法院对C-526/14 Tadej Kotnik和其他人诉Državni zbor斯洛文尼亚共和国案的判决和是否允许向金融机构提供国家援助

Polish Review of International and European Law Pub Date : 2018-10-03 DOI:10.21697/PRIEL.2017.6.2.04

Łukasz Stępkowski

{"title":"法院对C-526/14 Tadej Kotnik和其他人诉Državni zbor斯洛文尼亚共和国案的判决和是否允许向金融机构提供国家援助","authors":"Łukasz Stępkowski","doi":"10.21697/PRIEL.2017.6.2.04","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The present work explores the Court of Justice’s decision in C-526/14 Tadej Kotnik and Others, along with its background, elements that led to it and subsequent developments in EU law. The author comments on the Court’s reasoning to discover whether the case was decided meritoriously or per incuriam.","PeriodicalId":269602,"journal":{"name":"Polish Review of International and European Law","volume":"172 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Judgment of the Court of Justice in C-526/14 Tadej Kotnik and Others v. Državni zbor Republike Slovenije and permissibility of granting State aid to financial institutions\",\"authors\":\"Łukasz Stępkowski\",\"doi\":\"10.21697/PRIEL.2017.6.2.04\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The present work explores the Court of Justice’s decision in C-526/14 Tadej Kotnik and Others, along with its background, elements that led to it and subsequent developments in EU law. The author comments on the Court’s reasoning to discover whether the case was decided meritoriously or per incuriam.\",\"PeriodicalId\":269602,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Polish Review of International and European Law\",\"volume\":\"172 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-10-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Polish Review of International and European Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21697/PRIEL.2017.6.2.04\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Polish Review of International and European Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21697/PRIEL.2017.6.2.04","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

摘要

本工作探讨了法院在C-526/14 Tadej Kotnik和其他人案中的决定，以及其背景，导致该决定的因素以及随后欧盟法律的发展。发件人评论了法院的推理，以查明该案件是根据功绩判决还是根据法庭裁决。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Judgment of the Court of Justice in C-526/14 Tadej Kotnik and Others v. Državni zbor Republike Slovenije and permissibility of granting State aid to financial institutions

The present work explores the Court of Justice’s decision in C-526/14 Tadej Kotnik and Others, along with its background, elements that led to it and subsequent developments in EU law. The author comments on the Court’s reasoning to discover whether the case was decided meritoriously or per incuriam.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Polish Review of International and European Law

自引率

0.00%

发文量