ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
1.

Annuls Article 1(1), read in conjunction with Annex I, Tables 1 and 2, columns D and I, of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2019/583 of 3 April 2019 confirming or amending the provisional calculation of the average specific emissions of CO2 and the specific emissions targets for manufacturers of passenger cars for the calendar year 2017 and for certain manufacturers belonging to the Volkswagen pool for the calendar years 2014, 2015 and 2016 pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 443/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council, in so far as it specifies, in relation to Daimler AG, the average specific emissions of CO2 through CO2 savings achieved through eco-innovations;
Judgment of the General Court of 1 September 2021 — Homoki v Commission

(Case T-517/19) (1)

(Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Final report of the OLAF investigation into the implementation of a street-lighting investment project in Hungary - Refusal to grant access - Exception relating to the protection of the purpose of inspections, investigations and audits - Exception relating to the protection of the commercial interests of a third party - Exception relating to the protection of privacy and the integrity of the individual - Protection of personal data)

(2021/C 422/15)

Language of the case: Hungarian

Parties

Applicant: Andrea Homoki (Budapest, Hungary) (represented by: T. Hüttl, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Béres and A. Spina, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of the decision of the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) of 22 May 2019 rejecting a confirmatory application for access to documents in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ 2001 L 145, p. 43).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Decision No OCM(2019)11506 of the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) of 22 May 2019, in so far as it refused to grant access to the final report of the OLAF investigation in Case No OF/2015/0034/B4, with any personal data concerning witnesses, internal notes and references to OLAF’s methods redacted;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders the Commission to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 328, 30.9.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 24 November 2021 — Foz v Council

(Case T-258/19) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted against Syria - Freezing of funds - Error of assessment - Proportionality - Right to property - Right to pursue an economic activity - Misuse of powers - Obligation to state reasons - Rights of the defence - Right to a fair trial)

(2022/C 37/35)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Samer Foz (Dubai, United Arab Emirates) (represented by: L. Cloquet and J.P. Buyle, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: S. Kyriakopoulou and V. Piessevaux, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Council Implementing Decision (CFSP) 2019/87 of 21 January 2019 implementing Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2019 L 18 I, p. 13), of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/85 of 21 January 2019 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2019 L 18 I, p. 4), of Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/806 of 17 May 2019 amending Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2019 L 132, p. 36), of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/798 of 17 May 2019 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2019 L 132, p. 1), of Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/719 of 28 May 2020 amending Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2020 L 168, p. 66), and of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/716 of 28 May 2020 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2020 L 168, p. 1) in so far as those acts concern the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Samer Foz to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 238, 15.7.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 13 October 2021 — European Union Copper Task Force v Commission

(Case T-153/19) (1)

(Plant protection products - Active substance ‘copper compounds’ - Renewal of approval for placing on the market - Candidates for substitution - Action for annulment - Admissibility - Associations - Proportionality - Precautionary principle - Manifest error of assessment - Expert’s report)

(2021/C 490/31)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: European Union Copper Task Force (Springfield, United Kingdom) (represented by: I. Moreno-Tapia Rivas and C. Vila Gisbert, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Castilla Contreras and I. Naglis, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: European Parliament (represented by: L. Stefani, C. Ionescu Dima and A. Tamás, acting as Agents), Council of the European Union (represented by: D. Kornilaki and E. Karlsson, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1981 of 13 December 2018 renewing the approval of the active substances copper compounds, as candidates for substitution, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market, and amending the Annex to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 (OJ 2018 L 317, p. 16).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders European Union Copper Task Force to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;

3. Orders the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 155, 6.5.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 2 February 2022 — Polskie Górnictwo Naftowe i Gazownictwo v Commission (Rejection of a complaint)

(Case T-399/19) (1)

(Competition - Abuse of a dominant position - Gas markets of central and eastern Europe - Decision rejecting a complaint - No EU interest - State action defence - Obligation to conduct a diligent examination - Procedural rights under Regulation (EC) No 773/2004)

