do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-185/18: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo (Spain) lodged on 9 March 2018 — Oro Efectivo S.L. v Diputación Foral de Bizkaia
Date: 2018-03-09
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, indirect tax, jewellery and goldsmith's articles, personal property, purchase, tax law








C_2018182EN.01001302.xml










28.5.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 182/13





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo (Spain) lodged on 9 March 2018 — Oro Efectivo S.L. v Diputación Foral de Bizkaia
(Case C-185/18)
(2018/C 182/16)
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Tribunal Supremo

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Oro Efectivo S.L.

Defendant: Diputación Foral de Bizkaia

Question referred

Does Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, (1) the principle of tax neutrality arising from that directive, and the case-law of the Court of Justice interpreting the directive preclude a national rule of law under which a Member State may require payment of an indirect tax other than VAT from a business person or professional in respect of the purchase of movable property (specifically, gold, silver or jewellery) from a private individual where:






1.


the purchased object is going to be processed and subsequently sold on in the course of that business person’s economic activities;










2.


transactions subject to VAT will occur when the purchased property is reintroduced into the course of trade; and










3.


in such transactions the applicable legislation in that same Member State does not permit the business person or professional to deduct the amount paid by way of that tax in respect of the initial purchase?






(1)  OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2018-03-09
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2018090EN.01000201.xml










9.3.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 90/2





Euro exchange rates (1)

8 March 2018
(2018/C 90/03)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,2421 




JPY


Japanese yen


131,83 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4505 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,89465 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,2173 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,1731 




ISK


Iceland króna


123,50 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,7135 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,427 




HUF


Hungarian forint


312,02 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2042 




RON


Romanian leu


4,6588 




TRY


Turkish lira


4,7326 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5912 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,6044 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,7356 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7102 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,6339 




KRW


South Korean won


1 331,33 




ZAR


South African rand


14,7670 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,8696 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4365 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


17 114,90 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,8523 




PHP


Philippine peso


64,646 




RUB


Russian rouble


70,6686 




THB


Thai baht


38,921 




BRL


Brazilian real


4,0261 




MXN


Mexican peso


23,2184 




INR


Indian rupee


80,8980 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case C-180/18: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato (Italy) lodged on 9 March 2018 — Agrenergy Srl v Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico
Date: 2018-03-09
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: State aid, energy consumption, energy production, production aid, renewable energy








C_2018182EN.01001202.xml










28.5.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 182/12





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato (Italy) lodged on 9 March 2018 — Agrenergy Srl v Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico
(Case C-180/18)
(2018/C 182/14)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Consiglio di Stato

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Agrenergy Srl

Respondent: Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico

Question referred

Should Article 3(3)(a) of Directive 2009/28/EC (1) be interpreted — including in view of the general principle of the protection of legitimate expectations and the overall system of rules introduced by that directive to incentivise the production of energy from renewable sources — as rendering incompatible with EU law national legislation which allows the Italian Government, in subsequent implementing decrees, to reduce or even remove incentives introduced earlier?


(1)  Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources and amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC (OJ 2009 L 140, p. 16).
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8768 — Singapore Airlines/CAE/JV) (Text with EEA relevance. )
Date: 2018-03-09
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: aeronautical industry, air transport, crew, economic concentration, holding company, investment company, merger control, professional qualifications, vocational training








C_2018090EN.01000101.xml










9.3.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 90/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.8768 — Singapore Airlines/CAE/JV)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2018/C 90/01)
On 2 March 2018, 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 32018M8768. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-196/17: Order of the General Court of 9 March 2018 — Naftogaz of Ukraine v Commission (Action for annulment — Internal market in natural gas — Directive 2009/73/EC — Commission Decision on review of the exemption of the OPAL pipeline from the requirements on third-party access and tariff regulation — Lack of direct concern — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2018-03-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: gas pipeline, gas supply, natural gas, single market








C_2018152EN.01003601.xml










30.4.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 152/36





Order of the General Court of 9 March 2018 — Naftogaz of Ukraine v Commission
(Case T-196/17) (1)

((Action for annulment - Internal market in natural gas - Directive 2009/73/EC - Commission Decision on review of the exemption of the OPAL pipeline from the requirements on third-party access and tariff regulation - Lack of direct concern - Inadmissibility))
(2018/C 152/45)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: NJSC Naftogaz of Ukraine (Kiev, Ukraine) (represented by: D. Mjaaland, A. Haga, M. Krakowiak and P. Grzejszczak, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: Y. G. Marinova, O. Beynet and K. Herrmann, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking annulment of Commission Decision C(2016) 6950 final of 28 October 2016 on the review of the conditions for exemption of the OPAL pipeline, granted under Directive 2003/55/EC, from the rules on third-party access and tariff regulation.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as inadmissible.










