do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-9/17: Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2018 — RI v Council (Civil service — Officials — Invalidity pension — Fifth paragraph of Article 78 of the Staff Regulations — Refusal to recognise the invalidity as arising from an occupational disease — Incorrect view of the concept of occupational disease — Obligation to state reasons)
Date: 2018-07-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, disability insurance, occupational disease, staff regulations (EU)








C_2018328EN.01004502.xml










17.9.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 328/45






Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2018 — RI v Council
(Case T-9/17) (1)

((Civil service - Officials - Invalidity pension - Fifth paragraph of Article 78 of the Staff Regulations - Refusal to recognise the invalidity as arising from an occupational disease - Incorrect view of the concept of occupational disease - Obligation to state reasons))
(2018/C 328/61)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: RI (represented by: T. Bontinck, A. Guillerme and M. Forgeois, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bauer and R. Meyer, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU seeking annulment of the decision of the Council of 8 February 2016 refusing to recognise the applicant’s invalidity as arising from an occupational disease under the fifth paragraph of Article 78 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the Council of the European Union of 8 February 2016 refusing to recognise RI’s invalidity as arising from an occupational disease under the fifth paragraph of Article 78 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union;










2.


Orders the Council to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 70, 6.3.2017.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2018-07-12
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2018244EN.01000201.xml










12.7.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 244/2





Euro exchange rates (1)

11 July 2018
(2018/C 244/03)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1735 




JPY


Japanese yen


130,53 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4541 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,88482 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,2745 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,1653 




ISK


Iceland króna


125,40 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,4458 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,929 




HUF


Hungarian forint


324,66 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,3214 




RON


Romanian leu


4,6602 




TRY


Turkish lira


5,6103 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5869 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,5421 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,2111 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7266 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5968 




KRW


South Korean won


1 318,67 




ZAR


South African rand


15,8210 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,8359 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,3960 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 857,33 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,7374 




PHP


Philippine peso


62,893 




RUB


Russian rouble


72,7507 




THB


Thai baht


39,042 




BRL


Brazilian real


4,4923 




MXN


Mexican peso


22,3622 




INR


Indian rupee


80,7045 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case C-460/18 P: Appeal brought on 12 July 2018 by HK against the judgment delivered by the General Court (Eighth Chamber) on 3 May 2018 in Case T-574/16 HK v Commission
Date: 2018-07-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European official, damages, equal treatment, survivor's benefit








C_2018381EN.01000401.xml










22.10.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 381/4






Appeal brought on 12 July 2018 by HK against the judgment delivered by the General Court (Eighth Chamber) on 3 May 2018 in Case T-574/16 HK v Commission
(Case C-460/18 P)
(2018/C 381/05)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: HK (represented by: A. Champetier, S. Rodrigues, lawyers)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission, Council of the European Union

Form of order sought







—


Declare that the appeal is admissible and well founded;










—


Annul the judgment of the General Court of 3 May 2018 (Case T-574/16);










—


Dispose of the case itself by upholding the claims made at first instance by the appellant, including the claim that the defendant be ordered to pay the costs; or in the alternative










—


Refer the case back to the General Court for a ruling and, in those circumstances, make an order as to the costs of the appeal in accordance with Article 184 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of its appeal, the appellant relies on two grounds. The first ground is based on infringement of the first paragraph of Article 17 of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations, and the ambiguous, incoherent and contradictory nature of the statement of reasons. The second ground is based on infringement of the principle of non-discrimination and the inadequate statement of reasons.
Case C-14/17: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 12 July 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — VAR Srl, Azienda Trasporti Milanesi SpA (ATM) v Iveco Orecchia SpA (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Public procurement — Directive 2004/17/EC — Article 34 — Supply of spare parts for buses and trolley-buses — Technical specifications — Equivalent products — Whether proof of equivalence may be provided after the contract has been awarded)
Date: 2018-07-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: award of contract, bus, equal treatment, right to justice, rights of the defence, supplies contract, technical specification, tendering, vehicle parts








