• Judgment of 26 February 2019, Œuvre d’assistance aux bêtes d’abattoirs, C-497/17

In a case regarding the consistency with EU law of the use of the European ‘organic farming’ label in relation to products derived from animals which have been slaughtered in accordance with religious rites without first being stunned, the Court of Justice held that that practice fails to observe the highest animal welfare standards. It therefore held that rules of EU law did not authorise the placing of the organic production logo of the European Union on products derived from animals slaughtered in that fashion.

Link to the judgment

  • Judgment of 27 March 2019, slewo, C-681/17

In a case concerning online shopping, the Court of Justice held that the consumer’s right of withdrawal also applies to the purchase of a mattress, even once its protective film has been removed after delivery. As in the case of garments, it may be presumed that the trader is in a position to make the mattress, by means of cleaning or disinfection, suitable for resale, without prejudice to the requirements of health protection or hygiene. The consumer is, however, liable for any diminished value of the goods resulting from handling other than that necessary in order to establish the nature, characteristics and functioning of the goods.

Link to the judgment

  • Judgment of 4 April 2019, Germanwings, C-501/17

The Court of Justice held that an air carrier is required to compensate passengers for a delay of three hours or more even if the delay results from damage to a tyre caused by a screw lying on the runway. However, the carrier is only required to pay compensation where it is proved that it failed to deploy all means at its disposal for limiting the delay of the flight.

Link to the judgment

  • Judgment of 18 June 2019, Austria v Germany, C-591/17

From 2015, Germany has put in place a legal framework for the introduction of a charge for the use by passenger vehicles of federal roads, including motorways. Every owner of a vehicle registered in Germany would have to pay that charge, in the form of an annual vignette. For vehicles registered abroad, the charge would have to be paid only if motorways were used. In parallel, Germany provided that owners of vehicles registered in Germany would qualify for relief from the tax to an amount that is at least equivalent to the amount of the charge paid. The Court of Justice concluded that the economic burden of the charge would fall, de facto, solely on the owners and drivers of vehicles registered in other Member States. It therefore considered that the charge was discriminatory and thus contrary to EU law.

Link to the judgment

  • Judgment of 10 July 2019, Amazon EU, C-649/17

In a case involving e-commerce, the Court of Justice found that a platform such as Amazon is not obliged in all cases to make a telephone number available to consumers before the conclusion of a contract. However, EU law does require such a platform to provide those consumers with a means of communication allowing them to contact it quickly and to communicate with it efficiently (such as an electronic contact form, instant messaging or telephone call-back).

Link to the judgment

  • Judgment of 11 July 2019, České aerolinie, C-502/18

In the case of a connecting flight that is the subject of a single reservation departing from a Member State to a non-Member State via another non-Member State, the Court of Justice ruled that the air carrier that performed the first flight is obliged to pay compensation to passengers who suffered a long delay in the arrival of the second flight performed by an air carrier established outside the European Union. It held that passengers who suffered a delay of three hours or more in reaching their final destination, the cause of which was attributable to the second flight, operated under a code-share agreement by a carrier established in a non-Member State, could claim compensation under EU law from the EU air carrier that operated the first flight.

Link to the judgment

  • Judgment of 5 September 2019, Verein für Konsumenteninformation, C-28/18

In a case concerning payment for train tickets by direct debit, the Court of Justice found to be contrary to EU law a contractual clause included in the general conditions of carriage of the German rail transport company Deutsche Bahn, according to which users could avail themselves of the SEPA direct debit scheme only if they were resident in Germany. The condition of residence in the national territory indirectly amounts to indicating the Member State in which the payment account must be situated, which the payee is expressly prohibited from doing.

 Link to the judgment


Extracts from the Annual Report of the Court of Justice of the European Union. „The Year in Review “ 2019.