do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-518/17: Action brought on 8 August 2017 — Olarreaga Marques and Saralegui Reyzabal v SRB
Date: 2017-08-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Spain, abuse of power, aid for restructuring, company in difficulties, credit institution, damages, financial solvency, ownership, right to justice








C_2017374EN.01003702.xml










6.11.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 374/37





Action brought on 8 August 2017 — Olarreaga Marques and Saralegui Reyzabal v SRB
(Case T-518/17)
(2017/C 374/56)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicants: Gorka Olarreaga Marques (Madrid, Spain) and María-Aránzazu Saralegui Reyzabal (Madrid) (represented by: R. Jiménez Velasco, lawyer)

Defendant: Single Resolution Board

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:






—


Annul the decision of the Single Resolution Board agreed of 7 June 2017 adopting the resolution scheme regarding the institution Banco Popular Español, S.A.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those put forward in Cases T-478/17, Mutualidad de la Abogacía and Hermandad Nacional de Arquitectos Superiores y Químicos v Single Resolution Board, T-481/17, Fundación Tatiana Pérez de Guzmán el Bueno and SFL v Single Resolution Board, T-482/17, Comercial Vascongada Recalde v Commission and Single Resolution Board, T-483/17, García Suárez and Others v Commission and Single Resolution Board, T-484/17, Fidesban and Others v Single Resolution Board, T-497/17, Sáchez del Valle and Calatrava Real State 2015 v Commission and Single Resolution Board, and T-498/17, Pablo Álvarez de Linera Granda v Commission and Single Resolution Board.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2017-08-08
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2017257EN.01000201.xml










8.8.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 257/2





Euro exchange rates (1)

7 August 2017
(2017/C 257/02)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1797 




JPY


Japanese yen


130,78 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4384 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,90435 




SEK


Swedish krona


9,6175 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,1480 




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,3800 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


26,116 




HUF


Hungarian forint


303,80 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2518 




RON


Romanian leu


4,5640 




TRY


Turkish lira


4,1662 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4909 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4959 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,2289 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6033 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,6083 




KRW


South Korean won


1 332,55 




ZAR


South African rand


15,7661 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,9281 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4035 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 714,78 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


5,0532 




PHP


Philippine peso


59,526 




RUB


Russian rouble


70,8515 




THB


Thai baht


39,302 




BRL


Brazilian real


3,6878 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,1536 




INR


Indian rupee


75,3005 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case C-475/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Riigikohus (Estonia) lodged on 8 August 2017 — AS Viking Motors, OÜ TKM Beauty Eesti, AS TKM King, Kaubamaja AS, Selver AS v Tallinna linn, Maksu- ja Tolliamet
Date: 2017-08-08
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, consumer, restriction on competition, sale, tax harmonisation, taxpayer








C_2017347EN.01001601.xml










16.10.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 347/16





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Riigikohus (Estonia) lodged on 8 August 2017 — AS Viking Motors, OÜ TKM Beauty Eesti, AS TKM King, Kaubamaja AS, Selver AS v Tallinna linn, Maksu- ja Tolliamet
(Case C-475/17)
(2017/C 347/20)
Language of the case: Estonian

Referring court

Riigikohus

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: AS Viking Motors, OÜ TKM Beauty Eesti, AS TKM King, Kaubamaja AS, Selver AS

Defendants: Tallinna linn, Maksu- ja Tolliamet

Question referred

Is Article 401 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC (1) to be interpreted as precluding a national tax which applies generally and is proportionate to the price, but which, pursuant to the relevant provisions, is to be levied only at the stage of the sale of goods or services to a consumer, with the result that the final tax burden rests ultimately with the consumer, and which compromises the operation of the common system of value added tax and distorts competition?