C_2018319EN.01000402.xml










10.9.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 319/4






Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 12 July 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — VAR Srl, Azienda Trasporti Milanesi SpA (ATM) v Iveco Orecchia SpA
(Case C-14/17) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Public procurement - Directive 2004/17/EC - Article 34 - Supply of spare parts for buses and trolley-buses - Technical specifications - Equivalent products - Whether proof of equivalence may be provided after the contract has been awarded))
(2018/C 319/05)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Consiglio di Stato

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellants: VAR Srl, Azienda Trasporti Milanesi SpA (ATM)

Respondent: Iveco Orecchia SpA

Operative part of the judgment

Article 34(8) of Directive 2004/17/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 coordinating the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors must be interpreted as meaning that, when the technical specifications in the contract documentation refer to a specific mark, origin or production, the contracting authority must require the tenderer to submit, already in its tender, proof that the products which it proposes are equivalent to those defined in the technical specifications.


(1)  OJ C 168, 29.5.2017.
Case T-422/14: Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2018 — Viscas v Commission (Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — European market for power cables — Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU — Single and continuous infringement — Proof of the infringement — Duration of participation — Public distancing — Calculation of the fine — Gravity of the infringement — Unlimited jurisdiction)
Date: 2018-07-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU market, cartel, control of restrictive practices, electric cable, jurisdiction, proof, restriction on competition, sanction (EU)








C_2018328EN.01003201.xml










17.9.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 328/32






Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2018 — Viscas v Commission
(Case T-422/14) (1)

((Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - European market for power cables - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU - Single and continuous infringement - Proof of the infringement - Duration of participation - Public distancing - Calculation of the fine - Gravity of the infringement - Unlimited jurisdiction))
(2018/C 328/42)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Viscas Corp. (Tokyo, Japan) (represented by J.-F. Bellis, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by C. Giolito, L. Parpala, H. van Vliet and A. Biolan, acting as Agents, and by B. Doherty, Barrister)

Intervener in support of the applicant: Furukawa Electric Co. Ltd (Tokyo) (represented by C. Pouncey, A. Luke and L. Geary, Solicitors)

Re:

Action pursuant to Article 263 TFEU for partial annulment of Commission Decision C(2014) 2139 final of 2 April 2014 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 [TFEU] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT.39610 — Power cables) in so far as it concerns the applicant and, in the alternative, an application for a reduction in the amount of the fine imposed on the applicant in that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Viscas Corp. to bear its own costs and to pay those of the European Commission;










3.


Orders Furukawa Electric Co. Ltd to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 303, 8.9.2014.
Case T-438/14: Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2018 — Silec Cable and General Cable v Commission (Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — European market for power cables — Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU — Concept of an undertaking — Economic succession — Single and continuous infringement — Evidence of the infringement — Public distancing — Duration of participation — Equal treatment — Gravity of the infringement — Unlimited jurisdiction)
Date: 2018-07-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU market, cartel, control of restrictive practices, electric cable, equal treatment, jurisdiction, law of succession, proof, restriction on competition, sanction (EU)








C_2018328EN.01003301.xml










17.9.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 328/33






Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2018 — Silec Cable and General Cable v Commission
(Case T-438/14) (1)

((Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - European market for power cables - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU - Concept of an undertaking - Economic succession - Single and continuous infringement - Evidence of the infringement - Public distancing - Duration of participation - Equal treatment - Gravity of the infringement - Unlimited jurisdiction))
(2018/C 328/43)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: Silec Cable SAS (Montereau-Fault-Yonne, France) and General Cable Corp. (Wilmington, Delaware, United States) (represented by: I. Sinan, Barrister, and I. De Beni, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: C. Giolito and H. van Vliet, acting as Agents, and by D. Bailey, Barrister)

Re:

