Išči

Sodna praksa Sodišča EU, lastni članki, spremembe davčne zakonodaje....

Izbrani prispeveki - novice o davkih pri nas in v EU - NEWS about TAXES

V družbi TAXIN d.o.o. (mag. Franc Derganc), partnerici Mreže Modro Poslovanje preučujemo davčno-pravna in druga poslovno-pravna vprašanja na podlagi študija sodne prakse Sodišča EU in slovenskih sodišč, preučevati moramo pravne predpise EU in domače pravne predpise ter spremljamo "potrebe" strank - podjetij, ki delujejo v Republiki Sloveniji ter na t.i. mednarodnih trgih. 


Mreža modro poslovanje, na dnevnem nivoju, spremlja spremembe iz spodaj navedenih baz podatkov.

    The partners (TAXIN d.o.o.) of the Wisdom Business Network study tax, legal and other business-legal issues based on the study of the case law of the Court of Justice of the EU and Slovenian courts, they must study EU legal regulations and domestic legal regulations, and they must monitor the needs of customers - companies that operate in the Republic of Slovenia and operate also on the so-called international markets.

The Wisdom business network monitors changes from the databases listed below on a daily basis.


 

CELEX:62024TJ0197_INF: Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 26 February 2025.#eBilet Polska sp. z o.o. v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#EU trade mark – Application for EU figurative mark eBilet – Absolute ground for refusal – Descriptive nature – Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001.#Case T-197/24.

July 31, 2025 0 Comments

CELEX:62020TJ0270: Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 19 October 2022.#JS v Single Resolution Board.#Civil service – Members of the temporary staff – Appraisal report – 2018 appraisal exercise – Manifest error of assessment – Principle of impartiality – Right to a fair hearing – Article 26 of the Staff Regulations – Duty to have regard for the welfare of staff – Liability.#Case T-270/20.

July 31, 2025 0 Comments

CELEX:62022TJ0249_INF: Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 5 March 2025.#Alexander Ponomarenko v Council of the European Union.#Case T-249/22.

July 31, 2025 0 Comments

CELEX:62024TJ0089_INF: Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 5 March 2025.#Kapitan Navi Elżbieta Stramek i Waldemar Karpiński sp.j. v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#EU trade mark – Invalidity proceedings – EU word mark Matjesfilethappen nach ‘Kolberger Art’ – Absolute grounds for invalidity – No distinctive character – Descriptive character – No distinctive character acquired through use – Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001.#Case T-89/24.

July 31, 2025 0 Comments

CELEX:62021TJ0664:           Arrêt du Tribunal (huitième chambre) du 6 juillet 2022.#YF contre Agence européenne de contrôle des pêches.#Fonction publique – Agents temporaires – Contrat à durée indéterminée – Résiliation du contrat – Insuffisance professionnelle – Erreur manifeste d’appréciation – Principe de bonne administration.#Affaire T-664/21.

This document does not exist in English.
July 31, 2025 0 Comments

CELEX:62020TJ0271: Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 19 October 2022.#JS v Single Resolution Board.#Civil service – Members of the temporary staff – Time limit for complaints – Admissibility – Psychological harassment – Article 12a of the Staff Regulations – Request for assistance – Article 24 of the Staff Regulations – Rejection of the request – Absence of prima facie evidence – Duty to have regard for the welfare of staff – Liability.#Case T-271/20.

July 31, 2025 0 Comments

CELEX:62024TO0595(01)_INF: Order of the President of the General Court of 27 February 2025.#Capgemini España, SL and UniSystems Luxembourg Sàrl v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#Case T-595/24 R.

July 31, 2025 0 Comments

CELEX:62024TJ0090_INF: Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 5 March 2025.#Kapitan Navi Elżbieta Stramek i Waldemar Karpiński sp.j. v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#EU trade mark – Invalidity proceedings – EU word mark Matjeshappen nach ‘Kolberger Art’ – Absolute grounds for invalidity – No distinctive character – Descriptive character – No distinctive character acquired through use – Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001).#Case T-90/24.

July 31, 2025 0 Comments

CELEX:62024TJ0026_INF: Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 5 March 2025.#Funline International Corp. v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#EU trade mark – Revocation proceedings – EU word mark JUNGLE JUICE – Lack of genuine use of the mark – Article 58(1)(a) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Action for annulment – Representation by a lawyer – Admissibility.#Case T-26/24.

July 31, 2025 0 Comments

CELEX:62021TJ0217:           Arrêt du Tribunal (huitième chambre) du 7 septembre 2022.#SB contre Agence de l'Union européenne pour la gestion opérationnelle des systèmes d’information à grande échelle au sein de l’espace de liberté, de sécurité et de justice.#Fonction publique – Agents contractuels – Personnel de l’eu-LISA – Décision de licenciement à l’issue de la période de stage – Obligation de motivation – Conditions normales de stage – Droit d’être entendu – Irrégularités procédurales – Devoir de sollicitude – Erreur manifeste d’appréciation – Principe de bonne administration.#Affaire T-217/21.