(1)  Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1).
Case T-527/17: Action brought on 8 August 2017 — Waisman and Others v SRB
Date: 2017-08-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Spain, abuse of power, aid for restructuring, company in difficulties, credit institution, damages, financial solvency, ownership, right to justice








C_2017369EN.01002001.xml










30.10.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 369/20





Action brought on 8 August 2017 — Waisman and Others v SRB
(Case T-527/17)
(2017/C 369/30)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicants: Alejandro Claudio Waisman (Buenos Aires, Argentina) and 158 other applicants (represented by: J. De Castro Martín, M. Azpitarte Sánchez and J. Ruiz de Villa Jubany, lawyers)

Defendant: Single Resolution Board

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the General Court should:






—


In accordance with Article 263 TFEU, annul the Decision of the Single Resolution Board concerning the Banco Popular Español (SRB/EES/2017/08);










—


In accordance with Article 340(2) TFEU and Article 41(3) of the the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, order SRB to pay to the applicants, at the expense of the Single Resolution Fund established in accordance with Article 67 of Regulation No 806/2014, compensation for the damage caused to the applicants as a direct consequence of the Decision concerning the Banco Popular and the value of which corresponds to the market value of the capital instruments of the banking institution the day preceding (6 June 2017) the implementation of the resolution scheme; in the alternative, in the event that the Court does not uphold the previous claim for compensation, order SRB to pay to the applicants compensation, the value of which corresponds to the difference, which will be determined by the valuation of the independent person laid down in Article 20(16) of Regulation No 806/2014, between the payment in respect of their claims received by the applicants pursuant to the application of the Decision and the amount they would have received under a normal insolvency procedure;










—


Order SRB to pay the costs of these proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those put forward in Cases T-478/17, Mutualidad de la Abogacía and Hermandad Nacional de Arquitectos Superiores y Químicos v Single Resolution Board, T-481/17, Fundación Tatiana Pérez de Guzmán el Bueno and SFL v Single Resolution Board, T-482/17, Comercial Vascongada Recalde v Commission and Single Resolution Board, T-483/17, García Suárez and Others v Commission and Single Resolution Board, T-484/17, Fidesban and Others v Single Resolution Board, T-497/17, Sáchez del Valle and Calatrava Real State 2015 v Commission and Single Resolution Board, and T-498/17, Pablo Álvarez de Linera Granda v Commission and Single Resolution Board.
Case T-506/17: Action brought on 8 August 2017 — Makhlouf v Council
Date: 2017-08-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Syria, common foreign and security policy, economic sanctions, freedom of movement, international sanctions, natural person, ownership, right to justice, rights of the defence, trade restriction








C_2017347EN.01003801.xml










16.10.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 347/38





Action brought on 8 August 2017 — Makhlouf v Council
(Case T-506/17)
(2017/C 347/49)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Rami Makhlouf (Damascus, Syria) (represented by: E. Ruchat, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought







—


Declare the applicant’s action admissible and well-founded;










—


In consequence, annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/917 of 29 May 2017 and its subsequent implementing acts, insofar as they concern the applicant;










—


Order the Council of the European Union to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea in law, alleging that the contested acts infringe the applicant’s rights of the defence, in particular his right to effective judicial protection, enshrined in Articles 6 and 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), Article 215 TFEU and Articles 41 and 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the defendant has infringed the obligation to state reasons, since the reasoning provided does not satisfy the obligation on the EU institutions under Article 6 of the ECHR and Article 296 TFEU and 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging a manifest error of assessment committed by the Council as regards the involvement of the applicant in the financing of the Syrian regime.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging that the contested acts place an unjustified and disproportionate restriction on the fundamental rights of the applicant, in particular on his right to property, enshrined in Article 1 of the First Additional Protocol to the ECHR and Article 17 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, to respect for his reputation, under Articles 8 and 10(2) of the ECHR, to a presumption of innocence, enshrined in Article 6 of the ECHR and Article 48 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and his freedom of movement, guaranteed in Article 2(2) of Protocol No 4 to the ECHR.










5.


Fifth plea in law, alleging infringement of the guidelines on implementation and evaluation of restrictive measures (sanctions) in the context of the EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy (Council Document 15114/05 of 2 December 2005).
Case C-477/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Centrale Raad van Beroep (Netherlands) lodged on 8 August 2017 — Raad van bestuur van de Sociale Verzekeringsbank v D. Balandin and Others
Date: 2017-08-08
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Netherlands, establishment, foreign national, social-security benefit, temporary employment








C_2017357EN.01000401.xml










23.10.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 357/4





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Centrale Raad van Beroep (Netherlands) lodged on 8 August 2017 — Raad van bestuur van de Sociale Verzekeringsbank v D. Balandin and Others
(Case C-477/17)
(2017/C 357/05)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Centrale Raad van Beroep

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Raad van bestuur van de Sociale Verzekeringsbank

Defendant: D. Balandin, I. Lukachenko, Holiday on Ice Services B.V.

