do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-127/18: Action brought on 28 February 2018 — Cortina and FLA Europe v Commission
Date: 2018-02-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: China, Viet Nam, anti-dumping duty, footwear industry, import (EU), institutional balance (EU), originating product








C_2018142EN.01006601.xml










23.4.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 142/66





Action brought on 28 February 2018 — Cortina and FLA Europe v Commission
(Case T-127/18)
(2018/C 142/84)
Language of the case: Dutch

Parties


Applicants: Cortina (Oudenaarde, Belgium) and FLA Europe (Oudenaarde) (represented by: S. De Knop, B. Natens and A. Willems, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the General Court should:






—


declare the application admissible;










—


annul Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/2232 of 4 December 2017 reimposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of certain footwear with uppers of leather originating in the People's Republic of China and Vietnam and produced by certain exporting producers in the People’s Republic of China and Vietnam and implementing the judgment of the Court of Justice in Joined Cases C-659/13 and C-34/14; and










—


order the Commission 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 infringement of Article 5(1) and (2) TEU on account of absence of legal basis of the contested regulation and, in the alternative, infringement of the principle of institutional balance laid down in Article 13(2) TEU.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 266 TFEU for failure to take the necessary measures to implement the judgment of 4 February 2016, C & J Clark International (C-659/13 and C-34/14, EU:C:2016:74).










3.


Third plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 5(1) and (4) TFEU for adopting an act which goes further than is necessary to attain the objective being pursued.
Case C-301/16 P: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 28 February 2018 — European Commission v Xinyi PV Products (Anhui) Holdings Ltd (Appeal — Commercial policy — Dumping — Imports of solar glass originating in China — Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 — Article 2(7)(b) and (c) — Market Economy Treatment (MET) — Concept of ‘significant distortions carried over from the former non-market economy system’, within the meaning of the third indent of Article 2(7)(c) — Tax incentives)
Date: 2018-02-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: China, anti-dumping duty, glass, market economy, originating product, solar energy, tax incentive, tax relief








C_2018142EN.01000402.xml










23.4.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 142/4





Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 28 February 2018 — European Commission v Xinyi PV Products (Anhui) Holdings Ltd
(Case C-301/16 P) (1)

((Appeal - Commercial policy - Dumping - Imports of solar glass originating in China - Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 - Article 2(7)(b) and (c) - Market Economy Treatment (MET) - Concept of ‘significant distortions carried over from the former non-market economy system’, within the meaning of the third indent of Article 2(7)(c) - Tax incentives))
(2018/C 142/05)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: European Commission (represented by: L. Flynn and T. Maxian Rusche, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings: Xinyi PV Products (Anhui) Holdings Ltd (represented by: Y. Melin and V. Akritidis, avocats)

Intervener in support of the appellant: GMB Glasmanufaktur Brandenburg GmbH, (represented by: A. Bochon, avocat, and R. MacLean, Solicitor)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 16 March 2016, Xinyi PV Products (Anhui) Holdings v Commission (T 586/14, EU:T:2016:154);










2.


Refers the case back to the General Court of the European Union;










3.


Reserves the costs.






(1)  OJ C 270, 25.7.2016.
Case C-605/17: Order of the President of the Court of 28 February 2018 — European Commission v Slovak Republic
Date: 2018-02-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: construction costs, engineering structure, infringement procedure (EU), investment cost, telecommunications industry, trans-European network, transmission network








C_2018190EN.01002101.xml










4.6.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 190/21





Order of the President of the Court of 28 February 2018 — European Commission v Slovak Republic
(Case C-605/17) (1)

(2018/C 190/37)
Language of the case: Slovak
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 13, 15.1.2018.
Case C-162/18 P: Appeal brought on 28 February 2018 by Wenger SA against the judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) delivered on 23 January 2018 in Case T-869/16: Wenger v EUIPO
Date: 2018-02-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, clock and watch industry, clothing, leather, registered trade mark, sports equipment, textile product, trade-mark law, vehicle








