do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-422/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Social No 33 de Barcelona (Spain) lodged on 12 September 2014  — Christian Pujante Rivera v Gestora Clubs Dir, S.L., Fondo de Garantía Salarial
Date: 2014-09-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Spain, collective dismissal, interpretation of the law, redundancy, temporary employment, workplace








C_2014421EN.01002001.xml










24.11.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 421/20





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Social No 33 de Barcelona (Spain) lodged on 12 September 2014 — Christian Pujante Rivera v Gestora Clubs Dir, S.L., Fondo de Garantía Salarial
(Case C-422/14)
2014/C 421/29
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Juzgado de lo Social No 33 de Barcelona

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Christian Pujante Rivera

Defendants: Gestora Clubs Dir, S.L., Fondo de Garantía Salarial

Questions referred







1.


If temporary workers, whose contracts have been terminated on the lawful ground that those contracts are temporary, are to be regarded as falling outside the scope and protection of Directive 98/59 (1) on collective redundancies, by virtue of Article 1(2)(a) thereof (judgment on the request for a preliminary ruling in Case C-392/13 pending), would it be consistent with the purpose of the Directive if — conversely — such workers were taken into account for the purposes of determining the number of workers ‘normally’ employed at an establishment (or, in Spain, an undertaking) in order to calculate the numerical threshold for collective redundancies (10 % or 30 workers) laid down in Article 1(a)(i) of the Directive?










2.


The requirement under the second subparagraph of Article 1(1)(b) of Directive 98/59 that ‘terminations’ be ‘assimilated’ to ‘redundancies’ is made subject to the condition ‘that there [be] at least five redundancies’. Must that condition be interpreted as relating to the ‘redundancies’ previously effected or brought about by the employer, as provided for in Article 1(1)(a) of the Directive, and not to the minimum number of ‘assimilable terminations’ that must exist in order for such assimilation to take place?










3.


Does the concept of ‘terminations of an employment contract which occur on the employer’s initiative for one or more reasons not related to the individual workers concerned’, as referred to in the last subparagraph of Article 1(1) of Directive 98/59, cover the termination of a contract between the employer and the worker which, although initiated by the worker, comes about in response to a previous change in working conditions that was initiated by the employer on account of the critical difficulties being experienced by the undertaking and for which compensation is ultimately to be awarded in an amount equivalent to that payable for unfair dismissal?






(1)  Council Directive 98/59/EC of 20 July 1998 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to collective redundancies (OJ 1998 L 225, p. 16).
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2014-09-12
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2014310EN.01000301.xml










12.9.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 310/3





Euro exchange rates (1)

11 September 2014
2014/C 310/02

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,2928




JPY


Japanese yen


138,38




DKK


Danish krone


7,4435




GBP


Pound sterling


0,79580




SEK


Swedish krona


9,1945




CHF


Swiss franc


1,2100




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


8,2035




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


27,635




HUF


Hungarian forint


314,80




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




PLN


Polish zloty


4,1986




RON


Romanian leu


4,4190




TRY


Turkish lira


2,8440




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4182




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4236




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


10,0200




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,5794




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,6346




KRW


South Korean won


1 341,49




ZAR


South African rand


14,1981




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,9245




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,6220




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 325,23




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,1337




PHP


Philippine peso


56,920




RUB


Russian rouble


48,5670




THB


Thai baht


41,628




BRL


Brazilian real


2,9671




MXN


Mexican peso


17,0953




INR


Indian rupee


78,8026






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Corrigendum to Council Decision 2014/451/EU of 26 May 2014 on the signing and conclusion of the Participation Agreement between the European Union and the Swiss Confederation on the participation of the Swiss Confederation in the European Union Integrated Border Management Assistance Mission in Libya (EUBAM Libya) ( OJ L 205, 12.7.2014 )
Date: 2014-09-12
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: EU police mission, Libya, Switzerland, agreement (EU), border control, signature of an agreement