Action pursuant to Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Decision C(2014) 2139 final of 2 April 2014 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 [TFEU] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT.39610 — Power cables) in so far as it concerns the applicants and, in the alternative, an application for a reduction in the amount of the fines imposed on the applicants in that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Silec Cable SAS and General Cable Corp. to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 282, 25.8.2014.
Case T-419/14: Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2018 — The Goldman Sachs Group v Commission (Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — European market for power cables — Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU — Single and continuous infringement — Imputability of the infringement — Presumption — Error of assessment — Presumption of innocence — Legal certainty — Principle of personal responsibility — Unlimited jurisdiction)
Date: 2018-07-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU market, cartel, control of restrictive practices, electric cable, jurisdiction, liability, principle of legal certainty, restriction on competition, rights of the defence, sanction (EU)








C_2018328EN.01003102.xml










17.9.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 328/31






Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2018 — The Goldman Sachs Group v Commission
(Case T-419/14) (1)

((Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - European market for power cables - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU - Single and continuous infringement - Imputability of the infringement - Presumption - Error of assessment - Presumption of innocence - Legal certainty - Principle of personal responsibility - Unlimited jurisdiction))
(2018/C 328/41)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (New York, New York, United States) (represented by: W. Deselaers, J. Koponen and A. Mangiaracina, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: C. Giolito, L. Malferrari, H. van Vliet and J. Norris-Usher, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Prysmian SpA (Milan, Italy) and Prysmian Cavi e Sistemi Srl (Milan) (represented by: C. Tesauro, F. Russo and L. Armati, lawyers)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of Commission Decision C(2014) 2139 final of 2 April 2014 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 [TFEU] and Article 53 of the [EEA] Agreement (Case AT.39610 — Power cables) in so far as it concerns the applicant and, in the alternative, a reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. to bear its own costs and to pay those of the European Commission;










3.


Orders Prysmian SpA and Prysmian Cavi e Sistemi Srl to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 282, 25.8.2014.
Case T-224/18 R: Order of the President of the General Court of 12 July 2018 — PV v Commission (Interim measures — Civil Service — Psychological harassment — Decisions taken by the Commission following dismissal — Disciplinary proceedings — Reassignment — Setting the salary at ‘zero’ — Application for interim measures — Manifest inadmissibility of the main action — Partial inadmissibility — No prima facie case — No urgency)
Date: 2018-07-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European civil service, admissibility, disciplinary proceedings, harassment at work, pay, psychological harassment, reassignment








C_2018328EN.01005101.xml










17.9.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 328/51






Order of the President of the General Court of 12 July 2018 — PV v Commission
(Case T-224/18 R)
((Interim measures - Civil Service - Psychological harassment - Decisions taken by the Commission following dismissal - Disciplinary proceedings - Reassignment - Setting the salary at ‘zero’ - Application for interim measures - Manifest inadmissibility of the main action - Partial inadmissibility - No prima facie case - No urgency))
(2018/C 328/69)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: PV (represented by: M. Casado García-Hirschfeld, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Berscheid, B. Mongin and R. Striani, acting as agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Articles 278 and 279 TFEU seeking, on the one hand, the suspension of the operation of, first, disciplinary procedure CMS 13/087, second, disciplinary procedure CMS 17/025, third, the decision to reinstate the applicant, fourth, the decision to set the applicant’s salary at zero and, on the other hand, the adoption of an interim measure assigning the applicant to the staff association ‘Generation 2004’ or to another Directorate General of the Commission.

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no need to give a ruling on the application to suspend the operation of disciplinary procedure CMS 13/087.










2.


The application for interim measures is dismissed as to the remainder.










3.