(2022/C 128/24)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Polskie Górnictwo Naftowe i Gazownictwo S.A. (Warsaw, Poland) (represented by: K. Karasiewicz, T. Kaźmierczak, K. Kicun and P. Moskwa, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Ernst, G. Meessen and J. Szczodrowski, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Gazprom PJSC (Moscow, Russia), and Gazprom export LLC (Saint Petersburg, Russia) (represented by: J. Karenfort, J. Hainz, B. Evtimov, N. Tuominen and J. Heithecker, lawyers, as well as D. O’Keeffe, Solicitor)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Decision C(2019) 3003 final of the Commission of 17 April 2019 rejecting the complaint (Case AT.40497 — Polish gas prices).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Decision C(2019) 3003 final of the European Commission of 17 April 2019 rejecting the complaint (Case AT.40497 — Polish gas prices);

2. Orders the Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Polskie Górnictwo Naftowe i Gazownictwo S.A.;

3. Orders Gazprom PJSC and Gazprom export LLC to bear their own respective costs.

(1) OJ C 288, 26.8.2019.
(i)

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Decision C(2019) 7319 final of 15 October 2019 to reduce the amounts due under contract CARDS/2008/166-429 and to recover the amounts unduly paid and (ii) application under the second paragraph of Article 340 TFEU seeking, first of all, reimbursement of any amounts recovered by the Commission on the basis of that decision and payment of the last invoice issued, together with late-payment interest; next, release of the bank guarantee and compensation for the harm allegedly suffered by the applicant on account of its late release; and lastly, symbolic compensation for the non-material harm allegedly suffered by the applicant.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 22 June 2022 — thyssenkrupp v Commission

(Case T-584/19) (1)

(Competition - Concentrations - Market for the production and distribution of flat carbon steel - Decision declaring the concentration incompatible with the internal market and the EEA Agreement - Relevant market - Assessment of the effects of the transaction on competition - Commitments - Obligation to state reasons)

(2022/C 303/46)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: thyssenkrupp AG (Duisburg and Essen, Germany) (represented by: M. Klusmann, J. Ziebarth and M. Dästner, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Conte, T. Franchoo, I. Zaloguin and C. Sjödin, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Decision C(2019) 4228 final of 11 June 2019 declaring a concentration to be incompatible with the internal market and the functioning of the EEA Agreement (Case M.8713 — Tata Steel/thyssenkrupp/JV).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders thyssenkrupp AG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 357, 21.10.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 23 March 2022 — Necci v Commission

(Case T-129/19 RENV) (1)

(Civil service - Contract staff - Social security - JSIS - Rejection of the application for membership following a transfer of pension rights - Condition relating to a period of employment of more than three years - Article 95 of the CEOS - Article 34(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights - Article 45 TFEU)

(2022/C 207/43)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Claudio Necci (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: S. Orlandi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Mongin and T. Bohr, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: European Parliament (represented by: J. Van Pottelberge and I. Terwinghe, acting as Agents), Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bauer and M. Alver, acting as Agents)

Re:

By his action under Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the European Commission of 18 April 2018 by which it impliedly rejected his application for membership of the Joint Sickness Insurance Scheme of the Institutions of the European Communities (JSIS) submitted on 18 December 2017.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and those incurred by Mr Claudio Necci relating to the appeal proceedings before the Court of Justice, in Case C-202/20 P;

3. Orders Mr Necci to pay the costs relating to the appeal proceedings before the General Court, in Case T-129/19 RENV, and relating to the initial proceedings before the General Court, in Case T-129/19;

4. Orders the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union to bear their own costs relating to Case T-129/19 and to the present proceedings on referral.

(1) OJ C 155, 6.5.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 9 November 2022 — Ferriere Nord v Commission

(Case T-667/19) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market for concrete reinforcing bars - Decision finding an infringement of Article 65 CS after the expiry of the ECSC Treaty on the basis of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 - Fixing of prices - Limiting and controlling output and sales - Decision taken following the annulment of earlier decisions - New hearing held in the presence of the competition authorities of the Member States - Rights of the defence - Principle of sound administration - Reasonable period - Obligation to state reasons - Proportionality - Ne bis in idem principle - Plea of illegality - Evidence of involvement in the cartel - Aggravating circumstances - Repeated infringement - Mitigating circumstances - Equal treatment - Unlimited jurisdiction)

(2022/C 482/22)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Ferriere Nord SpA (Osoppo, Italy) (represented by: W. Viscardini, G. Donà and B. Comparini, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Rossi, G. Conte and C. Sjödin, acting as Agents, and by M. Moretto, lawyer)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: O. Segnana and E. Ambrosini, acting as Agents]

