do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 204/2018 of 21 September 2018 amending Annex XXI (Statistics) to the EEA Agreement [2021/318]
Date: 2018-09-21
Institutions: EEA Joint Committee
Subjects: EU statistics, European Economic Area, data transmission, disclosure of information, environmental statistics, information processing, information society, information technology, pesticide, revision of an agreement




L_2021075EN.01004301.xml










4.3.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 75/43








            DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE No 204/2018
of 21 September 2018
         
amending Annex XXI (Statistics) to the EEA Agreement [2021/318]


THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (‘the EEA Agreement’), and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Commission Regulation (EU) 2017/269 of 16 February 2017 amending Regulation (EC) No 1185/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning statistics on pesticides, as regards the list of active substances (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement.












(2)


Annex XXI to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
The following is added in point 24d (Regulation (EC) No 1185/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council) of Annex XXI to the EEA Agreement:


                  ‘, as amended by:






—



32017 R 0269: Commission Regulation (EU) 2017/269 of 16 February 2017 (OJ L 40, 17.2.2017, p. 4).’.







Article 2
The text of Regulation (EU) 2017/269 in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.


Article 3
This Decision shall enter into force on 22 September 2018, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement have been made (*1).


Article 4
This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.




Done at Brussels, 21 September 2018.


For the EEA Joint Committee


The President

Oda Helen SLETNES
            





(1)  
            OJ L 40, 17.2.2017, p. 4.

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.
Case T-562/18: Action brought on 21 September 2018 — YP v Commission
Date: 2018-09-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, administrative sanction, disciplinary proceedings, staff regulations (EU)








C_2018399EN.01005701.xml










5.11.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 399/57






Action brought on 21 September 2018 — YP v Commission
(Case T-562/18)
(2018/C 399/73)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: YP (represented by: J.-N. Louis, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

Declare and rule,






—


that the decision of the Commission of 18 September 2017 to impose the penalty of a reprimand on the applicant is annulled;










—


that the defendant is ordered to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on a single plea in law, alleging a manifest error of assessment committed by the defendant in considering that the applicant had failed to fulfil his obligations flowing from Article 12 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union.
Case T-558/18: Action brought on 21 September 2018 — Lupu v EUIPO — Et Djili Soy Dzhihangir Ibryam (Djili DS)
Date: 2018-09-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, agricultural product, beverage, crop production, foodstuff, live animal, processed food product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2018408EN.01005801.xml










12.11.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 408/58






Action brought on 21 September 2018 — Lupu v EUIPO — Et Djili Soy Dzhihangir Ibryam (Djili DS)
(Case T-558/18)
(2018/C 408/75)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Victor Lupu (Bucharest, Romania) (represented by: P. A. Acsinte, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Et Djili Soy Dzhihangir Ibryam (Dulovo, Bulgaria)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union figurative mark Djili DS — Application for registration No 8 404 551

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 June 2018 in Case R 2391/2017-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


uphold the opposition against the registration of the mark applied for (EUTM application 8 404 551) and/or cancel/declare the registration invalid.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 1 of the First Protocol of the European Convention on Human Rights and of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights;










—


Infringement of Rule 20(7)(a) and (c) of the Commission Regulation (EC) no. 2868/95 of 13 December 1995 implementing Council Regulation (EC) no. 40/94 on the Community trade mark;










—


Infringement of Article 53(2)(c) and (d) of Regulation (EC) no. 207/2009 in respect of Applicant’s copyright for the picture of the package ‘Djili’ written in red letters on a blue package with the figure of a parrot and in respect of Applicant’s rights to use a trade name for products in the sense of the Judgment of the European Court of Justice in the Case C-17/06 ‘Celine’.
Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 200/2018 of 21 September 2018 amending Annex XXI (Statistics) to the EEA Agreement [2021/314]
Date: 2018-09-21
Institutions: EEA Joint Committee
Subjects: EU statistics, European Economic Area, data collection, household, household income, living conditions, marginalisation, poverty, revision of an agreement, statistical method




L_2021075EN.01003901.xml










4.3.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 75/39








            DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE No 200/2018
of 21 September 2018
         
amending Annex XXI (Statistics) to the EEA Agreement [2021/314]


THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (‘the EEA Agreement’), and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Commission Regulation (EU) 2018/174 of 2 February 2018 implementing Regulation (EC) No 1177/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning Community statistics on income and living conditions (EU-SILC) as regards the list of target secondary variables on intergenerational transmission of disadvantages, household composition and evolution of income for 2019 (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement.












(2)


Annex XXI to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
The following point is inserted after point 18if (Commission Regulation (EU) 2016/114) of Annex XXI to the EEA Agreement:






‘18ig.