C_2018311EN.01000201.xml










3.9.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 311/2






Appeal brought on 28 February 2018 by Wenger SA against the judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) delivered on 23 January 2018 in Case T-869/16: Wenger v EUIPO
(Case C-162/18 P)
(2018/C 311/02)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Wenger SA (represented by: A. Sulovsky, Rechtsanwältin)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office, Swissgear Sàrl
By order of 5 July 2018 the Court of Justice (Seventh Chamber) held that there is no need to adjudicate on the present appeal.
Case C-672/16: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 28 February 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Arbitral Tributário (Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa — CAAD) — Portugal) — Imofloresmira — Investimentos Imobiliários SA v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Value added tax — TVA Directive — Exemption of the leasing and letting of immovable property — Right of option available to taxable persons — Implementation by the Member States — Deduction of input tax — Use for the purposes of the taxable person’s taxed transactions — Adjustment of the initial deduction — Not permissible)
Date: 2018-02-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, property leasing, tax exemption, tax relief








C_2018142EN.01001001.xml










23.4.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 142/10





Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 28 February 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Arbitral Tributário (Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa — CAAD) — Portugal) — Imofloresmira — Investimentos Imobiliários SA v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira
(Case C-672/16) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Value added tax - TVA Directive - Exemption of the leasing and letting of immovable property - Right of option available to taxable persons - Implementation by the Member States - Deduction of input tax - Use for the purposes of the taxable person’s taxed transactions - Adjustment of the initial deduction - Not permissible))
(2018/C 142/14)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Tribunal Arbitral Tributário (Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa — CAAD)

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Imofloresmira — Investimentos Imobiliários SA

Defendant: Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 167, 168, 184, 185 and 187 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted to the effect that they preclude national legislation which provides for the adjustment of the value added tax initially deducted on the ground that a property, for which the right to opt for taxation was exercised, is regarded as no longer being used by the taxable person for the purposes of its own taxed transactions, where that property has remained unoccupied for more than two years, even though it is established that the taxable person has sought to rent it during that period.


(1)  OJ C 86, 20.3.2017.
Case C-307/16: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 28 February 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny — Poland) — Stanisław Pieńkowski v Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Lublinie (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Directive 2006/112/EC — Value added tax (VAT) — Article 131 — Article 146(1)(b) — Article 147 — Exemptions on exportation — Article 273 — Legislation of a Member State making the benefit of the exemption subject to the attainment of a minimum level of turnover or the conclusion of an agreement with a person authorised to make VAT refunds to travellers)
Date: 2018-02-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, provision of services, tax exemption, tax rebate, taxpayer, traveller, turnover








C_2018142EN.01000501.xml










23.4.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 142/5





Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 28 February 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny — Poland) — Stanisław Pieńkowski v Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Lublinie
(Case C-307/16) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 2006/112/EC - Value added tax (VAT) - Article 131 - Article 146(1)(b) - Article 147 - Exemptions on exportation - Article 273 - Legislation of a Member State making the benefit of the exemption subject to the attainment of a minimum level of turnover or the conclusion of an agreement with a person authorised to make VAT refunds to travellers))
(2018/C 142/06)
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Stanisław Pieńkowski

Defendant: Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Lublinie

Operative part of the judgment

Article 131, Article 146(1)(b) and Articles 147 and 273 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as precluding national legislation under which, in the context of a supply of goods for export to be carried in the personal luggage of travellers, the vendor, a taxable person, must have attained a minimum level of turnover in the preceding tax year, or have concluded an agreement with a person authorised to refund VAT to travellers, where the mere failure to meet those conditions results in the definitive loss for the vendor of the exemption in relation to that supply.


