do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-685/16: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 20 September 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Münster — Germany) — EV v Finanzamt Lippstadt (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Articles 63 to 65 TFEU — Free movement of capital — Deduction of taxable profits — Shareholdings of a parent company in a capital company whose management and registered office are located in a non-member State — Dividends distributed to the parent company — Tax deductibility subject to stricter conditions than deduction of profits from shareholdings in a non-tax-exempt capital company governed by national law)
Date: 2018-09-20
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: company with share capital, corporation tax, free movement of capital, nationality of legal persons, parent company, shareholding, tax exemption, tax relief, taxable income, third country








C_2018408EN.01000902.xml










12.11.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 408/9






Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 20 September 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Münster — Germany) — EV v Finanzamt Lippstadt
(Case C-685/16) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Articles 63 to 65 TFEU - Free movement of capital - Deduction of taxable profits - Shareholdings of a parent company in a capital company whose management and registered office are located in a non-member State - Dividends distributed to the parent company - Tax deductibility subject to stricter conditions than deduction of profits from shareholdings in a non-tax-exempt capital company governed by national law))
(2018/C 408/09)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Finanzgericht Münster

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: EV

Defendant: Finanzamt Lippstadt

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 63 to 65 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which subjects a deduction of profits from shareholdings in a capital company with its management and head office in a non-member State to stricter conditions than a deduction of profits from shareholdings in a non-exempt capital company governed by national law.


(1)  OJ C 144, 8.5.2017.
Case C-466/17: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 20 September 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Trento — Italy) — Chiara Motter v Provincia autonoma di Trento (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 1999/70/EC — Framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP — Clause 4 — Public sector — Secondary school teachers — Employment of fixed-term workers as career civil servants through recruitment based on qualification — Determination of the period of service deemed accrued — Account taken only in part of periods of service completed under fixed-term contracts)
Date: 2018-09-20
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: equal treatment, full-time employment, recruitment, seniority, temporary employment








C_2018408EN.01002801.xml










12.11.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 408/28






Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 20 September 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Trento — Italy) — Chiara Motter v Provincia autonoma di Trento
(Case C-466/17) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Social policy - Directive 1999/70/EC - Framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP - Clause 4 - Public sector - Secondary school teachers - Employment of fixed-term workers as career civil servants through recruitment based on qualification - Determination of the period of service deemed accrued - Account taken only in part of periods of service completed under fixed-term contracts))
(2018/C 408/36)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale di Trento

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Chiara Motter

Defendant: Provincia autonoma di Trento

Operative part of the judgment

Clause 4 of the framework agreement on fixed-term work, concluded on 18 March 1999, annexed to Council Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999 concerning the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP, must be interpreted as not precluding, in principle, national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which for the purpose of classifying a worker in a salary grade at the time of his recruitment on the basis of qualifications as a career civil servant, takes full account only of the first four years of service completed under fixed-term contracts, only two thirds of subsequent periods of service being taken into consideration.


(1)  OJ C 347, 16.10.2017.
Case C-588/18: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Audiencia Nacional (Spain) lodged on 20 September 2018 — Federación de Trabajadores Independientes de Comercio (FETICO), Federación Estatal de Servicios, Movilidad y Consumo de la Unión General de Trabajadores (FESMC-UGT), Federación de Servicios de Comisiones Obreras (CC.OO.) v Grupo de Empresas DIA, S.A., Twins Alimentación, S.A.
Date: 2018-09-20
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: arrangement of working time, paid leave, weekly rest period








C_2018436EN.01002601.xml










3.12.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 436/26






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Audiencia Nacional (Spain) lodged on 20 September 2018 — Federación de Trabajadores Independientes de Comercio (FETICO), Federación Estatal de Servicios, Movilidad y Consumo de la Unión General de Trabajadores (FESMC-UGT), Federación de Servicios de Comisiones Obreras (CC.OO.) v Grupo de Empresas DIA, S.A., Twins Alimentación, S.A.
(Case C-588/18)
(2018/C 436/36)
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Audiencia Nacional

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Federación de Trabajadores Independientes de Comercio (FETICO), Federación Estatal de Servicios, Movilidad y Consumo de la Unión General de Trabajadores (FESMC-UGT), Federación de Servicios de Comisiones Obreras (CC.OO.)

