TL;DR

1. 1After a review, FranceAgriMer asked a vineyard company to repay over 889,000 euros in export aid and fines.
2. 2The vineyard company argued the court made mistakes in its decision about the repayment amount.
3. 3The appellate court rejected the company's appeal, saying their arguments were not valid, which led to further legal action.

TL;DR

1. 1A professor applied for a promotion to become a full university professor at the University of Artois.
2. 2The university denied his application, favoring another candidate, and he argued the decision lacked fairness and transparency.
3. 3The court must decide if the university violated principles of impartiality and properly evaluated both candidates.

TL;DR

1. 1Two individuals filed complaints against a veterinarian, leading to his temporary suspension for 15 months due to professional misconduct.
2. 2The veterinarian appealed the decision, arguing it was unfair and based on errors in the disciplinary process.
3. 3The court now has to decide whether to allow the veterinarian's appeal against the disciplinary decision imposed by his peers.

TL;DR

1. 1Three volunteer firefighters want the court to force their employers to apply EU work rules from 2003.
2. 2They claim their work exceeds legal limits and they deserve back pay for unpaid hours.
3. 3Their employers argue these rules don’t apply to volunteers and deny their requests.

TL;DR

1. 1A couple, M. and Mme Z..., fought against additional income tax payments and penalties from 2007 and 2008.
2. 2They argue errors were made regarding their residency status and how their income was assessed by tax authorities.
3. 3The lower court dismissed their claims, and now they want the higher court to overturn that decision.