32018 R 0174: Commission Regulation (EU) 2018/174 of 2 February 2018 implementing Regulation (EC) No 1177/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning Community statistics on income and living conditions (EU-SILC) as regards the list of target secondary variables on intergenerational transmission of disadvantages, household composition and evolution of income for 2019 (OJ L 32, 6.2.2018, p. 35).’






Article 2
The text of Regulation (EU) 2018/174 in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.


Article 3
This Decision shall enter into force on 22 September 2018, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement have been made (*1).


Article 4
This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.




Done at Brussels, 21 September 2018.


For the EEA Joint Committee


The President

Oda Helen SLETNES
            





(1)  
            OJ L 32, 6.2.2018, p. 35.

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8236 — Vossloh Rail Services/Rhomberg Sersa Rail Holding/Rhomberg Sersa Vossloh (JV)) (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2018-09-21
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, engineering structure, maintenance, merger control








C_2018359EN.01000201.xml










5.10.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 359/2






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.8236 — Vossloh Rail Services/Rhomberg Sersa Rail Holding/Rhomberg Sersa Vossloh (JV))
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2018/C 359/03)
On 21 September 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 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 32018M8236. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 197/2018 of 21 September 2018 amending Annex XXI (Statistics) to the EEA Agreement [2021/311]
Date: 2018-09-21
Institutions: EEA Joint Committee
Subjects: EU statistics, European Economic Area, foreign trade, industrial product, product design, production statistics, revision of an agreement, technological change, trade statistics




L_2021075EN.01003501.xml










4.3.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 75/35








            DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE No 197/2018
of 21 September 2018
         
amending Annex XXI (Statistics) to the EEA Agreement [2021/311]


THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (‘the EEA Agreement’), and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Commission Regulation (EU) 2017/2119 of 22 November 2017 establishing the ‘Prodcom list’ of industrial products provided for by Council Regulation (EEC) No 3924/91 (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement.












(2)


Annex XXI to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
The following point is inserted after point 4ao (Commission Regulation (EU) 2016/1872) of Annex XXI to the EEA Agreement:






‘4ap.



32017 R 2119: Commission Regulation (EU) 2017/2119 of 22 November 2017 establishing the ‘Prodcom list’ of industrial products provided for by Council Regulation (EEC) No 3924/91 (OJ L 325, 8.12.2017, p. 1).’






Article 2
The text of Regulation (EU) 2017/2119 in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.


Article 3
This Decision shall enter into force on 22 September 2018, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement have been made (*1).


Article 4
This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.




Done at Brussels, 21 September 2018.


For the EEA Joint Committee


The President

Oda Helen SLETNES
            





(1)  
            OJ L 325, 8.12.2017, p. 1.

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.
Case C-593/18 P: Appeal brought on 21 September 2018 by ABB Ltd, ABB AB against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 12 July 2018 in Case T-445/14: ABB Ltd, ABB AB v European Commission
Date: 2018-09-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: administrative procedure, cartel, control of restrictive practices, electric cable, equal treatment, restriction on competition, rights of the defence, sanction (EU)








C_2018436EN.01002702.xml










3.12.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 436/27






Appeal brought on 21 September 2018 by ABB Ltd, ABB AB against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 12 July 2018 in Case T-445/14: ABB Ltd, ABB AB v European Commission
(Case C-593/18 P)
(2018/C 436/38)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellants: ABB Ltd, ABB AB (represented by: I. Vandenborre, advocaat, S. Dionnet, avocat)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Form of order sought

The appellants claim that the Court should:






—


annul the Judgment or take such other action as justice may require, and










—


order the Commission to pay the costs





Pleas in law and main arguments

First plea-in-law. The General Court erred in law in concluding that the Commission met its burden of proof in establishing an infringement on the part of the appellant that included all underground power cables and accessories with voltages between 110 kV and 220 kV. The General Court failed to verify whether the Decision (1) identified the infringement with ‘sufficient precision’ and according to the requisite legal standard. The General Court also failed to properly apply the conditions to find sufficient awareness to conclude participation in the infringement on the part of the appellant.
Second plea-in-law. The General Court failed to apply the principle of equal treatment and the presumption of innocence when it confirmed the Commission's finding that the infringement period for the appellant started on 1 April 2000.
Third plea-in-law. The General Court breached its duty to state sufficient reasons in relation to its assessment of the appellant's plea of unequal treatment, erroneously concluding that the appellant had accepted such distinction during the administrative proceeding, and rendering such acceptance as a material consideration in its assessment.


