Link:

Languages available:

Judgment of the Court in Case C-163/21 | PACCAR and Others

The disclosure of ‘relevant evidence’, within the meaning of EU law, includes documents that a party may be required to create by compiling or classifying information, knowledge or data in its possession

In accordance with the principle of proportionality, the national courts must, however, take into account the appropriateness of the workload and the cost that the creation of such documents may entail

Directive 2014/104 1 aims to facilitate the private enforcement of EU competition rules by means of, inter alia, rules on the disclosure of evidence before national courts in disputes seeking compensation for damages suffered as a result of conduct contrary to EU competition law. 

(...)

El Defensor del Pueblo andaluz, Jesús Maeztu, ha mantenido hoy una reunión institucional con el alcalde de Jaén, Julio Millán, en la que han abordado las principales preocupaciones de la ciudadanía de la capital jiennense.

El Defensor ha destacado temas que son transversales al resto de la comunidad autónoma, como son la salud, los cortes de luz, la falta de presencialidad en las citas, o las ayudas de subsistencia y para mantener una vivienda. Al mismo tiempo Jesús Maeztu ha resaltado el valor de "tratar las preocupaciones en los lugares que suceden".

El Defensor del Pueblo, Ángel Gabilondo, ha asistido este jueves a la toma de posesión de Magdalena Valerio como nueva presidenta del Consejo de Estado.

El acto ha estado presidido por el ministro de Presidencia, Félix Bolaños.

Magdalena Valerio sustituye en el cargo a Mª Teresa Fernández de la Vega, que ha permanecido cuatro años al frente de esta institución.

El Consejo de Estado es el máximo órgano consultivo del Gobierno de España, tiene relevancia Constitucional y basa su actividad en la reflexión, el diálogo y la excelencia jurídica a la hora de emitir los dictámenes, mociones, informes y propuestas de reforma que le consulta el Gobierno u otros organismos previstos en la Ley Orgánica que lo regula.

After the launching of the control investigation by the Protector of Citizens, the Secretariat for Education and Child Care of the City Administration of the City of Belgrade enabled a child to use the service of a personal companion, who had the right to do so in the opinion of the Commission for assessing the need for providing additional educational, health and social support.

Following the complaint of the mother of the child who was not allowed to use this service and who was put on the waiting list, the Protector of Citizens launched an investigation to control the regularity and legality of work of the competent city secretariat.

As part of the investigation, the Protector of Citizens established that in October 2021, the child's mother submitted a request to the City Centre for Social Work in Belgrade – New Belgrade Department for the provision of the service of personal companion for the child, and that a month later, the Humanitarian Organization "Child’s Heart" from of Belgrade, as a licensed and authorized provider of this service, informed this authority that the current capacities are full and that the child is enrolled on the waiting list.

The Protector of Citizens also established that at the end of June 2022, the City Centre sent an urgent request to the organization "Child’s Heart" for the provision of the service of a personal companion for the child, as a priority, after which the waiting list was updated and the position of the complainant’s child was changed because another child stopped using this service as of 1 August 2022.

The Protector of Citizens was informed that the procedure for the inclusion of the complainant's child in the child's personal companion service is in progress, thereby meeting the legal conditions for the suspension of the investigation against the competent city secretariat.

Les faits

Mme K. a quitté son logement en avril 2018 et a fait confiance au propriétaire de ce logement qui lui avait promis d’effectuer le changement d’usager au plus vite auprès de la SWDE.

Malheureusement, celui-ci n’a signalé le changement qu’en février 2020 en continuant, entretemps, à consommer l’eau de ce logement, consommation facturée à Mme K. qui se retrouve avec une facture d’un montant de plus de 3400 €, malgré la production d'un certificat de résidence.

Mme K. conteste cette facture auprès de la SWDE, laquelle lui confirme que le montant est clairement dû.

L’intervention du Médiateur

Mme K. n’est pas d’accord et interpelle le Médiateur, lequel demande à la SWDE de ne facturer à Mme K. que la période d’occupation de ce logement, d’autant que l’article 44 du RGDE laisse au propriétaire un délai de trente jours pour signaler le changement d’usager, obligation non
respectée.

De plus, à défaut de connaître l’index exact à la date du départ, le Médiateur souhaite que la SWDE estime cet index en fonction de la consommation habituelle de la réclamante.

L’issue de la médiation

La SWDE accepte la proposition du Médiateur et établit une nouvelle clôture de compte au 27.04.2018 (date du Registre National) basée sur un index estimé à cette même date.