ALERTS : UNILATERAL PRACTICE - UNDERTAKING (NOTION)

Undertaking (notion): EU Court of Justice Advocate General Masak suggests to the Court to apply the criteria established by Cisal judgment regarding the notion of undertaking in a case regarding the German Occupational Injury/ Disease insurance regime (Kattner Stahlbau / Maschinenbau - und Metall - Berufsgenossenschaft)

KEYWORDS
Reference

CJUE, Conl.AG Mazák , 18 novembre 2008, C-350/07, affaire Kattner Stahlbau GmbH contre Maschinenbau - und Metall - Berufsgenossenschaft

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. On 18 November 2008, Advocate General Mazák delivered his Opinion in Case C-350/07 Kattner Stahlbau GmbH v Maschinenbau - und Metall - Berufsgenossenschaft on a reference for a preliminary ruling from the Sächsisches Landessozialgericht (Germany), seeking a preliminary ruling in the proceedings

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers

Already Subscribed? Sign-in

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.

Read one article for free

Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.

 

This document is protected by copyright laws and international copyright treaties. Non-authorised use of this document constitutes a violation of the publisher's rights and may be punished by up to 3 years imprisonment and up to a € 300 000 fine (Art. L 335-2 Code de la Propriété Intellectuelle). Personal use of this document is authorised within the limits of Art. L 122-5 CPI and DRM protection.

PDF Version

Author

  • L’actu-concurrence (Paris)
    France 4532 contributions 1119808 visits

Quotation

Alain Ronzano, Undertaking (notion): EU Court of Justice Advocate General Masak suggests to the Court to apply the criteria established by Cisal judgment regarding the notion of undertaking in a case regarding the German Occupational Injury/ Disease insurance regime (Kattner Stahlbau / Maschinenbau - und Metall - Berufsgenossenschaft) , 18 November 2008, Concurrences N° 1-2009, Art. N° 53709, www.concurrences.com

Visites 89

All reviews