do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-272/17: Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 23 January 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — K.M. Zyla v Staatssecretaris van Financiën (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Free movement of workers — Equal treatment — Income tax — Social security contributions — Worker who left the Member State of her employment during the course of the calendar year — Application of the pro rata temporis rule to social security credit)
Date: 2019-01-23
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: equal treatment, free movement of workers, residence, social-security contribution, tax on income








C_2019093EN.01000801.xml










11.3.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 93/8






Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 23 January 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — K.M. Zyla v Staatssecretaris van Financiën
(Case C-272/17) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Free movement of workers - Equal treatment - Income tax - Social security contributions - Worker who left the Member State of her employment during the course of the calendar year - Application of the pro rata temporis rule to social security credit))
(2019/C 93/09)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: K.M. Zyla

Respondent: Staatssecretaris van Financiën

Operative part of the judgment

Article 45 TFEU must be interpreted as not precluding legislation of a Member State which, with a view to establishing the amount of social security contributions payable by a worker, provides that the social security component of the tax credit to which a worker is entitled for a calendar year is to be proportionate to the period during which that worker was insured under the social security system of that Member State, thus excluding from that annual credit a fraction proportionate to the period during which that worker was not insured under that social security system and lived in another Member State where he did not engage in professional activity.


(1)  OJ C 277, 21.8.2017.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9095 — UPL/Arysta LifeScience) (Text with EEA relevance) 2019/C 364/02
Date: 2019-01-23
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: chemical product, economic concentration, merger control, plant health product








C_2019364EN.01000201.xml










29.10.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 364/2






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.9095 — UPL/Arysta LifeScience)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 364/02)
On 23 January 2019, 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 32019M9095. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case C-40/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság (Hungary) lodged on 23 January 2019 — EY v Bevándorlási és Menekültügyi Hivatal
Date: 2019-01-23
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: judicial proceedings, right of asylum, right to justice








C_2019139EN.01003201.xml










15.4.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 139/32






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság (Hungary) lodged on 23 January 2019 — EY v Bevándorlási és Menekültügyi Hivatal
(Case C-40/19)
(2019/C 139/30)
Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Fővárosi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: EY

Defendant: Bevándorlási és Menekültügyi Hivatal

Questions referred







1.


Can Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Article 31 of Directive 2013/32/EU (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council (known as the ‘Procedures Directive’) be interpreted, in the light of Articles 6 and 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights, as meaning that it is possible for effective judicial protection to be guaranteed in a Member State even if its courts cannot amend decisions given in asylum procedures but may only annul them and order that a new procedure be conducted?










2.


Can Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Article 31 of Directive 2013/3[2]/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council (known as the ‘Procedures Directive’) be interpreted, again in the light of Articles 6 and 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights, as meaning that legislation of a Member State which lays down a single mandatory time limit of 60 days in total for judicial proceedings in asylum matters, irrespective of any individual circumstances and without regard to the particular features of the case or any potential difficulties in relation to evidence, is compatible with those provisions?






(1)  Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection (OJ 2013 L 180, p. 60).
Case T-304/18: Order of the General Court of 23 January 2019 — MLPS v Commission (Action for annulment and for failure to act — Decision to take no further action on a complaint — Refusal by the Commission to institute proceedings under Article 7 TEU — Act not open to challenge — No direct concern — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2019-01-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: France, admissibility, complaint to the Commission, organisation of professions, social security








C_2019093EN.01006102.xml










11.3.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 93/61






Order of the General Court of 23 January 2019 — MLPS v Commission
(Case T-304/18) (1)

((Action for annulment and for failure to act - Decision to take no further action on a complaint - Refusal by the Commission to institute proceedings under Article 7 TEU - Act not open to challenge - No direct concern - Inadmissibility))
(2019/C 93/80)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Mouvement pour la liberté de la protection sociale (MLPS) (Paris, France) (represented by: M. Gibaud, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: H. Tserepa–Lacombe and H. Krämer, acting as Agents)

Re:

First, application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of the decision of the Commission of 7 March 2018 refusing to take any further action on a complaint requesting that proceedings be brought on the basis of Article 7 TEU against the French Republic and, secondly, action based on Article 265 TFEU seeking a declaration that the Commission unlawfully refrained from dealing with that complaint.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed.










2.


