent information concerning future ‘competitions’ and selection procedures to recruit EU civil servants. This is particularly importan

Regulation (EU) 2023/2844 establishes a uniform legal framework for the use of electronic communication between competent authorities in judicial cooperation procedures in civil, commercial and criminal matters and for the use of electronic communication between natural or legal persons and competent authorities in judicial procedures in civil and commercial matters. In addition, it lays down rules on: a) the use of videoconferencing or other distance communication technology for purposes other than the taking of evidence under Regulation (EU) 2020/1783; b) the application of electronic signatures and electronic seals; c) the legal effects of electronic documents; d) electronic payment of fees. Regulation applies to electronic communication in judicial cooperation procedures in civil, commercial and criminal matters, and hearings through videoconferencing or other means of distance communication technology in civil, commercial and criminal matters. This Regulation seeks t

The case of O.G. and Others v. Greece (applications nos. 71555/12 and 48256/13) concerned the publication, by decision of the domestic authorities, of medical data concerning prostitutes who had been diagnosed as HIV-positive, and media coverage of them. It also concerned the circumstances in which they were required to undergo a blood test.  In Chamber 's judgment(23.1.2024) in this case the European Court of Human Rights held, unanimously, that there had been two violations:  -A violation of Article 8 (right to respect for private life) of the European Convention on Human Rights, with regard to two applicants, on account of the blood tests they had been required to undertake.  The Court considered that the blood samples imposed on two applicants had amounted to an interference with their private life and noted that this had not been in accordance with the law within the meaning of Article 8 of the Convention, given that the provisions of domestic law in issue ought to have been f

As every two years, the European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ) publishes on its website, and on the special page of its database CEPEJ-STAT, a specific Study on notaries.  This study has been prepared by the Council of the Notariats of the European Union (CNUE), professional association with CEPEJ observer status. Based on 2020 data collected by the CEPEJ in the framework of its evaluation of judicial systems, this study practically complements and deepens the   Evaluation Report  published in 2022.  The Specific Study on Notaries  covers different themes relating to the profession of notaries in Europe and in particular the status, number, functions, competences, activities, best practices in the field of new technologies, training, and supervision and monitoring of the notariat. Similar studies are carried out concerning enforcement agents and judicial experts, and they are published in September on the CEPEJ and CEPEJ-STAT web pages. Trends and conclusions of the

By Giorgos Kazoleas, Lawyer A significant decision was issued by the CJEU [1] interpreting Articles 8 and 23 of Directive 2008/48/EC on consumer credit agreements and repealing Council Directive 87/102/EEC as regards the obligation of credit institutions to assess the creditworthiness of consumers before concluding the credit agreement.  Article 8 of that directive, entitled ‘Obligation to assess the creditworthiness of the consumer’, provides: ‘ 1. Member States shall ensure that, before the conclusion of the credit agreement, the creditor assesses the consumer’s creditworthiness on the basis of sufficient information, where appropriate obtained from the consumer and, where necessary, on the basis of a consultation of the relevant database. Member States whose legislation requires creditors to assess the creditworthiness of consumers on the basis of a consultation of the relevant database may retain this requirement. 2. Member States shall ensure that, if the parties agree to c

In Chamber's judgment (14.12.2023) in the case of M.L. v. Poland (application no. 40119/21) concerning restrictions on abortion rights the European Court of Human Rights held, by five votes to two, that there had been a violation of Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the European Convention on Human Rights.  The applicant alleged in particular that she had been banned from having access to a legal abortion in the case of foetal abnormalities, following a 2020 Constitutional Court judgment. She had become pregnant and the foetus was diagnosed with trisomy 21. A scheduled hospital abortion had been cancelled when the legislative amendments resulting from the Constitutional Court ruling had come into force. Unable to have an abortion in Poland, she had ultimately had to travel to a private clinic abroad for the procedure.  The Court found that the legislative amendments in question, which had forced her to travel abroad for an abortion at considerable expense

The European Ombudsman has criticised two practices that the European Medicines Agency (EMA) applies when handling access to documents requests. The first concerns EMA’s handling of certain requests for public access to documents by placing them in a chronological queue. In the Ombudsman’s view, this practice does not meet the requirement in the EU transparency regulation that the EU administration handle access requests promptly. The second practice concerns EMA restricting individuals to a maximum of five requests in the chronological queue at a given time and limiting each of these requests to no more than two documents. This ‘5-2 rule’ is arbitrary and does not take account of the length, complexity, or total number of documents falling within the scope of individual requests. As a result, the Ombudsman found it to constitute maladministration. The Ombudsman noted that EMA is already taking steps to phase out the chronological queue and asked the agency to report to her on it