2.


There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the applications to intervene.










3.


NJSC Naftogaz of Ukraine shall bear its own costs and the costs of the European Commission.










4.


Naftogaz of Ukraine, the Commission, OPAL Gastransport GmbH & Co. KG, Gazprom Eksport LLC and Polskie Górnictwo Naftowe i Gazownictwo S.A. shall each bear their own costs relating to the applications to intervene.






(1)  OJ C 151, 15.5.2017.
Case T-187/18: Action brought on 9 March 2018 — VP v Cedefop
Date: 2018-03-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: abuse of power, damages, indemnification, termination of employment, work contract








C_2018166EN.01003901.xml










14.5.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 166/39





Action brought on 9 March 2018 — VP v Cedefop
(Case T-187/18)
(2018/C 166/50)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: VP (represented by: L. Levi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (Cedefop)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare the present appeal admissible and founded;










—


annul the decision of 12 May 2017 of the defendant rejecting the request of the applicant to renew the employment contract for an indefinite period;










—


annul the decision of 1 December 2017 of the defendant rejecting the complaint of the applicant of 9 August 2017 against the decision of 12 May 2017;










—


order the compensation of the immaterial damage suffered by the applicant, evaluated ex aequo et bono to 100 000 (one hundred thousand) euros;










—


order the compensation of the material damage suffered by the applicant; and










—


order the reimbursement of all the costs incurred by the applicant for the present appeal.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on the following pleas in law, alleging that: the decision of the defendant not to renew the employment contract of the applicant was adopted in violation of the right to be heard, the obligation of duty of care, the obligation to state reasons, in violation of the duty to hear the immediate superior; it suffers under a manifest error of appreciation and is vitiated by a misuse of powers.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8836 — 3i/Sits) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance. )
Date: 2018-03-09
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: consumer, cosmetics industry, economic concentration, investment, investment company, merger control, secondary sector, service, technology








C_2018090EN.01001401.xml










9.3.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 90/14





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.8836 — 3i/Sits)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2018/C 90/06)






1.


On 1 March 2018, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1).
This notification concerns the following undertakings:






—


3i Group plc (The United Kingdom),










—


Crown Bidco BV, controlled by 3i Group plc,










—


Sits Holding BV (The Netherlands)




3i Group plc (3i) will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation, and through Crown Bidco BV, control of the whole of Sits Holding BV (Sits).
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   3i: investment management focused on midmarket private equity and infrastructure investments.3i invests in three core sectors: business and technology services, consumer and industrial,
—   Crown Bidco BV: vehicle company created for the purpose of this transaction,
—   Sits: manufacture, under the name Royal Sanders, of personal care products, such as: bath and shower, skin care products, deodorants and perfumes. It manufactures primarily for retailers and brand owners. It also owns a portfolio of branded care products which includes Van Gils, Sanicur and Odorex.










3.


On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.
Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.










4.


The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:
M.8836 — 3i/Sits
Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:





E-mail:




COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu




Fax:




+32 22964301




Postal address:




European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË










(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.
Case T-462/16: Judgment of the General Court of 9 March 2018 — Portugal v Commission (FEAGA — Expenditure excluded from financing — Area-related aid — Expenditure incurred by Portugal — Legitimate Expectations — Article 41(3) of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 — Article 31(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 — Proportionality)
Date: 2018-03-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EAFRD, EAGF, agricultural expenditure, aid per hectare, eligibility criteria, principle of proportionality, single payment scheme








C_2018142EN.01004401.xml










23.4.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 142/44





Judgment of the General Court of 9 March 2018 — Portugal v Commission
(Case T-462/16) (1)

((FEAGA - Expenditure excluded from financing - Area-related aid - Expenditure incurred by Portugal - Legitimate Expectations - Article 41(3) of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 - Article 31(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 - Proportionality))
(2018/C 142/57)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties


Applicant: Portuguese Republic (represented by: L. Inez Fernandes, M. Figueiredo, J. Saraiva de Almeida and P. Estêvão, acting as Acting as Agents

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Sauka, acting as Agent, assisted by M. Marques Mendes and A. Dias Henriques, lawyers)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/1059 of 20 June 2016 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ 2016 L 173, p. 59), in so far as it concerns the Portuguese Republic.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action.










2.