(1)  Commission Decision of 2 April 2014 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT.39610 — Power Cables) (notified under document C(2014) 2139 final) (OJ 2014, C 319, p. 10).
Case C-598/18 P: Appeal brought on 21 September 2018 by the Council of the European Union against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber, Extended Composition) delivered on 13 July 2018 in Case T-786/14: Eleni Pavlikka Bourdouvali and Others v Council of the European Union and Others
Date: 2018-09-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Cyprus, Euro Group (euro area), admissibility, central bank, economic policy, economic stabilisation, financial aid, stability programme








C_2018427EN.01002501.xml










26.11.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 427/25






Appeal brought on 21 September 2018 by the Council of the European Union against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber, Extended Composition) delivered on 13 July 2018 in Case T-786/14: Eleni Pavlikka Bourdouvali and Others v Council of the European Union and Others
(Case C-598/18 P)
(2018/C 427/33)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Council of the European Union (represented by: A. de Gregorio Merino, E. Chatziioakeimidou, I. Gurov, Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings: Eleni Pavlikka Bourdouvali and Others, European Commission, European Central Bank, Euro Group, represented by the Council of the European Union, European Union, represented by the European Commission

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:






—


set aside the parts of the contested judgments in which the General Court dismisses the plea of inadmissibility raised by the Council in respect of the Euro Group;










—


and order the respondents to pay the costs of the appeal.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The appeal of the Council seeks to set aside the parts of the contested judgment in which the General Court dismisses the plea of inadmissibility raised by the Council in respect of the Euro Group and is based on the following grounds:






—


the General Court has erred in law in deciding that the Euro Group is a ‘body of the Union formally established by the Treaties’;










—


the General Court has erred in law in dismissing the plea of inadmissibility of the Council while failing to identify any ‘powers’ conferred on the Euro Group by the Treaties;










—


the General Court has erred in law in deciding that the admission of the plea of inadmissibility, submitted by the Council, would result in ‘the establishment, within the legal system of the European Union itself, of entities whose acts and conduct could not result in the European Union incurring liability’.
Case T-564/18: Action brought on 21 September 2018 — Bernis and Others v ECB
Date: 2018-09-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: abuse of power, bank, banking supervision, discretionary power, principle of proportionality, trade licence








C_2018436EN.01005301.xml










3.12.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 436/53






Action brought on 21 September 2018 — Bernis and Others v ECB
(Case T-564/18)
(2018/C 436/75)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: Ernests Bernis (Jurmala, Latvia), Oļegs Fiļs (Jurmala), OF Holding SIA (Riga, Latvia) and Cassandra Holding Company SIA (Jurmala) (represented by: O. Behrends, M. Kirchner and L. Feddern, lawyers)

Defendant: European Central Bank (ECB)

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:






—


annul decision ECB-SSM-2018-LVABL-2 WOANCA-2018-0007 of 11 July 2018 withdrawing the banking licence of ABLV Bank, AS;










—


order the defendant to pay all costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicants rely on seven pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging that the ECB incorrectly assumed that the conditions for a licence withdrawal were met.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the ECB failed to take into account the discretionary nature of the decision.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging that the ECB violated the principle of proportionality.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging that the ECB committed a misuse of power.










5.


Fifth plea in law, alleging that the ECB’s decision was not appropriately reasoned.










6.


Sixth plea in law, alleging a violation of essential procedural requirements.










7.


Seventh plea in law, alleging a violation of the nemo auditur principle.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9034 — EQT Fund Management/Azelis) (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2018-09-21
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: chemical industry, distributor, economic concentration, food industry, investment company, merger control








C_2018344EN.01000101.xml










26.9.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 344/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.9034 — EQT Fund Management/Azelis)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2018/C 344/01)
On 21 September 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 32018M9034. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case C-592/18: Request for a preliminary ruling from the College van Beroep voor het Bedrijfsleven (Netherlands) lodged on 21 September 2018 — Darie B.V. v Staatssecretaris van Infrastructuur en Milieu
Date: 2018-09-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: chemical product, market approval, marketing standard, microorganism, pest








C_2018436EN.01002701.xml










3.12.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 436/27






Request for a preliminary ruling from the College van Beroep voor het Bedrijfsleven (Netherlands) lodged on 21 September 2018 — Darie B.V. v Staatssecretaris van Infrastructuur en Milieu
(Case C-592/18)
(2018/C 436/37)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

College van Beroep voor het Bedrijfsleven

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Darie B.V.

Defendant: Staatssecretaris van Infrastructuur en Milieu

Questions referred







1.


Should the term ‘biocidal products’ in Article 3 of Regulation 528/2012 (1) be interpreted as also referring to substances which consist of one or more types of bacteria, enzymes or other constituents, given that, due to the specific way in which they act, they have no direct effect on the harmful organism for which they are intended, but on the creation or maintenance of the potential habitat of that harmful organism, and what requirements must then, where appropriate, be imposed on such an effect?










2.


In answering question 1, is it relevant whether the situation in which such a product is used is free of the harmful organism, and, if so, what criterion should be used to assess whether the latter is present?










3.


In answering question 1, does the period within which the effect takes place have any relevance?






(1)  Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2012 concerning the making available on the market and use of biocidal products Text with EEA relevance (OJ 2012 L 167, p. 1).