Search results

DECISIONS D A T U M 2 4 . 0 3 . 2 0 2 2 BUSINESS NUMBER W 2 5 3 2 2 2 6 2 6 1 - 1/8 E I M N A M E N D E R E P U B L I K ! The Federal Administrative Court has

place in disregard of the suspensive effect of an appeal, 29 cf. on this: W.-R. Schenke in: Kopp/Schenke, VwGO, 27th edition 2021, § 80 Rdn. 20. 30 This

rule, were only displayed in full to employees who worked with them (e.g. W, S, Receivables Management), while only the last four digits of the IBAN were

yet been conclusively clarified by case law (cf. Sesing MMR 2021, 544, 547 m.w.N. ). In the event of a dispute, the question of such a requirement of equivalence

[residence], APPLICANT for cassation, hereinafter: [person involved], lawyer: H.J.W. alto, against GOOGLE LLC, based in Mountain View, California, United States

in the case between [plaintiff] , in Amstelveen, plaintiff (Agents: mr. E.W.S. Peperkamp, mr. S.E.A. Vermeer-de Jongh and mr. G.N.N. camp house), and Dutch

April 15, 2021 at the litigation secretariat of the Council of State, Ms. W ... A ..., Mr. AA ... U ... and Mrs Y ... O ... ask the Council of State: 1

lawyer's salary. This decision was made by Mrs. H.J. van Kooten, R.S. van Coevorden and R.W. Polak, and was pronounced in open court on 14 December 2021 in

</script><script> (function(i,s,o,g,r,a,m){i['GoogleAnalyticsObject']=r;i[r]=i[r]||function(){ (i[r].q=i[r].q||[]).push(arguments)},i[r].l=1*new Date();a=s.createElement(o)

as: [defendant] , authorized representatives: mr. O.A. Sleeking and mr. A.W.D. lensink. 1. The process 1.1. The course of the procedure follows from the

statement was made by mr. L.M. Reijnierse, judge, in the presence of mr. E.H.W. Schierbeek, clerk. The decision was pronounced on November 10, 2020 and will

November 26, 2020, GZ 3 R 128 / 20v-15 , with which the judgment of the Salzburg Regional Court of August 14, 2020, GZ 4 Cg 67 / 19w-9, was partially amended

refers to the judgment of the Federal Fiscal Court of October 28, 2009 (VIII R 78/05) and the ruling of the Bavarian State Office for Taxes of March 28, 2020

telephone (video) connection. The agents of defendants J. Stoffels (Roerdalen), R. Timmers (Valkenburg aan de Geul), M. Orasanin (Vaals) and Mr. A.A.C.M. Gidding-Baade

Bodewits), and the Dutch Data Protection Authority, defendant (attorneys: mr. W. van Steenbergen and mr. E Nijhof). Procedure By decision of 23 September 2019

operates in Belgium, and the complainant has been a senior executive of Company W for some time. years, i.e. a company that is closely related to Company Z.

business number W245 2252208-1/36E W245 2252221-1/30E Written copy of the verbal decision announced on March 31, 2023 I M N A M E N D E R E P U B L I K 

of 26 January 2006, p. 1). July 2017 - RiZ (R) 3/16 -, juris marginal no. 15 and of 16 March 2005 - RiZ (R) 2/04 -, juris marginal no. 20; VG Potsdam,

represented by his counsel Mr. Dr. Jan-Henning Strunz, Matray, Matray & Hallet, s.c.r.l, rue des Fories, 2, 4020 Liège, hereinafter “the plaintiff” The defendant:

DECISIONS D A T U M 2 9 . 0 4 . 2 0 2 2 BUSINESS NUMBER W 2 5 8 2 2 4 7 0 2 8 - 1 / 1 1 E I M N A M E N D E R E P U B L I K ! The Federal Administrative Court