Orders the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 392, 24.10.2016.
Case T-181/18: Action brought on 9 March 2018 — Multifit Tiernahrungs v EUIPO (TAKE CARE)
Date: 2018-03-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, animal feedingstuffs, animal welfare, pet food, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2018161EN.01007001.xml










7.5.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 161/70





Action brought on 9 March 2018 — Multifit Tiernahrungs v EUIPO (TAKE CARE)
(Case T-181/18)
(2018/C 161/87)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Multifit Tiernahrungs GmbH (Krefeld, Germany) (represented by: N. Weber and L. Thiel, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Trade mark at issue: European Union figurative mark containing the word element ‘TAKE CARE’ — Application for registration No 16 254 898

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 January 2018 in Case R 845/2017-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8796 — Crown/Signode) (Text with EEA relevance. )
Date: 2018-03-09
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, packaging product








C_2018090EN.01000102.xml










9.3.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 90/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.8796 — Crown/Signode)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2018/C 90/02)
On 5 March 2018, 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 32018M8796. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-246/16: Order of the General Court of 9 March 2018 — Aurora Group Danmark v EUIPO — Retail Distribution (PANZER) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — Withdrawal of the application for a declaration of invalidity — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2018-03-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, computer, electronic device, mobile phone, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2018161EN.01005101.xml










7.5.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 161/51





Order of the General Court of 9 March 2018 — Aurora Group Danmark v EUIPO — Retail Distribution (PANZER)
(Case T-246/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Withdrawal of the application for a declaration of invalidity - No need to adjudicate))
(2018/C 161/57)
Language of the case: Danish

Parties


Applicant: Aurora Group Danmark A/S (Ballerup, Denmark) (represented by: L. Elmgaard Sørensen, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: initially, D. Gaja and, subsequently, T. Frydendahl and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Retail Distribution ApS (Hinnerup, Denmark) (represented by: E.A. Skovbo, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 March 2016 (Case R 447/2015-1), relating to invalidity proceedings between Retail Distribution and Aurora Group Danmark.

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.










2.


Aurora Group Danmark A/S and Retail Distribution ApS shall bear their own respective costs and shall each pay half of the costs incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).






(1)  OJ C 279, 1.8.2016.
Commission information notice pursuant to Article 16(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community — Imposition of public service obligations in respect of scheduled air services (Text with EEA relevance. )
Date: 2018-03-09
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Catalonia, Community of Madrid, Extremadura, Spain, air transport, inland transport, services of general interest, transport regulations








C_2018090EN.01001301.xml










9.3.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 90/13





Commission information notice pursuant to Article 16(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community
Imposition of public service obligations in respect of scheduled air services
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2018/C 90/05)






Member State


Spain




Routes concerned


Badajoz-Madrid
Badajoz-Barcelona




Date of entry into force of the public service obligations


The day following the publication of this information notice




Address where the text and any other information or documentation related to the public service obligations can be obtained







Ministerio de Fomento




Dirección General de Aviación Civil




Subdirección General de Transporte Aéreo




Paseo de la Castellana 67




28071 Madrid




MADRID




ESPAÑA




Tel. +34 915977505




Fax +34 915978643




Email address: osp.dgac@fomento.es








In the event that no air carrier submits a programme of services compliant with the public service obligations imposed, access will be restricted to a single air carrier through the corresponding public tender procedure, in accordance with Article 16(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008.
Recommendation of the European Central Bank of 9 March 2018 to the Council of the European Union on the external auditors of the Banque de France (ECB/2018/9)
Date: 2018-03-09
Institutions: European Central Bank
Subjects: European System of Central Banks, France, accountant, auditing, central bank, euro area








C_2018107EN.01000101.xml










22.3.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 107/1





RECOMMENDATION OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK
of 9 March 2018
to the Council of the European Union on the external auditors of the Banque de France
(ECB/2018/9)
(2018/C 107/01)
THE GOVERNING COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank, and in particular Article 27.1 thereof,
Whereas:






(1)


The accounts of the European Central Bank (ECB) and national central banks of the Member States whose currency is the euro are audited by independent external auditors recommended by the ECB’s Governing Council and approved by the Council of the European Union.










(2)


Pursuant to Article L.142-2 of the Monetary and Financial Code, the General Council of the Banque de France appoints two statutory auditors to audit the accounts of the Banque de France.










(3)


The mandate of the Banque de France’s external auditors ended following the audit for the financial year 2017. It is therefore necessary to appoint external auditors from the financial year 2018.










(4)


The Banque de France has selected Mazars and KPMG S.A. as its external auditors for the financial years 2018 to 2023,




HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:






1.


It is recommended that Mazars and KPMG S.A. should be appointed jointly as the external auditors of the Banque de France for the financial years 2018 to 2023.





Done at Frankfurt am Main, 9 March 2018.


The President of the ECB

Mario DRAGHI