Question referred

Must Article 1 of Regulation No 1231/2010 (1) be interpreted as meaning that third-country nationals, who live outside the European Union, but who work in various Member States on a temporary basis for an employer who is established in the Netherlands, may invoke (Title II of) Regulation No 883/2004 (2) and Regulation No 987/2009 (3)?


(1)  Regulation (EU) No 1231/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 extending Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 and Regulation (EC) No 987/2009 to nationals of third countries who are not already covered by these Regulations solely on the ground of their nationality (OJ 2010 L 344, p. 1).

(2)  Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the coordination of social security systems (OJ 2004 L 166, p. 1).

(3)  Regulation (EC) No 987/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009 laying down the procedure for implementing Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 on the coordination of social security systems (OJ 2009 L 284, p. 1).
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8422 — ChemChina/AKC/JVs) (Text with EEA relevance. )
Date: 2017-08-08
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: chemical industry, economic concentration, electronics industry, merger control, pharmaceutical industry, research and development, textile industry, wholesale trade








C_2017257EN.01000101.xml










8.8.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 257/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.8422 — ChemChina/AKC/JVs)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2017/C 257/01)
On 1 August 2017, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:






—


in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,










—


in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32017M8422. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Reserve lists — Open competition EPSO/AST-SC/05/16 — Accreditation Officers/Receptionists (SC 1/SC 2)
Date: 2017-08-08
Institutions: European Personnel Selection Office
Subjects: EPSO, assistant, competition (EU)




CA2017257EN.01000101.xml










8.8.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CA 257/1








            RESERVE LISTS
             (1)

Open competition EPSO/AST-SC/05/16
Accreditation Officers/Receptionists (SC 1/SC 2)
(2017/C 257 A/01)


          
      

Grade SC 1







ABATI


Valentina




AYALA


Elena




BROZ HAFNER


Maja




BURNET


Aurélie




CAPPELLAZZO


Claudio




CASTELLANI


Simona




CIPRIANI


Silvia




D’ALESSIO


Maria Cristina




D’ELIA


Sara




DE RYCK


Liesbet




DI MARZIO


Antony




DOSOLINI


Consuelo




ENACHE


Marius Ion




GALLETTI


Michel




GLAVAS


Monika




GORGORIS


Spyridon




GRABNAR


Marko




GREKULA


Hanna




HERNÁNDEZ MARTÍN


África María




KROLZIK


Kristin




LEIRA


Alba




LIODAKIS


Antonios




LODEWYCKX


Angelique




LORUSSO


Rita




MARTINEZ SALVADOR


Alonso




MASCIOTRA


Nicola




MIAZGA


Ewelina Amelia




MONGE COSIN


Jose Luis




NAAS


Catherine




NADOLU


Adrian Marius




PERUCCONI


Chiara




PORON


Davy




ROSSETTI


Melissa




RUSSO


Flavia




SANDOR ANTUNES


Ivett




SAVIC


Radojka




SCARCIA


Giuseppe




SEDIĆ


Slađana




STOIAN


Valeria




STOIMIRSKA


Dimitrina




TELEIONI


Dafni




TERMINI


Daiana




TSORTANIDOU


Olga




VEDRIŠ


Vedran




VILA FLOR


Carlos





 (*1)



 




ZANIN DE MELO


Thais Helena





Grade SC 2







BERLEMONT


Aurélie Louise Anna




CINAR


Nevin




CUPERTINO


Giacomo




DAHNKE


Martina




DI LORENZO


Massimo




DIAZ GAMBOA


Paul Edward




FASSARI


Angelo




POLIDORI


Silvia




RODRIGUEZ BLOCH


Maria Noelia




SEPPÄLÄ


Jari-Pekka




VAN DEN BERGHE


Françoise




VASILOPOULOU


Panagiota




The reserve lists will be valid until 
               31 December 2020
            .


(1)  One or more successful candidates may explicitly have requested that their name not be published.

(*1)  Information erased or replaced within the framework of protection of personal data and/or confidentiality.