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for, primarily, annulment of Commission Decision C(2019) 4969 final of 4 July 2019 relating to a breach of Article 65 of the ECSC Treaty (Case AT.37956 — Concrete reinforcing bars) or, in the alternative, a reduction in the amount of the fine imposed on the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Ferriere Nord SpA to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;

3. Declares that the Council of the European Union is to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 399, 25.11.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — BNetzA v ACER

(Case T-631/19) (1)

(Energy - Internal market in electricity - Regulation (EU) 2019/942 - Decision of the Board of Appeal of ACER - Action for annulment - Act not open to challenge - Inadmissibility - ACER’s competence - Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 713/2009 - Article 6(10) of Regulation 2019/942 - Article 9(12) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1222 - Applicable law - Regulation (EU) 2019/943)

(2022/C 418/17)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Bundesnetzagentur für Elektrizität, Gas, Telekommunikation, Post und Eisenbahnen (BNetzA) (Bonn, Germany) (represented by: H. Haller, N. Gremminger, L. Reiser, V. Vacha and C. Dietz-Polte, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (represented by: P. Martinet and E. Tremmel, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks, first, annulment in part of Decision No 02/2019 of the European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER) of 21 February 2019 on the Core CCR TSOs’ proposals for the regional design of the day-ahead and intraday common capacity calculation methodologies, and, secondly, annulment of Decision A-003-2019 of the Board of Appeal of ACER of 11 July 2019 dismissing its appeal against the initial decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Decision A-003-2019 of the Board of Appeal of the European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER) of 11 July 2019;

2. Dismisses the remainder of the action as inadmissible;

3. Orders ACER to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 383, 11.11.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 17 February 2021 — Ryanair v Commission

(Case T-238/20) (1)

(State aid - Air transport market in Sweden, from Sweden and to Sweden - Loan guarantees to support airlines amid the Covid-19 pandemic - Decision not to raise any objections - Temporary Framework for State aid measures - Measure intended to remedy a serious disturbance in the economy of a Member State - Free provision of services - Equal treatment - Proportionality - Criterion of holding a licence issued by the Swedish authorities - Failure to weigh the beneficial effects of the aid against its adverse effects on trading conditions and the maintenance of undistorted competition - Article 107(3)(b) TFEU - Ratio legis - Duty to state reasons)

(2021/C 138/40)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Ryanair DAC (Swords, Ireland) (represented by: E. Vahida, F. C. Laprévote, S. Rating and I. G. Metaxas-Maranghidis, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Flynn, S. Noë and F. Tomat, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: French Republic (represented by: E. de Moustier, C. Mosser, A. Daniel and P. Dodeller, acting as Agents), Kingdom of Sweden (represented by: C. Meyer-Seitz, H. Eklinder, A. Runeskjöld, M. Salborn Hodgson, H. Shev, R. Shahsavan Eriksson and J. Lundberg, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Decision C(2020) 2366 final of 11 April 2020 on State Aid SA.56812 (2020/N) — Sweden — COVID-19: Loan guarantee scheme to airlines.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Ryanair DAC to bear its own costs and to pay those of the European Commission, including the costs relating to the request for confidential treatment;

3. Orders the French Republic and the Kingdom of Sweden to bear their own respective costs.

(1) OJ C 209, 22.6.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 20 January 2021 — Crevier v EUIPO (air freshener)

(Case T-276/20) (1)

(Community design - Application for a Community design representing an air freshener - Non-compliance with a time limit vis-à-vis EUIPO - Application for restitutio in integrum - Article 67(1) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 - Duty of care)

(2021/C 72/38)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Jeffrey Scott Crevier (Fort Lauderdale, Florida, United States) (represented by: M. Kime, Barrister)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: R. Cottrell, A. Folliard-Monguiral and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 March 2020 (Case R 2396/2019-3) relating to an application for restitutio in integrum.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Jeffrey Scott Crevier to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 247, 27.7.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 28 April 2021 — FCA Italy v EUIPO — Bettag (Pandem)

