Lexploria - Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Lexploria beta Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Menu
Browsing history:

RUTAR AND RUTAR MARKETING D.O.O. v. SLOVENIA

Doc ref: 21164/20 • ECHR ID: 001-205155

Document date: September 17, 2020

  • Inbound citations: 0
  • Cited paragraphs: 0
  • Outbound citations: 5

RUTAR AND RUTAR MARKETING D.O.O. v. SLOVENIA

Doc ref: 21164/20 • ECHR ID: 001-205155

Document date: September 17, 2020

Cited paragraphs only

Communicated on 17 September 2020 Published on 5 October 2020

SECOND SECTION

Application no. 21164/20 Gregor RUTAR and RUTAR MARKETING d.o.o . against Slovenia lodged on 11 May 2020

SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE

The application concerns minor offence proceedings for the violation of the Consumer Protection Act, during which the applicants (the company Rutar Marketing d.o.o . and its marketing director) requested a referral to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU).

In its decision of 20 July 2018 the Market Inspectorate of the Republic of Slovenia found that the applicants had violated the relevant provisions of the Consumer Protection Act and imposed a fine on them. The applicants lodged a request for judicial review against the Inspectorate ’ s decision, in which they requested that the court seek a preliminary ruling with the CJEU. Following a short reasoning, the Nova Gorica Local Court dismissed their request for judicial review. Subsequently, the applicants lodged a constitutional complaint, which was rejected as inadmissible by the Constitutional Court.

The applicants complain that their right to a fair trial under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention had been infringed in that the Local Court had ignored their request for the case to be referred to the CJEU for a preliminary ruling.

QUESTION TO THE PARTIES

Was the decision of the Nova Gorica Local Court taken in accordance with the applicants ’ right to a fair hearing under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, in particular, in light of the principle that the domestic courts should give reasons for a decision refusing to seek a preliminary ruling from the Court of Justice of the European Union and/or given the reasoning underlying the applicants ’ request (see Sanofi Pasteur v. France , no. 25137/16, §§ 77-81, 13 February 2020; Schipani and Others v. Italy , no. 38369/09, §§ 69-72, 21 July 2015; Dhahbi v. Italy , no. 17120/09, §§ 31 ‒ 34, 8 April 2014; Vergauwen and Others v. Belgium ( dec. ), no. 4832/04, §§ 89-90, 10 April 2012; and Baydar v. the Netherlands , no. 55385/14, §§ 42-44, 24 April 2018)?

© European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2026

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant

Active Products: EUCJ + ECHR Data Package + Citation Analytics • Documents in DB: 401132 • Paragraphs parsed: 45279850 • Citations processed 3468846