{"id":3483,"date":"2016-12-06T14:32:58","date_gmt":"2016-12-06T14:32:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mgra.pt\/en\/?p=3483"},"modified":"2020-10-06T10:56:43","modified_gmt":"2020-10-06T10:56:43","slug":"case-law-november-2016","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/e-legal-blawg.com\/en\/2016\/12\/06\/case-law-november-2016\/","title":{"rendered":"CASE-LAW – November 2016"},"content":{"rendered":"

III. CASE-LAW<\/strong><\/p>\n

III.1. Court of Justice of the European Union<\/strong><\/p>\n

Judgment of the Court, of 10th November 2016, Case C-453\/15<\/strong>: Preliminary Ruling. Urgent preliminary ruling procedure. Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters. European arrest warrant. Framework Decision 2002\/584\/JAI. Article 8 n.1 (c). Concept of “arrest warrant”. Autonomous concept of EU law. National arrest warrant issued by a police service and confirmed by a public prosecutor for criminal proceedings.<\/p>\n

Summary:<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n

“The Article 8 n.1(c) of the Council Framework Decision 2002\/584\/JHA of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States, as amended by Council Framework Decision 2009\/299\/JHA of 26 February 2009, must be interpreted as meaning that a confirmation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, by the public prosecutor’s office, of a national arrest warrant issued previously by a police service in connection with criminal proceedings constitutes a ‘judicial decision’, within the meaning of that provision.”<\/p>\n

http:\/\/eur-lex.europa.eu\/legal-content\/PT\/TXT\/?qid=1480091142824&uri=CELEX:62016CJ0453<\/a><\/p>\n

Judgment of the Court, of 24th November 2016, Case C-443\/15<\/strong>: Preliminary Ruling. Equal treatment in employment and occupation. Directive 2000\/78\/EC. Article 2. Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation and age. National Pension Scheme. Payment of a survivor’s benefit to the civil partner. Condition. Partnership contracted before the 60th<\/sup> birthday of the member of the scheme. Civil partnership. Not possible in the Member State concerned before 2010. Existing stable relationship. Article 6 n. 2. Justification of differences of treatment on grounds of age.<\/p>\n

Summary:<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n

“Article 2 of Council Directive 2000\/78\/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation must be interpreted as meaning that a national rule which, in connection with an occupational benefit scheme, makes the right of surviving civil partners of members to receive a survivor’s benefit subject to the condition that the civil partnership was entered into before the member reached the age of 60, where national law did not allow the member to enter into a civil partnership before reaching that age, does not constitute discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation.”<\/p>\n

http:\/\/eur-lex.europa.eu\/legal-content\/PT\/TXT\/?qid=1480091142824&uri=CELEX:62015CJ0443<\/a><\/p>\n

III.2. Constitutional Court<\/strong><\/p>\n

Judgment No. 624\/2016, Case No. 732\/15:<\/strong> Deems unconstitutional the article 7 of the Regulation nº 17\/2002, on the public inspections by the Public Prosecutor’s Office (approved by the High Council of Public Prosecutors meeting at the 9\/01\/2002 and published on the Official Gazette, Series II, n. 49 of the 27th<\/sup> February 2002), by violating article 112 n. 7 of the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic<\/p>\n

http:\/\/www.tribunalconstitucional.pt\/tc\/acordaos\/20160624.html<\/a><\/p>\n

Judgment No. 609\/2016, Case No. 396\/16: <\/strong>The rule of the article 17 n. 1 of the attachment addition of the Decree-Law nº 296\/98, of 1th September, is deemed constitutional, insofar as the procedural steps provided by this system do not enable the raising of third party interventions.<\/p>\n

http:\/\/www.tribunalconstitucional.pt\/tc\/acordaos\/20160609.html<\/a><\/p>\n

III.3. Courts of Justice<\/strong><\/p>\n

Judgment of Coimbra’s Court of Appeal of 8th<\/sup> November 2016, Case No. 1622\/10.7TBACB-H.C2<\/strong>: <\/strong>Insolvency. Lease Agreement. Insolvency Administrator. The Report. Legal Form.<\/p>\n

http:\/\/www.dgsi.pt\/jtrc.nsf\/8fe0e606d8f56b22802576c0005637dc\/6cbd7552ebce57a98025807200579992?OpenDocument<\/a><\/p>\n

Judgment of Évora’s Court of Appeal of 3th<\/sup> November 2016, Case No. 490\/16.0T8PTG.E1<\/strong>: <\/strong>Child support past the age of majority. Jurisdiction.<\/p>\n

http:\/\/www.dgsi.pt\/jtre.nsf\/134973db04f39bf2802579bf005f080b\/691ac742e9f7a2158025806e00585827?OpenDocument<\/a><\/p>\n

III.4. Administrative and Tax Courts<\/strong><\/p>\n

Judgment of the Administrative Supreme Court, of 09th<\/sup> November 2016, Case No. <\/strong>0972\/16: <\/strong>Third-party Appeals. Attachment. Immovable property. Legal Separation. Conversion.<\/p>\n

http:\/\/www.dgsi.pt\/jsta.nsf\/35fbbbf22e1bb1e680256f8e003ea931\/b4f393b1a334adb98025806800501c87?OpenDocument<\/a><\/p>\n

Judgment of the Administrative Supreme Court, of 16th<\/sup> November 2016, Case No. <\/strong>0408\/16: <\/strong>Right of asylum. Procedural Costs.<\/p>\n

http:\/\/www.dgsi.pt\/jsta.nsf\/35fbbbf22e1bb1e680256f8e003ea931\/d294802cbb463bbb8025807300589db0?OpenDocument<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>

Partilhar este artigo<\/p>

<\/i><\/a><\/i><\/a><\/i><\/a><\/i><\/span><\/a><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":3465,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[26,33],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3483","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-e-legal-en","category-e-legal16"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/e-legal-blawg.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3483","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/e-legal-blawg.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/e-legal-blawg.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/e-legal-blawg.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/e-legal-blawg.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3483"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/e-legal-blawg.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3483\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/e-legal-blawg.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/3465"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/e-legal-blawg.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3483"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/e-legal-blawg.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3483"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/e-legal-blawg.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3483"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}