The Mouvement pour la liberté de la protection sociale shall pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 259, 23.7.2018.
Statement of revenue and expenditure of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction for the financial year 2018 — amending budget No 1
Date: 2019-01-23
Institutions: European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction
Subjects: EU expenditure, amending budget, budgetary resources, financial year, general budget (EU), publication of accounts








C_2019029EN.01000101.xml










23.1.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 29/1






Statement of revenue and expenditure of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction for the financial year 2018 — amending budget No 1
(2019/C 29/01)

REVENUE










Title
Chapter


Heading


Budget 2018


Amending budget No 1


New amount





1




EUROPEAN UNION SUBSIDY





1 1


EUROPEAN UNION SUBSIDY


15 445 600 


 


15 445 600 




1 2


EUROPEAN UNION SPECIAL FUNDING FOR SPECIFIC PROJECTS


—


 


—




 



Title 1 — Total




15 445 600 



 



15 445 600 






2




OTHER SUBSIDIES





2 1


NORWAY’S PARTICIPATION


412 932,41 


1 910,69 


414 843,10 




2 2


PRE-ACCESSION STRATEGY


276 550,49 


 


276 550,49 




2 3


INCOME FROM SALE OF CURRENT EMCDDA PREMISES


—


 


—




 



Title 2 — Total




689 482,90 




1 910,69 




691 393,59 






3




REVENUE FOR SERVICES RENDERED AGAINST PAYMENT





3 1


REVENUE FOR SERVICES RENDERED AGAINST PAYMENT


p.m.


 


p.m.




 



Title 3 — Total




p.m.



 



p.m.






4




OTHER REVENUE





4 1


INTERNAL ASSIGNED REVENUE


p.m.


34 399,08 


34 399,08 




4 2


INTEREST GENERATED BY FUNDS PAID TO THE EMCDDA


p.m.


2 807,54 


2 807,54 




4 3


MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE


—


 


—




 



Title 4 — Total




p.m.




37 206,62 




37 206,62 





 



GRAND TOTAL




16 135 082,90 




39 117,31 




16 174 200,21 






EXPENDITURE










Title
Chapter


Heading


Appropriations 2018


Amending budget No 1


New amount





1




EXPENDITURE RELATING TO PERSONS WORKING WITH THE EMCDDA





1 1


STAFF IN ACTIVE EMPLOYMENT


10 248 290,81 


111 612,81 


10 359 903,62 




1 2


PENSIONS AND SEVERANCE GRANTS


 


 


 




 



Title 1 — Total




10 248 290,81 




111 612,81 




10 359 903,62 






2




EXPENDITURE FOR SUPPORT ACTIVITIES





2 1


ADMINISTRATIVE AND LOGISTIC SUPPORT ACTIVITIES


1 351 209,01 


23 843,07 


1 375 052,08 




 



Title 2 — Total




1 351 209,01 




23 843,07 




1 375 052,08 






3




EXPENDITURE FOR OPERATIONAL ACTIVITIES AND PROJECTS





3 1


PROJECT-RELATED ACTIVITIES


4 535 583,08 


–99 145,45 


4 436 437,63 




 



Title 3 — Total




4 535 583,08 




–99 145,45 




4 436 437,63 






4




EXPENDITURE FOR IMPLEMENTING SPECIAL PROJECTS FUNDED BY SPECIFIC EU SUBSIDIES





4 1


PROJECTS


 


2 806,88 


2 806,88 




 



Title 4 — Total



 



2 806,88 




2 806,88 





5


RESERVE


 


 


 




 



GRAND TOTAL




16 135 082,90 




39 117,31 




16 174 200,21
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9257 — NEC/KMD) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2019-01-23
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, information technology industry, merger control, public sector








C_2019028EN.01000801.xml










23.1.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 28/8






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.9257 — NEC/KMD)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 28/04)

1.   
On 15 January 2019, 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:






—


NEC Corporation (‘NEC’, Japan),










—


KMD Holding APS (‘KMD’, Denmark), owned by the private equity firm Advent International and the Danish pension fund Sampension.




NEC acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of KMD.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for NEC: a Japanese technology group providing equipment and IT solutions to the public and private sectors. Through its subsidiary Northgate Public Services Limited (‘NPS’), NEC provides IT services to the public sector in the UK.
—   for KMD: a Danish IT company active in the provision of IT solutions for local and central governments primarily in Denmark and the Nordic countries.


