Skip to content

GlobalLawDBby GenieAI

Laws Search Sanctions Map Data Developers

Search the text of the law

Log in Get an API key

Laws Search Sanctions Map Data Developers

Log in Get an API key

The Global Law Database. Free to read, built for people and AI agents.

Explore

All laws
Search the text
Sanctions
Map of connections
Compare UK and EU

Developers

AI agents (MCP)
REST API
Bulk data
API keys

Coverage

United Kingdom
European Union
United States
Canada
Australia
France
Germany
Netherlands
Spain
Austria
Norway
Finland
Switzerland
Ireland

GlobalLawDB is made by GenieAI, London. It is not legal advice: check the official text before relying on it. Text comes from official publishers under their licences, listed on the Data page.

ThemeMatch my systemLightDark

European Union
European Commission v Kingdom of the Netherlands (C-279/08 P)
Judgment
The procedure before the General Court…
9

European Commission v Kingdom of the Netherlands (C-279/08 P)

Judgment of 8 Sept 2011law://eu/cjeu/2008/c-279-08/para_9@2026-11-11

9By order of 8 June 2004, the Court referred the case to the General Court pursuant to Council Decision 2004/407/EC, Euratom of 26 April 2004 amending Articles 51 and 54 of the Protocol on the Statute of the Court of Justice (OJ 2004 L 132, p. 5).

Source: EUR-Lex, © European Union, 1998-2026. Reuse authorised under Decision 2011/833/EU.

Key facts

Court: Court of Justice · Third Chamber
Case: C-279/08 P · ECLI:EU:C:2011:551
Decided: 8 Sept 2011
Procedure: Action for annulment
Ruled invalid: 62004TJ0233
Applicant: European Commission
Rapporteur: G. Arestis
Advocate General: P. Mengozzi
Bench: 5 judges
K. Lenaerts, R. Silva de Lapuerta, E. Juhász, G. Arestis, J. Malenovský
Language: Dutch
Official: CURIA · EUR-Lex 62008CJ0279

Topics

History · 1 version

8 Sept 2011Reading

Connections

Interprets 1: Kingdom of the Netherlands v Commission of the European Communities (T-233/04)
Cited by 20: Roberto Passalacqua v European Commission (C-309/24); Ryanair DAC v European Commission (T-458/22); Ryanair DAC v European Commission (T-743/21); Autorità di Regolazione per Energia Reti e Ambiente (ARERA) v Fallimento Esperia spa and Gestore dei Servizi Energetici SpA - GSE (C-558/22); Scandlines Danmark ApS and Scandlines Deutschland GmbH v European Commission (T-7/19); Kopřiva - Horák v. o. s. v European Commission (T-731/21); PNB Banka AS and Others v Single Resolution Board (T-732/19); Ryanair DAC v European Commission (T-769/20); Ryanair DAC v European Commission (T-14/21); European Commission and Interessengemeinschaft der Grenzhändler (IGG) v Dansk Erhverv (C-508/21 P)3 provisions; Ryanair DAC v European Commission (T-268/21); Ryanair DAC and Condor Flugdienst GmbH v European Commission (T-34/21); Wizz Air Hungary Légiközlekedési Zrt. (Wizz Air Hungary Zrt.) v European Commission (T-142/21); Kingdom of the Netherlands v European Commission (T-469/20)2 provisions; European Dynamics Luxembourg SA v European Central Bank (T-761/20); Ryanair DAC v European Commission (T-657/20); Ryanair DAC v European Commission (T-577/20); Ryanair DAC v European Commission (T-665/20); Dansk Erhverv v European Commission (T-47/19)3 provisions; Ryanair DAC v European Commission (T-465/20)
Cites 21: Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (consolidated 2016)5 provisions; PreussenElektra AG v Schhleswag AG, in the presence of Windpark Reußenköge III GmbH and Land Schleswig-Holstein (C-379/98); Italian Republic v Commission of the European Communities (C-310/99); Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22 March 1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty; Comité des industries du coton et des fibres connexes de l'Union européenne (Eurocoton) and Others v Council of the European Union (C-76/01 P); Chronopost SA and La Poste v Union française de l’express (UFEX) and Others (C-341/06); Trubowest Handel GmbH and Viktor Makarov v Council of the European Union and European Commission (C-419/08); Kingdom of Belgium v Commission of the European Communities (C-75/97); Federal Republic of Germany v Commission of the European Communities (C-156/98); British Aggregates Association v Commission of the European Communities and United Kingdom (C-487/06); Italian Republic v Commission of the European Communities (C-66/02); Kingdom of the Netherlands v Commission of the European Communities (C-164/02); Comitato «Venezia vuole vivere», Hotel Cipriani Srl and Società Italiana per il gas SpA (Italgas) v European Commission (C-71/09 P, C-73/09 P, C-76/09 P); European Commission v Kronoply GmbH & Co. KG and Kronotex GmbH & Co. KG (C-83/09 P); Kingdom of the Netherlands v Commission of the European Communities (C-159/01); European Commission v Deutsche Post AG (C-399/08 P); Adria-Wien Pipeline GmbH and Wietersdorfer & Peggauer Zementwerke GmbH v Finanzlandesdirektion für Kärnten (C-143/99); French Republic v Commission of the European Communities (C-482/99); Kingdom of Spain v Commission of the European Communities (C-409/00); Industrie Aeronautiche e Meccaniche Rinaldo Piaggio SpA v International Factors Italia SpA (Ifitalia), Dornier Luftfahrt GmbH and Ministero della Difesa (C-295/97); Altmark Trans GmbH and Regierungspräsidium Magdeburg v Nahverkehrsgesellschaft Altmark GmbH, and Oberbundesanwalt beim Bundesverwaltungsgericht (C-280/00)