Back to EUR-Lex homepage

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search
You are here

Document 62020CN0378

Case C-378/20: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesverwaltungsgericht Oberösterreich (Austria) lodged on 11 August 2020 — Stadtapotheke E

OJ C 443, 21.12.2020, p. 3–4 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

21.12.2020   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 443/3

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesverwaltungsgericht Oberösterreich (Austria) lodged on 11 August 2020 — Stadtapotheke E

(Case C-378/20)

(2020/C 443/04)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landesverwaltungsgericht Oberösterreich

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Stadtapotheke E

Respondent authority: Bezirkshauptmannschaft Linz-Land

Other party to the proceedings: AW

Questions referred

1.

Are rules of national law that oblige a court, when taking expert evidence as required in a procedure for the award of a licence, to obtain an expert’s report from an occupational self-governing organisation whose decision-making bodies are in fact dominated mostly by members of an occupational group whose interests tend to conflict with those of the occupational group to which the applicant for the licence belongs, or — in the event that such rules are contrary to EU law — from an official expert employed by a public authority, compatible with the appearance of impartiality of that court required by Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union?

2.

Does a rule of national law that sets a projected guaranteed potential customer base — specifically at 5 500 people — which de facto cannot be verified by the courts, comply with the requirements of Articles 15 to 17 of the Charter in so far as, pursuant to those provisions, interference with such a guarantee is permissible only if the principle of proportionality is complied with?
Top