do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-602/16: Judgment of the General Court of 13 December 2017 — CJ v ECDC (Civil service — Members of the contract staff — Career evaluation report — Assessment exercise 2012 — Drawing up — Application for annulment of the decision closing appraisal report)
Date: 2017-12-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: servant (EU), staff assessment, staff regulations (EU)








C_2018042EN.01001902.xml










5.2.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 42/19





Judgment of the General Court of 13 December 2017 — CJ v ECDC
(Case T-602/16) (1)

((Civil service - Members of the contract staff - Career evaluation report - Assessment exercise 2012 - Drawing up - Application for annulment of the decision closing appraisal report))
(2018/C 042/27)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: CJ (represented by: V. Kolias, lawyer)

Defendant: European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC), (represented by J. Mannheim and A. Daume, acting as Agents, and by D. Waelbroeck and A. Duron, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought under Article 270 TFEU, seeking annulment of the decision of the appeal assessor of the ECDC of 21 September 2015 finalising the applicant’s appraisal report for the year 2011 and, insofar as necessary, the decision of the ECDC of 20 April 2016 rejecting the complaint lodged by the applicant against that decision of the appeal assessor.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders CJ to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 296, 16.8.2016 (case initially registered before the European Union Civil Service Tribunal under case No F-32/16 and transferred to the General Court of the European Union on 1.9.2016).
Case T-497/15: Judgment of the General Court of 13 December 2017 — Oltis Group v Commission (Research and development — Framework Programme for Research and Innovation 2014-2020 (Horizon 2020) — Stimulation and coordination of EU research and innovation investments in the rail sector — Establishment of the Shift2Rail Joint Undertaking — Associate membership of the Shift2Rail Joint Undertaking — Call for expressions of interest — Rejection of candidature — Obligation to state reasons — Manifest error of assessment — Misuse of powers)
Date: 2017-12-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU investment, European Joint Undertaking, Framework Programme for Research and Development, abuse of power, rail transport, tendering








C_2018042EN.01001301.xml










5.2.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 42/13





Judgment of the General Court of 13 December 2017 — Oltis Group v Commission
(Case T-497/15) (1)

((Research and development - Framework Programme for Research and Innovation 2014-2020 (Horizon 2020) - Stimulation and coordination of EU research and innovation investments in the rail sector - Establishment of the Shift2Rail Joint Undertaking - Associate membership of the Shift2Rail Joint Undertaking - Call for expressions of interest - Rejection of candidature - Obligation to state reasons - Manifest error of assessment - Misuse of powers))
(2018/C 042/17)
Language of the case: Czech

Parties


Applicant: Oltis Group a.s. (Olomouc, Czech Republic) (represented by: P. Konečný, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Hottiaux and Z. Malůšková, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking annulment of Commission Decision Ares (2015) 2691017 of 26 June 2015 concerning the request for a review of the rejection of the applicant’s application to become an associate member of the Shift2Rail Joint Undertaking.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Oltis Group a.s. to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 389, 23.11.2015.
Case T-712/15: Judgment of the General Court of 13 December 2017 — Crédit mutuel Arkéa v ECB (Economic and monetary policy — Prudential supervision of credit institutions — Article 4(3) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 — Prudential supervision at the consolidated level — Group subject to prudential supervision — Institutions permanently affiliated to a central body — Article 2(21)(c) of Regulation (EU) No 468/2014 — Article 10 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 — Capital requirements — Article 16(1)(c) and (2)(a) of Regulation No 1024/2013)
Date: 2017-12-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Economic and Monetary Union, banking supervision, credit institution, financial supervision








C_2018042EN.01001401.xml










5.2.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 42/14





Judgment of the General Court of 13 December 2017 — Crédit mutuel Arkéa v ECB
(Case T-712/15) (1)

((Economic and monetary policy - Prudential supervision of credit institutions - Article 4(3) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 - Prudential supervision at the consolidated level - Group subject to prudential supervision - Institutions permanently affiliated to a central body - Article 2(21)(c) of Regulation (EU) No 468/2014 - Article 10 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 - Capital requirements - Article 16(1)(c) and (2)(a) of Regulation No 1024/2013))
(2018/C 042/19)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Crédit mutuel Arkéa (Le Relecq Kerhuon, France) (represented by: H. Savoie and P. Mele, lawyers)

Defendant: European Central Bank (ECB) (represented by: K, Lackhoff, R. Bax and C. Olivier, acting as Agents, and D. Martin, M. Pittie and M. Françon, lawyers)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: V. Di Bucci and K.-P. Wojcik, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of Decision ECB/SSM/2015 — 9695000CG 7B84NLR5984/28 of the ECB of 4 October 2015 setting out the prudential requirements for the Crédit Mutuel group.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Crédit mutual Arkéa to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Central Bank (ECB).










3.


Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 59, 15.2.2016.
Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries
Date: 2017-12-13
Institutions: Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, European Commission
Subjects: Atlantic Ocean, Belgium, EU waters, catch by species, catch quota, fishing area, fishing rights, sea fish, sea fishing








C_2017428EN.01003202.xml










13.12.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 428/32





Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries
(2017/C 428/13)
In accordance with Article 35(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Union control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (1), a decision has been taken to close the fishery as set down in the following table:






Date and time of closure


10.10.2017




Duration


10.10.2017-31.12.2017




Member State


Belgium




Stock or Group of stocks


NEP/8ABDE.