L_2014271EN.01010101.xml










12.9.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 271/101







Corrigendum to Council Decision 2014/451/EU of 26 May 2014 on the signing and conclusion of the Participation Agreement between the European Union and the Swiss Confederation on the participation of the Swiss Confederation in the European Union Integrated Border Management Assistance Mission in Libya (EUBAM Libya)

(
Official Journal of the European Union L 205 of 12 July 2014
)


On page 2, in the title:
for:


                           ‘COUNCIL DECISION
of 26 May 2014
                        
on the signing and conclusion of the Participation Agreement between the European Union and the Swiss Confederation on the participation of the Swiss Confederation in the European Union Integrated Border Management Assistance Mission in Libya (EUBAM Libya)
(2014/451/EU)’
                        
,read:


                           ‘COUNCIL DECISION 2014/451/CFSP
of 26 May 2014
                        
on the signing and conclusion of the Participation Agreement between the European Union and the Swiss Confederation on the participation of the Swiss Confederation in the European Union Integrated Border Management Assistance Mission in Libya (EUBAM Libya)’
                        
.
Case C-130/14: Order of the President of the Court of 12 September 2014 — European Commission v Kingdom of Belgium
Date: 2014-09-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Walloon region (Belgium), discrimination on the basis of nationality, infringement of EU law, investment company, personal income tax, tax relief








C_2014431EN.01001603.xml










1.12.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 431/16





Order of the President of the Court of 12 September 2014 — European Commission v Kingdom of Belgium
(Case C-130/14) (1)

(2014/C 431/25)
Language of the case: French
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 159, 26.5.2014.
Case T-657/14: Action brought on 12 September 2014  — Spain v Commission
Date: 2014-09-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European Regional Development Fund, Spain, operational programme, research and development








C_2014380EN.01002201.xml










27.10.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 380/22





Action brought on 12 September 2014 — Spain v Commission
(Case T-657/14)
2014/C 380/29
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: A. Gavela Llopis, Abogado del Estado)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:






—


annul the decision of 27 June 2014 interrupting the payment deadline in respect of the statement of expenditure and applications for payment No 21 in relation to the operational programme for research, development and innovation, Technology Fund-ERDF, sent by Spain on 26 December 2013, and initiating the suspension procedure, and










—


order the defendant institution to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on three pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging that the decision interrupting [the payment deadline] and initiating the suspension procedure infringed Article 87(2), in conjunction with Articles 91 and 92 of Council Regulation 1083/2006 of 11 July 2006 laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 (OJ 2006 L 210, p. 25).






—


It is claimed in this regard, that the period referred to in Article 87(2) is a limitation period that prevents the Commission from adopting a decision interrupting the payment deadline once the two month period has expired and, therefore, does not permit a suspension of payments procedure to be initiated either.














2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the decision interrupting [the payment deadline] and initiating the suspension procedure was adopted outside the period set by EU law and was in breach of the principles of legal certainty, the protection of legitimate expectations and sound administration. It had a detrimental budgetary and financial impact on the Kingdom of Spain, which trusted in good faith that it would obtain payment within the prescribed period.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 91(1)(a) of Regulation 1083/2006 through non-compliance with the rules laid down in that regulation for that decision to be validly adopted.






—


It is claimed in this regard, that the decision interrupting [the payment deadline] was not based on an audit report, as required by the provision in question, but on a mere draft, which cannot be regarded as a definitive document capable of substantiating a decision interrupting [the payment deadline]. Furthermore, the draft in question does not contain evidence, still less proof, of serious deficiencies in the management and control system.
Case T-658/14: Action brought on 12 September 2014  — Jurašinović v Council
Date: 2014-09-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: access to EU information, indemnification, international relations, judicial proceedings








C_2014380EN.01002301.xml










27.10.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 380/23





Action brought on 12 September 2014 — Jurašinović v Council
(Case T-658/14)
2014/C 380/30
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Ivan Jurašinović (Angers, France) (represented by: O. Pfligersdorffer, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the decision of 8 July 2014 insofar as it limited the applicant’s access to the documents referred to in Annex 3 to that decision by invoking the protection of international relations and the protection of court proceedings and by redacting the requested documents on that ground;