Defendants: Grupo de Empresas DIA, S.A., Twins Alimentación, S.A.

Questions referred







1.


Must Article 5 of Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 (1) concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time be interpreted as precluding national legislation under which the weekly rest period is permitted to overlap with paid leave of absence intended to meet needs other than rest?










2.


Must Article 7 of Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time be interpreted as precluding national legislation under which annual leave is permitted to overlap with paid leave of absence intended to meet needs other than rest, relaxation and leisure?






(1)  OJ 2003 L 299, p. 9.
Case C-585/18: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Najwyższy (Poland) lodged on 20 September 2018 — A. K. v Krajowa Rada Sądownictwa
Date: 2018-09-20
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: appeal, higher court, independence of the judiciary, jurisdiction, separation of powers








C_2019044EN.01000902.xml










4.2.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 44/9






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Najwyższy (Poland) lodged on 20 September 2018 — A. K. v Krajowa Rada Sądownictwa
(Case C-585/18)
(2019/C 44/13)
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Sąd Najwyższy

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: A. K.

Respondent: Krajowa Rada Sądownictwa (National Council of the Judiciary)

Questions referred







1.


On a proper construction of the third subparagraph of Article 267 TFEU, read in conjunction with Article 19(1) and Article 2 TEU and Article 47 of the [Charter of Fundamental Rights], is a newly-created chamber of a court of last instance of a Member State which has jurisdiction to hear an appeal by a national court judge and which is composed exclusively of judges selected by a national body tasked with safeguarding the independence of the courts (the National Council of the Judiciary), which, having regard to the systemic model for the way in which it is formed and the way in which it operates, is not guaranteed to be independent from the legislative and executive authorities, an independent court or tribunal within the meaning of EU law?










2.


If the answer to the first question is negative, should the third subparagraph of Article 267 TFEU, read in conjunction with Article 19(1) and Article 2 TEU and Article 47 of the [Charter of Fundamental Rights], be interpreted as meaning that a chamber of a court of last instance of a Member State which does not have jurisdiction in the case but meets the requirements of EU law for a court seised with an appeal in an EU case should disregard the provisions of national legislation which preclude it from having jurisdiction in that case?
Case T-192/17: Order of the General Court of 20 September 2018 — RZ v EESC and Committee of the Regions (Civil service — Officials — [confidential] — Action for annulment and damages — No act adversely affecting an official)
Date: 2018-09-20
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, access to EU information, confidentiality, damages, disciplinary proceedings, harassment at work, information profession, psychological harassment








C_2018427EN.01006602.xml










26.11.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 427/66






Order of the General Court of 20 September 2018 — RZ v EESC and Committee of the Regions
(Case T-192/17) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - [confidential] (2) - Action for annulment and damages - No act adversely affecting an official)
(2018/C 427/88)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: RZ (represented by: M.-A. Lucas, lawyer)

Defendants: European Economic and Social Committee (represented by: M. Pascua Mateo, K. Gambino and L. Camarena Januzec, acting as Agents, and M. Troncoso Ferrer and F.-M. Hislaire, lawyers), Committee of the Regions (represented by: S. Bachotet, M. Antonini and M. Esparrago Arzadun, acting as Agents, and B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

Application under Article 270 essentially seeking, first, annulment of the decision of 11 May 2016 by which the Secretary General of the Committee of the Regions [confidential], a joint service between the Committee of the Regions and the European Economic Social Committee (EESC), [confidential] and second, compensation for the harm the applicant allegedly suffered as a result of those decisions.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed.










2.


RZ is ordered to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 178, 6.6.2017.

(2)  Confidential information redacted.
Case T-146/17: Judgment of the General Court of 20 September 2018 — Mondi v ACER (Energy — Decision of the Board of Appeal of ACER — Rejection of the application to intervene — Direct and existing interest at the end of the procedure — Right to be heard)
Date: 2018-09-20
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: energy industry, energy law, rights of the defence








C_2018408EN.01004901.xml










12.11.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 408/49






Judgment of the General Court of 20 September 2018 — Mondi v ACER
(Case T-146/17) (1)

((Energy - Decision of the Board of Appeal of ACER - Rejection of the application to intervene - Direct and existing interest at the end of the procedure - Right to be heard))
(2018/C 408/62)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Mondi AG (Vienna, Austria) (represented by: B. Rajal, lawyer)

Defendant: Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (represented by: P. Martinet and E. Tremmel, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Republic of Poland (represented by: B. Majczyna, acting as Agent)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of the decision of the Board of Appeal of ACER of 17 February 2017 rejecting the applicant’s application to intervene in Case A-001-2017 (consolidated).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mondi AG to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER);










3.