Species


Norway lobster (Nephrops Norvegicus)




Zone


VIIIa, VIIIb, VIIId and VIIIe




Type(s) of fishing vessels


—




Reference number


21/TQ127






(1)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8711 — Macquarie/Oiltanking/Oiltanking Odfjell Terminal Singapore) (Text with EEA relevance. )
Date: 2017-12-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: banking, consultancy, economic concentration, financial services, investment company, merger control, oil industry, petrochemicals, storage








C_2017428EN.01000801.xml










13.12.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 428/8





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.8711 — Macquarie/Oiltanking/Oiltanking Odfjell Terminal Singapore)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2017/C 428/06)
On 5 December 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 32017M8711. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-692/15: Judgment of the General Court of 13 December 2017 — HTTS v Council (Common foreign and security policy — measures adopted against Iran with the aim of preventing nuclear proliferation — Freezing of funds — Duty to provide reasons — Contractual liability — Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law conferring rights on individuals)
Date: 2017-12-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Iran, common foreign and security policy, economic sanctions, indemnification, international sanctions, legal person, nuclear non-proliferation, trade restriction








C_2018042EN.01001302.xml










5.2.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 42/13





Judgment of the General Court of 13 December 2017 — HTTS v Council
(Case T-692/15) (1)

((Common foreign and security policy - measures adopted against Iran with the aim of preventing nuclear proliferation - Freezing of funds - Duty to provide reasons - Contractual liability - Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law conferring rights on individuals))
(2018/C 042/18)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: HTTS Hanseatic Trade Trust & Shipping GmbH (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: M. Schlingmann and M. Bever, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bishop and J.-P. Hix, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: S. Bartelt and R. Tricot, and subsequently by R. Tricot and T. Scharf, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action based on Article 268 TFEU and seeking compensation for the losses which the applicant allegedly suffered following the listing of its name, first, by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2010 of 26 July 2010 implementing Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 423/2007 concerning restrictive measures against Iran (OJ 2010 L 195, p. 25) in Annex V to Council Regulation (EC) No 423/2007 of 19 April 2007 concerning restrictive measures against Iran (OJ 2007 L 103, p. 1) and, secondly, by Council Regulation (EU) No 961/2010 of 25 October 2010 on restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Regulation No 423/2007 (OJ 2010 L 281, p. 1) in Annex VIII to Regulation No 961/2010.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders HTTS Hanseatic Trade Trust & Shipping GmbH to bear its own costs and to pay those of the Council of the European Union;










3.


Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 59, 15.2.2016.
Case T-592/16: Judgment of the General Court of 13 December 2017 — HQ v CPVO (Civil Service — Members of the temporary staff — Fixed-term contract — Decision not to renew — Manifest error of assessment — Duty of care — Principle of sound administration — Right to be heard — Psychological harassment — Misuse of powers — Liability)
Date: 2017-12-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: abuse of power, damages, psychological harassment, servant (EU), temporary employment, termination of employment, work contract








C_2018042EN.01001901.xml










5.2.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 42/19





Judgment of the General Court of 13 December 2017 — HQ v CPVO
(Case T-592/16) (1)

((Civil Service - Members of the temporary staff - Fixed-term contract - Decision not to renew - Manifest error of assessment - Duty of care - Principle of sound administration - Right to be heard - Psychological harassment - Misuse of powers - Liability))
(2018/C 042/26)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: HQ (represented by: L. Levi and A. Blot, lawyers)

Defendants: Community Plant Variety Office (CPVO) (represented by: A. Verdini, acting as Agent, assisted by D. Waelbroeck and de A. Duron, lawyers)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU, seeking, first, annulment of the CPVO decisions of 24 June 2015 not to renew the applicant's contract and of 20 January 2016 rejecting the complaint and, secondly, compensation for the harm allegedly suffered by the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders HQ to bear the costs.






(1)  OJ C 251, of 11.7.2016 (case initially registered before the European Union Civil Service Tribunal under Case No F-22/16 and transferred to the General Court of the European Union on 1.9.2016).
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8615 — AXA/Unibail-Rodamco/Paunsdorf Center) (Text with EEA relevance. )
Date: 2017-12-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: business lease, economic concentration, investment company, merger control, real estate business, shopping centre








C_2017428EN.01000701.xml










13.12.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 428/7





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.8615 — AXA/Unibail-Rodamco/Paunsdorf Center)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2017/C 428/04)
On 14 November 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 32017M8615. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-703/16 RENV: Judgment of the General Court of 13 December 2017 — CJ v ECDC (Civil service — Members of the contract staff — Fixed-term contract — Early termination — Article 47(b)(ii) of the CEOS — Terms of notice — Liability — Non-material damage)
Date: 2017-12-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: contract staff, damages, servant (EU), temporary employment, termination of employment, work contract








