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
Proceedings brought by Polbud - Wykonawstwo sp. z o.o (C-106/16)
Consideration of the questions referred
Preliminary observations
26

Proceedings brought by Polbud - Wykonawstwo sp. z o.o (C-106/16)

Judgment of 25 Oct 2017law://eu/cjeu/2016/c-106-16/para_26@2026-11-10

26At the outset, it must be observed that the questions referred for a preliminary ruling are based on the premiss, which Polbud disputes, that Polbud did not intend to transfer its real head office to Luxembourg.

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

Key facts

Court: Court of Justice · Grand Chamber
Case: C-106/16 · ECLI:EU:C:2017:804
Decided: 25 Oct 2017
Procedure: Preliminary reference · referred by the Sąd Najwyższy (Supreme Court, Poland)
Rapporteur: K. Jürimäe
Advocate General: Kokott
Bench: 12 judges
K. Lenaerts, A. Tizzano, T. von Danwitz, J. L. da Cruz Vilaça, A. Rosas, J. Malenovský, E. Levits, E. Juhász, A. Borg Barthet, D. Šváby M. Berger, K. Jürimäe, M. Vilaras
Language: Polish
Official: CURIA · EUR-Lex 62016CJ0106

Topics

Freedom of establishment

History · 1 version

25 Oct 2017Reading

Connections

Interprets 1: Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (consolidated 2016)3 provisions
Cited by 23: Repubblika v Il-Prim Ministru (C-896/19); European Commission v Hungary (C-66/18); Maximilian Schrems v Meta Platforms Ireland Limited (C-446/21); Acacia Srl v Pneusgarda Srl and Audi AG and Acacia Srl and Rolando D'Amato v Dr. Ing. h.c.F. Porsche AG (C-397/16, C-435/16); Skatteministeriet v T Danmark and Y Denmark Aps (C-116/16, C-117/16); Associação Peço a Palavra and Others v Conselho de Ministros (C-563/17); Edil Work 2 Srl. and S.T. Srl v STE Sàrl (C-276/22); Public.Resource.Org, Inc. and Right to Know CLG v European Commission (C-588/21 P); Finanzamt R v W-GmbH (C-98/21); HJ v Ministerstvo práce a sociálních věcí (C-101/21); M. A. v État belge (C-112/20); Vivendi SA v Autorità per le Garanzie nelle Comunicazioni (C-719/18); Foundation for the Protection of the Traditional Cheese of Cyprus named Halloumi v European Union Intellectual Property Office (C-766/18 P); Köln-Aktienfonds Deka v Staatssecretaris van Financiën (C-156/17); Consorzio Tutela Aceto Balsamico di Modena v Balema GmbH (C-432/18); College Pension Plan of British Columbia v Finanzamt München Abteilung III (C-641/17); N Luxembourg 1 and Others v Skatteministeriet (C-115/16, C-118/16, C-119/16, C-299/16); MEO – Serviços de Comunicações e Multimédia SA v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira (C-295/17); Carrefour Hypermarchés SAS and Others v Ministre des Finances et des Comptes publics (C-510/16)2 provisions; Fidelity Funds and Others v Skatteministeriet (C-480/16); Bruno Dell'Acqua v Eurocom Srl and Regione Lombardia (C-370/16); K.A. and Others v Belgische Staat (C-82/16); Slowakische Republik v Achmea BV (C-284/16)
Cites 12: Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (consolidated 2016)4 provisions; Peter Gauweiler and Others v Deutscher Bundestag (C-62/14); Anonymi Geniki Etairia Tsimenton Iraklis (AGET Iraklis) v Ypourgos Ergasias, Koinonikis Asfalisis kai Koinonikis Allilengyis (C-201/15); CARTESIO Oktató és Szolgáltató bt (C-210/06); National Grid Indus BV v Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst Rijnmond/kantoor Rotterdam (C-371/10); The Queen v H. M. Treasury and Commissioners of Inland Revenue, ex parte Daily Mail and General Trust plc (81/87); Request for a preliminary ruling from Landgericht Koblenz (C-411/03); VALE Építési kft (C-378/10); Opinion of the Advocate General (C-106/16); Damijan Vnuk v Zavarovalnica Triglav d.d (C-162/13); Kamer van Koophandel en Fabrieken voor Amsterdam v Inspire Art Ltd (C-167/01); Centros Ltd v Erhvervs- og Selskabsstyrelsen (C-212/97)