Orders the Republic of Poland to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 129, 24.4.2017.
Case T-266/17: Judgment of the General Court of 20 September 2018 — Kwizda Holding v EUIPO — Dermapharm (UROAKUT) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark UROAKUT — Earlier national and international figurative marks UroCys — Relative ground for refusal — Lack of likelihood of confusion — Power to amend decisions — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No (EC) 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
Date: 2018-09-20
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, dietary product, pharmaceutical product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2018399EN.01003401.xml










5.11.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 399/34






Judgment of the General Court of 20 September 2018 — Kwizda Holding v EUIPO — Dermapharm (UROAKUT)
(Case T-266/17) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark UROAKUT - Earlier national and international figurative marks UroCys - Relative ground for refusal - Lack of likelihood of confusion - Power to amend decisions - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No (EC) 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)))
(2018/C 399/46)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Kwizda Holding GmbH (Vienna, Austria) (represented by: L. Wiltschek, D. Plasser and K. Majchrzak, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Hanne, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Dermapharm GmbH (Vienna) (represented by: H. Kunz-Hallstein and R. Kunz-Hallstein, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 7 March 2017 (Case R 1221/2016-4) concerning opposition proceedings between Dermapharm and Kwizda Holding.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 7 March 2017 (Case R 1221/2016-4);










2.


Rejects the opposition brought by Dermapharm GmbH;










3.


Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and the costs incurred by Kwizda Holding GmbH, including the costs incurred before the Board of Appeal;










4.


Orders Dermapharm to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 202, 26.6.2017.
Case T-561/18: Action brought on 20 September 2018 — ITD and Danske Fragtmænd v Commission
Date: 2018-09-20
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Denmark, State aid, VAT, control of State aid, financial aid, postal service, services of general interest, tax exemption, universal service








C_2018427EN.01009002.xml










26.11.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 427/90






Action brought on 20 September 2018 — ITD and Danske Fragtmænd v Commission
(Case T-561/18)
(2018/C 427/119)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: ITD, Brancheorganisation for den danske vejgodstransport A/S (Padborg, Denmark) and Danske Fragtmænd A/S (Åbyhøj, Denmark) (represented by: L. Sandberg-Mørch, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:






—


annul Commission Decision C(2018) 3169 final of 28 May 2018 in State aid case SA.47707 (2018/N) — State compensations granted to PostNord for the provision of the universal postal service — Denmark; (1)











—


order the Commission to bear the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicants rely on a single plea in law, alleging failure by the Commission to open the formal investigation procedure provided for in Article 108(2) TFEU, despite the serious difficulties arising in the assessment of the measures at issue. This plea based on two series of arguments relating to the length and circumstances of the preliminary investigation procedure as well as to the content of the contested decision.






—


As regards the content of the contested decision, the applicants claim, in particular, that: (i) the universal service obligation compensation is not compatible with the internal market; (ii) the State guarantees do not constitute existing aid; (iii) the VAT exemption is imputable to the State; (iv) the misallocation of costs involves the transfer of State resources and is imputable to the State; and (v) the capital injection of 23 February 2017 is imputable to the State and confers an economic advantage on Post Danmark.






(1)  OJ 2018 C 360, p. 3.
Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/553 of 3 April 2018 concerning the classification of certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature (OJ L 92, 10.4.2018)
Date: 2018-09-20
Institutions: Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission
Subjects: Combined Nomenclature, aluminium, piping, specification of tariff heading, tube








L_2018237EN.01001201.xml










20.9.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 237/12







Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/553 of 3 April 2018 concerning the classification of certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature

(
Official Journal of the European Union L 92 of 10 April 2018
)


On page 1, in recital 5:
for:


                  ‘The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Customs Code Committee,’,

read:


                  ‘The Customs Code Committee has not delivered an opinion within the time limit laid down by its Chair,’.