C_2018042EN.01002201.xml










5.2.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 42/22





Judgment of the General Court of 13 December 2017 — CJ v ECDC
(Case T-703/16 RENV) (1)

((Civil service - Members of the contract staff - Fixed-term contract - Early termination - Article 47(b)(ii) of the CEOS - Terms of notice - Liability - Non-material damage))
(2018/C 042/31)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: CJ (represented by: V. Kolias, lawyer)

Defendant: European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) (represented by: J. Mannheim and A. Daume, acting as Agents, and by D. Waelbroeck and A. Duron, lawyers)

Re:

Application based on Article 270 TFEU and seeking compensation for the harm suffered by the applicant arising from the decision of the director of the ECDC, communicated to him on 24 February 2012, to terminate early his contract as a member of the contract staff.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Orders the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) to pay CJ, in respect of non-material damage, the sum of EUR 2 000;










2.


Dismisses the remainder of the action in Case F-161/12;










3.


Orders CJ and the ECDC to bear their own costs in the original proceedings before the European Union Civil Service Tribunal in Case F-161/12, the appeal proceedings in Case T-370/15 P and the present proceedings on referral.






(1)  OJ C 311, 21.9.2015.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8478 — Zukunft Ventures/Gustav Magenwirth/Brake Force One/Unicorn Energy/JV) (Text with EEA relevance. )
Date: 2017-12-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: cycle and motorcycle industry, economic concentration, merger control, motor vehicle industry








C_2017428EN.01000702.xml










13.12.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 428/7





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.8478 — Zukunft Ventures/Gustav Magenwirth/Brake Force One/Unicorn Energy/JV)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2017/C 428/05)
On 6 December 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 German language 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 32017M8478. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8583 — Lufthansa Technik/Pepperl+Fuchs/JV) (Text with EEA relevance. )
Date: 2017-12-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: aeronautical industry, economic concentration, maintenance, merger control, research and development








C_2017428EN.01000901.xml










13.12.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 428/9





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.8583 — Lufthansa Technik/Pepperl+Fuchs/JV)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2017/C 428/08)
On 7 December 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 German language 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 32017M8583. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case C-403/16: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 13 December 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny — Poland) — Soufiane El Hassani v Minister Spraw Zagranicznych (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Area of freedom, security and justice — Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 — Article 32(3) — Community Visa Code — Decision to refuse a visa — Right of the applicant to bring an appeal against that decision — Obligation of a Member State to guarantee the right to a judicial appeal)
Date: 2017-12-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, EU visa policy, appeal, area of freedom, security and justice, national law, right to justice








C_2018052EN.01000801.xml










12.2.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 52/8





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 13 December 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny — Poland) — Soufiane El Hassani v Minister Spraw Zagranicznych
(Case C-403/16) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Area of freedom, security and justice - Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 - Article 32(3) - Community Visa Code - Decision to refuse a visa - Right of the applicant to bring an appeal against that decision - Obligation of a Member State to guarantee the right to a judicial appeal))
(2018/C 052/10)
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Soufiane El Hassani

Defendant: Minister Spraw Zagranicznych

Operative part of the judgment

Article 32(3) of Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 establishing a Community Code on Visas, as amended by Regulation (EU) No 610/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013, read in the light of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as meaning that it requires Member States to provide for an appeal procedure against decisions refusing visas, the procedural rules for which are a matter for the legal order of each Member State in accordance with the principles of equivalence and effectiveness. Those proceedings must, at a certain stage of the proceedings, guarantee a judicial appeal.


(1)  OJ C 383,17.10.2016.
Case T-314/15: Judgment of the General Court of 13 December 2017 — Greece v Commission (State aid — Aid in favour of an undertaking which has concluded a concession to operate container terminals in the Port of Piraeus — Decision declaring the aid to be incompatible with the internal market — Right of defence — Duty to give reasons — Concept of State aid — Aid to facilitate the development of certain economic activities or of certain economic areas — Incentive effect of the aid — Necessity of the aid — Determination of the amount of aid)
Date: 2017-12-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: State aid, aid to undertakings, container, control of State aid, harbour installation, rights of the defence








C_2018042EN.01001201.xml










5.2.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 42/12





Judgment of the General Court of 13 December 2017 — Greece v Commission
(Case T-314/15) (1)

((State aid - Aid in favour of an undertaking which has concluded a concession to operate container terminals in the Port of Piraeus - Decision declaring the aid to be incompatible with the internal market - Right of defence - Duty to give reasons - Concept of State aid - Aid to facilitate the development of certain economic activities or of certain economic areas - Incentive effect of the aid - Necessity of the aid - Determination of the amount of aid))
(2018/C 042/16)
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicant: Hellenic Republic (represented by: K. Boskovits and L. Kotroni, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Bouchagiar and B. Stromsky, agents acting as Agents)

Re:

Action under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of Commission Decision (EU) 2015/1827 of 23 March 2015, in relation to the State aid SA.28876 (12/C) (ex CP 202/2009) which Greece granted to the undertakings Piraeus Container Terminal SA and Cosco Pacific Ltd (OJ 2015 L 269, p. 93)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 279, 24.8.2015.