Which case held that regulations and decisions have direct effect?

Which case held that tax authorities are a state emanation?

Which case held that directive cannot have horizontal effect?

Which case held that indirect effect can operate horizontally?

Which case held that national courts are not required to interpret national law contra legum?

Which case held that incorrect transposition of a directive was a sufficiently serious breach as defined by Brasserie?

Which case defined CEEs as a 'pecuniary charge, however small'?

Which case defined a tax?

Which case first outlined the test for similar products?

Which case defined indirect discrimination under A110(1)?

Which case outlined the criteria which may justify an indirectly discriminatory tax?

In which case was it held that a tax will not be held to have a protective effect (under A110(2)) if the price of one of the goods is so high that the tax level has no effect?

Which directive distinguished between Distinctly and Indistinctly applicable MEQRS?

Which case demonstrates that a quota is a QR?

Which case concerned the restricting of distribution channels - a distinct MEQR?

In which case was a public security A36 derogation NOT found regarding the exlcusive marketing of oil products?

Which case held that if scientific evidence is inconclusive, the CJ will allow MS to decide the degree of health protection required?

Which case concerned protests on an Austrian highway?

Which of these cases concerned a ban on television advertising aimed at children in Sweden which was held not to be a selling arrangement?

Which of these cases is the case authority for the application of A2(2)(b) D2004 38?

Which of these is an example of A45(2) direct discrimination concerning FMP?

In which case was a discretionary childbirth loan held to be a 'social advantage'?

Which case held that for a worker to be deported he/she must pose a threat to 'one of the fundamental interests of society'?

Which case defined the public service as posts involving the 'exercise of power conferred by public law'?

Which case held the A157 was directly effective?

Which case held that indirect discrimination can be 'objectively justified'?

Which case defined 'objectively justified' (regarding indirect sex discrimination)?

Which case held that an employer's contributions to a pension scheme are 'pay' under A157?

Which case held that special travel facilities are 'pay'?

Which case held that a complete prohibition on night work by woman but not by men was not permissible?

Which case held that A49 is directly effective?

Which case est the rule of reason for freedom of establishment?

Case which defined an obstacle to freedom of establishment?

Which case est that MS must follow any Directive setting out professional standards and ignore their own national standards?

Which case concerned a British lawyer practicing in Luxembourg?

Which case est the A49 can have horizontal effect?

Which cases held that a company does not need to reform itself if it were to move its principal place of business to a MS employing the Real Seat Doctrine?

Which case held that computer services for the lottery did not constitute official authority under A51?

Which case held that the provider and recipient of a service do not have to be in different MS for there to be a cross-border element?

Which case recognised operating a business as an A56 right?

Which case est the rule of reason for the provision of services?

Which case held that education was not a service?

Which case defined an 'undertaking'?

Which case held that gentlemen's agreements are within the definition of an agreement?

Which case held that A101(1) can be applied horizontally?

In which case was North West Germany found to be a 'substantial part' of the EU?

What was the name of the port in the Sealink case?

Which case defined 'excessive' in the context of high prices as demonstrating market dominance?

In which case did a company with a 50%+ market share engage in predatory pricing?

Grenoble used to be known as what?