—


order the Council to pay the applicant EUR 5  000 exclusive of tax, that is to say EUR 6  000 in total including all taxes, to cover procedural costs, with interest at the European Central Bank rate as at the date of registration of the application;










—


order the Council to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on three pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging a manifest error of assessment in relation to the exception concerning the protection of court proceedings laid down in the second indent of Article 4(2) of Regulation No 1049/2001 (1), in so far as the Court had already held, in Jurašinović v Council (T-63/10, EU:T:2012:516) — in implementation of which the contested decision was adopted — that although that exception was applicable, it could not operate in the present case.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging a manifest error of assessment in relation to the exception concerning the protection of the public interest as regards international relations laid down in the third indent of Article 4(1)(a) of Regulation No 1049/2001, in that the measure or the documents at issue concerned information issued by the European Union and not from the United Nations system, with the result that the flow of information from that organisation would not be affected.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging a manifest error of assessment in relation to the exception concerning the overriding public interest, which allows, under Article 4(2) of Regulation No 1049/2001, derogation from the protection of court proceedings and legal advice, in that, first, the proceedings to which the documents relate are now definitively completed and, secondly, the Republic of Croatia is now a Member State of the European Union.






(1)  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).
Case F-93/14: Action brought on 12 September 2014 — ZZ v OHIM
Date: 2014-09-12
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: residential mobility, teleworking








C_2015007EN.01004802.xml










12.1.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 7/48





Action brought on 12 September 2014 — ZZ v OHIM
(Case F-93/14)
(2015/C 007/56)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: ZZ (represented by: S. Pappas, lawyer)

Defendant: OHIM

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

The Annulment of the decision of OHIM, drafted on the grounds of the decision of the president of the Office of 29th March 2012 concerning teleworking, not to authorise the applicant to telework in Barcelona, and thus, obliging her to return to Alicante.

Form of order sought







—


Annul the contested decision;










—


order the Defendant to bear the costs of the current proceedings.
Notice concerning a request pursuant to Article 35 of Directive 2014/25/EU — Extension of Deadline — Request made by a Member State
Date: 2014-09-12
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Poland, electrical energy, public contract, wholesale selling








C_2014310EN.01001001.xml










12.9.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 310/10





Notice concerning a request pursuant to Article 35 of Directive 2014/25/EU — Extension of Deadline
Request made by a Member State
2014/C 310/04
On 15 May 2014 the Commission received a request in accordance with Article 35 of Directive 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on procurement procedures by entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors and repealing Directive 2004/17/EC (1).
This request, made by the Republic of Poland, concerns the production and wholesale of electricity in that country. The relevant notice was published on page 14 of OJ C 186 on 18 June 2014. The initial deadline was 25 September 2014.
Pursuant to fourth subparagraph, of point 1of Annex IV of Directive 2014/25/EU, the deadline may be extended by the Commission with the agreement of those having made the request for exemption concerned. Given that the need to obtain and analyse additional information, and with the agreement of the Republic of Poland, the period available to the Commission for deciding on this request is hereby extended by 26 working days.
The final deadline is therefore 31 October 2014.


(1)  OJ L 94, 28.3.2014, p. 243.
Case C-365/14: Order of the President of the Court of 12 September 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Rüsselsheim — Germany) — Brunhilde Liebler, Helmut Liebler v Condor Flugdienst GmbH
Date: 2014-09-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: airport, delegation of power, transport company








C_2014431EN.01001704.xml










1.12.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 431/17





Order of the President of the Court of 12 September 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Rüsselsheim — Germany) — Brunhilde Liebler, Helmut Liebler v Condor Flugdienst GmbH
(Case C-365/14) (1)

(2014/C 431/30)
Language of the case: German
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 329, 22.9.2014.