This document does not exist in English.
July 31, 2025 0 Comments

CELEX:62023TJ1187_INF: Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 5 March 2025.#Funline International Corp. v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#EU trade mark – Revocation proceedings – EU word mark AMSTERDAM POPPERS – Lack of genuine use of the mark – Article 58(1)(a) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Action for annulment – Representation by a lawyer – Admissibility.#Case T-1187/23.

July 31, 2025 0 Comments

CELEX:62023TJ1066_INF: Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 26 February 2025.#Schweppes International Ltd v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#EU trade mark – Invalidity proceedings – EU figurative marks MAY TEA – International registration of the earlier figurative marks МАЙСКИЙ – International registration of the earlier word mark МАЙСКИЙ ЧАЙ – Relative ground for invalidity – No likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) and Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) and Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001).#Joined Cases T-1066/23 to T-1069/23.

July 31, 2025 0 Comments

CELEX:62023TJ1106_INF: Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 29 January 2025.#Alexander Semenovich Vinokurov v Council of the European Union.#Case T-1106/23.

July 31, 2025 0 Comments

CELEX:62022TJ0748_INF: Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 15 January 2025.#Viatcheslav Moshe Kantor v Council of the European Union.#Case T-748/22.

July 31, 2025 0 Comments

CELEX:62024TJ0073_INF: Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 5 March 2025.#Victor Waskito Purwana v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#EU trade mark – International registration designating the European Union – Figurative mark EAST INDIES GIN – Absolute ground for refusal – Descriptive character – Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001.#Case T-73/24.

July 31, 2025 0 Comments

CELEX:62022TJ0607_INF: Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 18 September 2024.#Andrey Anatolyevich Kozitsyn v Council of the European Union.#Joined Cases T-607/22 and T-731/22.

July 31, 2025 0 Comments

CELEX:62022TJ0497_INF: Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 11 September 2024.#Marina Alexandrova Mordashova v Council of the European Union.#Case T-497/22.

July 31, 2025 0 Comments

UPRS Delna sodba in sklep I U 1854/2019-56

Tožnikov pravni položaj, relevanten za odmero obresti, je bil zaključen z izdajo izpodbijane odločbe, kar pa je že v času, ko se uporablja novela ZDavP-2J, zato že pojmovno z odmero obresti ni moglo priti do posega v pridobljene pravice. V tožnikovi zadevi bi tako lahko šlo zgolj za nepravo retroaktivnost, ki pa se ne presoja po 155. členu Ustave, temveč z vidika načela pravne države in načela zaupanja v pravo (2. člen Ustave). Novela ZDavP-2J pa ni posegla v tožnikov zaključen pravni položaj, posegla je zgolj v njegovo pričakovanje, da zakonodajalec ne bo spremenil obrestne mere, po kateri se bodo obrestovale njegove davčne obveznosti oz. v pričakovanje, da če bo do spremembe obresti prišlo, da bo nova obrestna mera veljala šele za čas od spremembe dalje. Neodvisno od presoje, ali gre v obravnavani zadevi za pričakovanje ali za pričakovano pravico, sodišče sodi, da obračun višjih obresti za celotno obdobje obrestovanja, čeprav se je obrestna...
July 31, 2025 0 Comments

UPRS Sodba II U 195/2022-15

Stroški tistih davčnih zavezancev, ki so prejeti od tujega delodajalca v zvezi z delom, morajo biti obravnavani enako kot vsebinsko primerljivi stroški davčnih zavezancev, prejeti od slovenskega delodajalca po splošni določbi 44. člena ZDoh-2. Če je glede na okoliščine posameznega primera ugotovljeno, da delavec ni bil le na službenem potovanju v tujini, pač pa je po pogodbi o zaposlitvi njegovo delovno mesto dejansko v tujini (npr. v poslovni enoti njegovega delodajalca ali pri njegovih pogodbenih partnerjih v drugi državi), delavec do dnevnic ni upravičen. Navedeno pomeni, da se navedena izplačila (ne glede na svoje poimenovanje) ne morejo obravnavati kot neobdavčen del dohodka, ki se ne všteva v davčno osnovo, ampak se morajo obravnavati kot del dohodka iz naslova zaposlitve, ki ga je treba všteti v osnovo za odmero dohodnine. Na predložitev pogodbe o zaposlitvi, ki je ključna za to, da se v obravnavani zadevi ugotovi narava oziroma vsebina...
July 31, 2025 0 Comments

UPRS Sodba I U 788/2024-15

Upoštevaje stališča SEU po presoji tega sodišča drugostopenjski davčni organ v tožnikovem primeru, glede na to, da se je tožnik smel na poziv prvostopenjskega organa za predložitev dodatne dokumentacije odzvati tudi še po poteku enomesečnega roka in tudi šele s pritožbo, ne bi smel izhajati iz tega, da je tožnik s podajo dokaznih predlogov prekludiran (in po tretjem odstavku 238. člena ZUP preverjati upravičenosti razlogov, ki so tožnika vodili do takšne zamude), temveč bi bilo treba, izhajajoč iz neprekluzivnosti roka iz 74.e člena ZDVV-1, upoštevati pravočasnost predložitve teh dokazov.
July 31, 2025 0 Comments
RSS
1345678910Last