(1)  OJ C 335, 12.9.2016.
Case T-138/18: Action brought on 28 February 2018 — De Esteban Alonso v Commission
Date: 2018-02-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European Anti-fraud Office, damages, rights of the defence








C_2018190EN.01003002.xml










4.6.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 190/30





Action brought on 28 February 2018 — De Esteban Alonso v Commission
(Case T-138/18)
(2018/C 190/53)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Fernando De Esteban Alonso (Saint-Martin-de-Seignanx, France) (represented by: C. Huglo, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought







—


Order OLAF to produce in full and complete form the note of 19 March 2003 produced in the case of Franchet and Byk v Commission (T-48/05) before the General Court of the European Union;










—


Order the European Commission to pay the sum of EUR 1 102 291,68 (one million one hundred and two thousand two hundred and ninety-one euros and sixty-eight cents) as compensation for the losses suffered, to be adjusted if necessary, divided as follows:






—


in respect of the non-material harm suffered by reason of never having [been] heard as regards the facts which gave rise to the charges against him, the sum of EUR 60 000;










—


in respect of the losses suffered as a result of the unlawful, unjustified and disproportionate conduct of the European Commission in pursuing procedures without any factual ground or material element:






—


the sum of EUR 39 293,38 in respect of material harm, namely lawyers’ fees;










—


the sum of EUR 872,74 in respect of material harm, namely travel expenses;










—


the sum of EUR 500 000 in respect of non-material harm, namely the undeniable damage caused to his reputation and honour;










—


the sum of EUR 500 000 as compensation for the physical and mental harm adversely affecting his state of health;










—


the sum of EUR 2 125,56 in respect of material harm, namely examination and medical costs.


















—


Order the European Commission to pay the sum of EUR 3 000 in respect of non-recoverable costs and all the costs of the action, to be adjusted if necessary.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on a single plea in law, alleging the unlawfulness of the European Commission’s conduct and its serious wrongdoing, in that it failed to observe, firstly, the principle of sound administration; secondly, the duty of care and, thirdly, the principles of the rights of the defence by infringing Articles 41 and 48 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights.
Case C-387/16: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 28 February 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Lietuvos vyriausiasis administracinis teismas — Lithuania) — Valstybinė mokesčių inspekcija prie Lietuvos Respublikos finansų ministerijos v Nidera BV (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Value added tax (VAT) — Directive 2006/112/EC — Deduction of input tax — Article 183 — Refund of overpaid VAT — Late refund — Amount of default interest due under national law — Reduction of that amount for reasons not attributable to the taxable person — Whether permissible — Fiscal neutrality — Legal certainty)
Date: 2018-02-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, debt, interest, principle of legal certainty, tax rebate








C_2018142EN.01000601.xml










23.4.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 142/6





Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 28 February 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Lietuvos vyriausiasis administracinis teismas — Lithuania) — Valstybinė mokesčių inspekcija prie Lietuvos Respublikos finansų ministerijos v Nidera BV
(Case C-387/16) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Taxation - Value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Deduction of input tax - Article 183 - Refund of overpaid VAT - Late refund - Amount of default interest due under national law - Reduction of that amount for reasons not attributable to the taxable person - Whether permissible - Fiscal neutrality - Legal certainty))
(2018/C 142/07)
Language of the case: Lithuanian

Referring court

Lietuvos vyriausiasis administracinis teismas

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Valstybinė mokesčių inspekcija prie Lietuvos Respublikos finansų ministerijos

Defendant: Nidera BV

Intervener: Vilniaus apskrities valstybinė mokesčių inspekcija

Operative part of the judgment

Article 183 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, read in the light of the principle of fiscal neutrality, must be interpreted as precluding a reduction in the amount of interest normally payable under national law on overpaid value added tax which was not refunded in due time for reasons connected to circumstances not attributable to the taxable person, such as the high amount of that interest when compared with the amount of the overpaid value added tax, the period of time during which the overpayment was not refunded and the underlying reasons for this, as well as the losses actually incurred by the taxable person.