(Case T-191/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark Pandem - Earlier national and international word marks PANDA - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2021/C 242/46)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: FCA Italy SpA (Turin, Italy) (represented by: F. Jacobacci and E. Truffo, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: G. Sakalaitė-Orlovskienė and J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Christoph Bettag (Aachen, Germany) (represented by: M. Metzner, A. Hönninger and M. Zeis, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 February 2020 (Case R 1483/2019-5), relating to opposition proceedings between FCA Italy and Mr Bettag.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders FCA Italy SpA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 201, 15.6.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 17 March 2021 — Steinel v EUIPO (MobileHeat)

(Case T-226/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for the EU word mark MobileHeat - Relative ground for refusal - Descriptive nature - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2021/C 206/30)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Steinel GmbH (Herzebrock-Clarholz, Germany) (represented by: M. Breuer and K. Freudenstein, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Markakis, acting as Agent)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 February 2020 (Case R 2472/2019-2) concerning an application for registration of the word sign MobileHeat as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Steinel GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 201, 15.6.2020.
Judgment of the General Court of 19 May 2021 — Ryanair v Commission (KLM; Covid-19)

(Case T-643/20) (1)

(State aid - Netherlands - State guarantee for loans and subordinated loan by the State to KLM amid the COVID-19 pandemic - Temporary Framework for State aid measures - Decision not to raise any objections - Decision declaring the aid compatible with the internal market - Aid granted previously to another company in the same group of companies - Duty to state reasons - Maintenance of the effects of the decision)

(2021/C 263/30)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Ryanair DAC (Swords, Ireland) (represented by: F.C. Laprévote, V. Blanc, E. Vahida, S. Rating and I.G. Metaxas-Maranghidis, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Flynn, S. Noë and C. Georgieva, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: French Republic (represented by: E. de Moustier and P. Dodeller, acting as Agents), Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: J. Langer, acting as Agent, and by I. Rooms, lawyer), Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (Amstelveen, Netherlands) (represented by: K. Schillemans, H. Vanderveen and P. Huizing, lawyers)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Decision C(2020) 4871 final of 13 July 2020 on State Aid SA.57116 (2020/N) — The Netherlands — COVID-19: State loan guarantee and State loan for KLM.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Commission Decision C(2020) 4871 final of 13 July 2020 on State aid SA.57116 (2020/N) — The Netherlands — COVID-19: State loan guarantee and State loan for KLM;

2. Orders the effects of the annulment of that decision to be suspended pending the adoption of a new decision by the European Commission under Article 108 TFEU; those effects are to be suspended for a period not exceeding two months from the date of delivery of this judgment if the Commission decides to adopt such a new decision under Article 108(3) TFEU, and for a reasonable further period if the Commission decides to initiate the procedure under Article 108(2) TFEU;

3. Orders the Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Ryanair DAC;

4. Orders the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the French Republic and Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV to bear their own respective costs.

(1) OJ C 423, 7.12.2020.
Judgment of the General Court of 14 April 2021 — Ryanair v Commission (Finnair I; Covid-19)

(Case T-388/20) (1)

(State aid - Finnish air transport market - Aid granted by Finland to Finnair in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic - State guarantee on a loan - Decision not to raise any objections - Temporary Framework for State aid measures - Measure intended to remedy a serious disturbance in the economy of a Member State - Failure to weigh the beneficial effects of the aid against its adverse effects on trading conditions and the maintenance of undistorted competition - Equal treatment - Freedom of establishment - Freedom to provide services - Duty to state reasons)

(2021/C 242/61)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Ryanair DAC (Swords, Ireland) (represented by: E. Vahida, F.-C. Laprévote, S. Rating and I.-G. Metaxas-Maranghidis, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Flynn, S. Noë and F. Tomat, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: L. Aguilera Ruiz, acting as Agent), French Republic (represented by: E. de Moustier and P. Dodeller, acting as Agents), Republic of Finland (represented by: H. Leppo, acting as Agent)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Decision C(2020) 3387 final of 18 May 2020 on State Aid SA.56809 (2020/N) — Finland — COVID-19: State loan guarantee for Finnair.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Ryanair DAC to bear its own costs and to pay those of the European Commission, including the costs relating to the request for confidential treatment;

3. Orders the Kingdom of Spain, the French Republic and the Republic of Finland to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 262, 10.8.2020.