The costs are reserved.
Case T-455/14: Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2018 — Pirelli & C. v Commission (Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — European market for power cables — Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU — Single and continuous infringement — Imputability of the infringement — Presumption — Obligation to state reasons — Fundamental rights — Proportionality — Equal treatment — Beneficium ordinis seu excussionis — Unlimited jurisdiction)
Date: 2018-07-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU market, cartel, control of restrictive practices, electric cable, equal treatment, fundamental rights, jurisdiction, principle of proportionality, restriction on competition, sanction (EU)








C_2018328EN.01004001.xml










17.9.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 328/40






Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2018 — Pirelli & C. v Commission
(Case T-455/14) (1)

((Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - European market for power cables - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU - Single and continuous infringement - Imputability of the infringement - Presumption - Obligation to state reasons - Fundamental rights - Proportionality - Equal treatment - Beneficium ordinis seu excussionis - Unlimited jurisdiction))
(2018/C 328/54)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Pirelli & C. SpA (Milan, Italy) (represented initially by: M. Siragusa, F. Moretti, G. Rizza and P. Ferrari, and subsequently by M. Siragusa, F. Moretti, G. Rizza and A. Bardanzellu, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by: C. Giolito, L. Malferrari and P. Rossi, and subsequently by H. van Vliet, L. Malferrari and P. Rossi, acting as Agents, and by P. Manzini, lawyer)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Prysmian Cavi e Sistemi Srl (Milan) (represented by: C. Tesauro, F. Russo and L. Armati, lawyers)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of Commission Decision C(2014) 2139 final of 2 April 2014 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 [TFEU] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT.39610 — Power cables) in so far as it concerns the applicant and, in the alternative, a reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Pirelli & C. SpA to bear its own costs and to pay those of the European Commission;










3.


Orders Prysmian Cavi e Sistemi Srl to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 261, 11.8.2014.
Case T-439/14: Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2018 — LS Cable & System v Commission (Competition — Agreement, decisions and concerted practices — European market for power cables — Single and continuous infringement — Sufficient proof — Contributing to the single objective of the infringement — Knowledge of key elements of the infringement — Calculation of the fine — Basic amount — Paragraph 18 of the Guidelines — Gravity of the infringement — Proportionality — Mitigating circumstances — Unlimited jurisdiction)
Date: 2018-07-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU market, cartel, control of restrictive practices, electric cable, jurisdiction, principle of proportionality, proof, restriction on competition, sanction (EU)








C_2018328EN.01003302.xml










17.9.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 328/33






Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2018 — LS Cable & System v Commission
(Case T-439/14) (1)

((Competition - Agreement, decisions and concerted practices - European market for power cables - Single and continuous infringement - Sufficient proof - Contributing to the single objective of the infringement - Knowledge of key elements of the infringement - Calculation of the fine - Basic amount - Paragraph 18 of the Guidelines - Gravity of the infringement - Proportionality - Mitigating circumstances - Unlimited jurisdiction))
(2018/C 328/44)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: LS Cable & System Ltd (Anyang-si, South Korea) (represented by: S. Kinsella and S. Spinks, Solicitors)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by: C. Giolito, A. Biolan and N. Khan, and subsequently by N. Khan and H. van Vliet, acting as Agents, and by B. Rayment, Barrister)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Decision C(2014) 2139 final of 2 April 2014 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 [TFEU] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT.39610 — Power cables) in so far as it concerns the applicant and, in the alternative, a reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders LS Cable & System Ltd to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 282, 25.8.2014.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8999 — CACF/Bankia/JV) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2018-07-12
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, financial services, insurance, merger control








C_2018244EN.01000401.xml










12.7.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 244/4





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.8999 — CACF/Bankia/JV)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2018/C 244/05)

1.   
On 5 July 2018, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1), whereby CA Consumer Finance SA (‘CACF’, France) and Bankia SA (‘Bankia’, Spain) acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation joint control of a newly created joint venture (the ‘Target’).
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for Bankia: financial services and provision of financing, insurance, asset management and management of real estate assets in Spain,
—   for CACF: provision of consumer credit in a variety of areas of consumer credit such as direct sales, point-of-sales financing, e-commerce, partnerships and brokerage in 19 countries,
—   for the Target: provision of consumer finance products to individuals, self-employed workers as well as other related activities exclusively in Spain and through non-banking channels such as, inter alia, car dealership companies, shops, direct contact via telephone or websites.


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.8999 — CACF/Bankia/JV
Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:





Email: 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.