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.9257 — NEC/KMD
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.
Case T-41/19: Action brought on 23 January 2019 — MSI Svetovanje v EUIPO — Industrial Farmaceutica Cantabria (nume)
Date: 2019-01-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, dairy ice cream, food supplement, foodstuff, non-alcoholic beverage, pharmaceutical product, processed foodstuff, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, veterinary medicinal product








C_2019112EN.01004201.xml










25.3.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 112/42






Action brought on 23 January 2019 — MSI Svetovanje v EUIPO — Industrial Farmaceutica Cantabria (nume)
(Case T-41/19)
(2019/C 112/51)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: MSI Svetovanje, marketing, d.o.o (Vrhnika, Slovenia) (represented by: M. Maček, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Industrial Farmaceutica Cantabria, SA (Madrid, Spain)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union figurative nume — Application for registration No 15 120 355

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 November 2018 in Case R 722/2018-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred to MSI Svetovanje d.o.o.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 95(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 94 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council and of Article 296 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;










—


Infringement of Articles 8(1)(b) and 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case C-698/17 P: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 23 January 2019 — Toni Klement v European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (Appeal — EU trade mark — Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Article 15(1) — Application for revocation of a mark — Three-dimensional mark representing the form of an oven — Genuine use of the mark — Statement of reasons)
Date: 2019-01-23
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, furnace, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2019093EN.01001701.xml










11.3.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 93/17






Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 23 January 2019 — Toni Klement v European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)
(Case C-698/17 P) (1)

((Appeal - EU trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Article 15(1) - Application for revocation of a mark - Three-dimensional mark representing the form of an oven - Genuine use of the mark - Statement of reasons))
(2019/C 93/21)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellant: Toni Klement (represented by: J. Weiser, Rechtsanwalt)

Other party to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by: D. Hanf, D. Botis and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Mr Toni Klement to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 134, 16.4.2018.
Case C-41/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Köln (Germany) lodged on 23 January 2019 — FX v GZ, represented for legal purposes by her mother
Date: 2019-01-23
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: enforcement of ruling, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, maintenance obligation








C_2019155EN.01002001.xml










6.5.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 155/20






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Köln (Germany) lodged on 23 January 2019 — FX v GZ, represented for legal purposes by her mother
(Case C-41/19)
(2019/C 155/26)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Amtsgericht Köln

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: FX

Defendant: GZ, represented for legal purposes by her mother

Questions referred







1.


Does an application opposing enforcement made pursuant to Paragraph 767 of the German Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO) against a foreign maintenance order constitute a matter relating to maintenance within the meaning of Council Regulation (EC) No 4/2009 of 18 December 2008 on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of decisions and cooperation in matters relating to maintenance obligations (the European Maintenance Regulation)? (1)











2.


If not, does an application opposing enforcement made pursuant to Paragraph 767 ZPO against a foreign maintenance order constitute proceedings concerned with the enforcement of judgments within the meaning of Article 24(5) of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters? (2)







(1)  OJ 2009 L 7, p. 1.

(2)  OJ 2012 L 351, p. 1.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9126 — MHI/Danfoss/AIP) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2019-01-23
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, machinery, merger control








C_2019028EN.01001001.xml










23.1.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 28/10






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.9126 — MHI/Danfoss/AIP)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 28/05)

1.   
On 16 January 2019, 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:






—


Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd (Japan),










—


Danfoss A/S (Denmark).




Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd (‘MHI’) and Danfoss A/S (‘Danfoss’) acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation joint control of Artemis Intelligent Power Limited (‘AIP’), a company based in Edinburgh, United Kingdom, currently controlled by MHI and active in the provision of technology associated with Digital Displacement hydraulics.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for MHI: an international supplier of heavy industrial machinery, headquartered in Tokyo,
—   for Danfoss: a supplier of products and services in areas such as mobile hydraulics, cooling and heating, headquartered in Nordborg.


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.9126 — MHI/Danfoss/AIP
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.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9228 — Denso/Aisin/JV) (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2019-01-23
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, electric vehicle, electrical engineering, electronics industry, merger control, motor vehicle industry, research and development








C_2019039EN.01001102.xml










1.2.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 39/11






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.9228 — Denso/Aisin/JV)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 39/05)
On 23 January 2019, 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 32019M9228. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9231 — Viohalco Group/ACEK Group/Etem JVs) (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2019-01-23
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: aluminium, economic concentration, merger control, motor vehicle industry








C_2019057EN.01000101.xml










13.2.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 57/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.9231 — Viohalco Group/ACEK Group/Etem JVs)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 57/01)
On 23 January 2019, 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 32019M9231. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.