(1)  OJ C 343, 19.9.2016.
Case C-636/17: Order of the President of the Court of 28 February 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesgericht Korneuburg — Austria) — Germanwings GmbH v Emina Pedić
Date: 2018-02-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: air traffic control, air transport, carriage of passengers, carrier, damages, indemnification








C_2018190EN.01002102.xml










4.6.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 190/21





Order of the President of the Court of 28 February 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesgericht Korneuburg — Austria) — Germanwings GmbH v Emina Pedić
(Case C-636/17) (1)

(2018/C 190/38)
Language of the case: German
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 63, 19.2.2018.
Case T-641/17: Order of the General Court of 28 February 2018 — Ferri v ECB
Date: 2018-02-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Italy, bank, banking system, central bank, law of banking, market supervision, national law, powers of the institutions (EU)








C_2018152EN.01005904.xml










30.4.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 152/59





Order of the General Court of 28 February 2018 — Ferri v ECB
(Case T-641/17) (1)

(2018/C 152/72)
Language of the case: Italian
The President of the Seventh Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 382, 13.11.2017.
Case C-164/18: Action brought on 28 February 2018 — European Commission v Kingdom of Spain
Date: 2018-02-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: infringement procedure (EU), national implementing measure, sanction (EU), service concession








C_2018152EN.01002001.xml










30.4.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 152/20





Action brought on 28 February 2018 — European Commission v Kingdom of Spain
(Case C-164/18)
(2018/C 152/24)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (representatives: P. Ondrůšek, E. Sanfrutos Cano and G. von Rintelen, Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of Spain

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court of Justice should:






—


Declare that, by failing to adopt, by 18 April 2016, all of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2014/23/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014, (1) or, in any case, by failing to notify those measures to the Commission, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 51(1) of that directive;










—


Impose on the Kingdom of Spain, in accordance with Article 260(3) TFEU a daily penalty payment of EUR 61 964,32, with effect from the date of delivery of the judgment declaring the failure to fulfil the obligation to adopt or, in any case, notify to the Commission, the measures necessary to comply with Directive 2014/23/EU;










—


Order the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The period prescribed for adapting national law to Directive 2014/23/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council ended on 18 April 2016.


(1)  Directive 2014/23/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on the award of concession contracts (
OJ 2014 L 94, p. 1).
Case T-292/15: Judgment of the General Court of 28 February 2018 — Vakakis kai Synergates v Commission (Non-contractual liability — Public supply contracts — Tender procedure — Admissibility — Misuse of procedure — Conflict of interests — Duty of diligence — Loss of opportunity)
Date: 2018-02-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Albania, damages, food safety, services contract, tendering








C_2018142EN.01004001.xml










23.4.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 142/40





Judgment of the General Court of 28 February 2018 — Vakakis kai Synergates v Commission
(Case T-292/15) (1)

((Non-contractual liability - Public supply contracts - Tender procedure - Admissibility - Misuse of procedure - Conflict of interests - Duty of diligence - Loss of opportunity))
(2018/C 142/51)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Vakakis kai Synergates — Symvouloi gia Agrotiki Anaptixi AE Meleton, formerly Vakakis International — Symvouloi gia Agrotiki Anaptixi AE (Athens, Greece) (represented by: B. O’Connor, Solicitor, S. Gubel and E. Bertolotto, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by F. Erlbacher and E. Georgieva, and subsequently by E. Georgieva and L. Baumgart, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought under Article 268 TFEU, seeking compensation in respect of the loss which the applicant allegedly suffered as a result of irregularities committed by the Commission in the context of the Tendering Procedure ‘Consolidation of the Food Safety System in Albania’ (EuropeAid/129820/C/SER/AL).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Orders the European Union to pay compensation for the damage suffered by Vakakis kai Synergates — Symvouloi gia Agrotiki Anaptixi AE Meleton in relation to the loss of an opportunity to be awarded the contract ‘Consolidation of the Food Safety System in Albania’ (EuropeAid/129820/C/SER/AL) and for the costs and expenses incurred in participating in that call for tenders;










2.


Orders that the compensation referred to in point 1 of the present operative part be increased by default interest, starting from the date of delivery of the present judgment until full payment, at the rate set by the European Central Bank (ECB) for its main refinancing operations, increased by two percentage points;










3.


Dismisses the action as to the remainder;










4.


Orders the parties to inform the Court, within three months from the date of delivery of the present judgment, of the amount of compensation arrived at by agreement;










5.


Orders that, in the absence of agreement, the parties shall transmit to the Court, within the same period, a statement of their views with supporting figures;










6.


Reserves the costs.






(1)  OJ C 294, 7.9.2015.