do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/325 of 25 February 2019 amending Decision 2012/642/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Belarus
Date: 2019-02-25
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Belarus, EU restrictive measure, economic sanctions, international sanctions




L_2019057EN.01000401.xml










26.2.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 57/4








            COUNCIL DECISION (CFSP) 2019/325
of 25 February 2019
         
amending Decision 2012/642/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Belarus


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 29 thereof,


Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,

Whereas:







(1)


On 15 October 2012, the Council adopted Decision 2012/642/CFSP (1) concerning restrictive measures against Belarus.












(2)


On the basis of a review of that Decision, the restrictive measures against Belarus should be extended until 28 February 2020.












(3)


Decision 2012/642/CFSP should therefore be amended accordingly,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
Article 8 of Decision 2012/642/CFSP is replaced by the following:


‘Article 8

1.   This Decision shall apply until 28 February 2020.


2.   This Decision shall be kept under constant review and shall be renewed or amended, as appropriate, if the Council deems that its objectives have not been met.’.





Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




Done at Brussels, 25 February 2019.


For the Council


The President

G. CIAMBA
            





(1)  Council Decision 2012/642/CFSP of 15 October 2012 concerning restrictive measures against Belarus (OJ L 285, 17.10.2012, p. 1).
Case T-129/19: Action brought on 25 February 2019 — Necci v Commission
Date: 2019-02-25
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: health insurance, servant (EU), staff regulations (EU), transfer of pension rights








C_2019155EN.01004501.xml










6.5.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 155/45






Action brought on 25 February 2019 — Necci v Commission
(Case T-129/19)
(2019/C 155/54)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Claudio Necci (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: S. Orlandi and T. Martin, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the decision of 18 April 2018 rejecting his application for membership of the JSIS;










—


order the Commission to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on one main plea in law and one alternative plea in law.
Primarily, he claims that the European Commission infringed Article 95 of the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants (‘the CEOS’) by refusing to admit him as a member of the Joint Sickness Insurance Scheme (JSIS), without taking into account the additional contribution period granted to him in the pension scheme of the institutions of the Union in consideration for the transfer of his national pension rights.
In the alternative, the applicant raises an objection of illegality in respect of Article 95 of the CEOS having regard to Article 45 of the TFEU.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9076 — Novelis/Aleris) (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2019-02-25
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: aluminium, economic concentration, merger control, semi-manufactured goods, subsidiary, waste recycling








C_2019070EN.01001201.xml










25.2.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 70/12






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.9076 — Novelis/Aleris)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 70/08)

1.   
On 18 February 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:






—


Novelis Inc. (USA, ‘Novelis’), a subsidiary of Hindalco Industries Limited (India),










—


Aleris Corporation (USA, ‘Aleris’).




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


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


Novelis is a global manufacturer of semi-finished aluminium products and recycler of aluminium,










—


Aleris is a global manufacturer of semi-finished aluminium products.






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.



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.9076 — Novelis/Aleris
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’).
Case C-169/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte dei Conti — Sezione Giurisdizionale Per la Regione Puglia (Italy) lodged on 25 February 2019 — IC v Istituto Nazionale della Previdenza Sociale
Date: 2019-02-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: nationality, residence, tax on income, tax relief, taxable income








C_2019206EN.01002101.xml










17.6.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 206/21






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte dei Conti — Sezione Giurisdizionale Per la Regione Puglia (Italy) lodged on 25 February 2019 — IC v Istituto Nazionale della Previdenza Sociale
(Case C-169/19)
(2019/C 206/25)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Corte dei Conti — Sezione Giurisdizionale Per la Regione Puglia

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: IC

Defendant: Istituto Nazionale della Previdenza Sociale

Question referred

Must Articles 18 TFEU and 21 TFEU be interpreted as precluding legislation of a Member State which provides for the taxation, in that Member State, of the income of a person resident in another Member State who receives all of his income from the first Member State but who does not hold the nationality of the second Member State, without the benefit of the tax advantages provided by that second Member State?
Case C-181/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landessozialgericht Nordrhein-Westfalen (Germany) lodged on 25 February 2019 — JD v Jobcenter Krefeld — Widerspruchsstelle
Date: 2019-02-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: additional benefit, equal treatment, family benefit, free movement of workers, residence permit, social security legislation, worker (EU)








C_2019182EN.01002001.xml










27.5.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 182/20






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landessozialgericht Nordrhein-Westfalen (Germany) lodged on 25 February 2019 — JD v Jobcenter Krefeld — Widerspruchsstelle
(Case C-181/19)
(2019/C 182/24)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landessozialgericht Nordrhein-Westfalen

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: JD

Defendant: Jobcenter Krefeld — Widerspruchsstelle

Questions referred







1.


Is the exclusion of Union citizens having a right of residence under Article 10 of Regulation No 492/2011 (1) from receipt of social assistance within the meaning of Article 24(2) of Directive 2004/38 (2) compatible with the requirement of equal treatment arising from Article 18 TFEU read in conjunction with Articles 10 and 7 of Regulation No 492/2011?






(a)


Does social assistance within the meaning of Article 24(2) of Directive 2004/38 constitute a social advantage within the meaning of Article 7(2) of Regulation No 492/2011?










(b)


Does the limitation set out in Article 24(2) of Directive 2004/38 apply to the requirement of equal treatment arising from Article 18 TFEU read in conjunction with Articles 10 and 7 of Regulation No 492/2011?














2.


Is the exclusion of Union citizens from receipt of special non-contributory cash benefits within the meaning of Articles 3(3) and 70(2) of Regulation No 883/2004 (3) compatible with the requirement of equal treatment arising from Article 18 TFEU read in conjunction with Article 4 of Regulation No 883/2004 if those citizens have a right of residence arising from Article 10 of Regulation No 492/2011 and are integrated into a social security system or family benefits system within the meaning of Article 3(1) of Regulation No 883/2004?






(1)  Regulation (EU) No 492/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2011 on freedom of movement for workers within the Union Text with EEA relevance (OJ 2011 L 141, p. 1).

(2)  Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC (OJ 2004 L 158, p. 77).

(3)  Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the coordination of social security systems (OJ 2004 L 166, p. 1).
Case C-173/19 P: Appeal brought on 25 February 2019 by Scandlines Danmark ApS and Scandlines Deutschland GmbH against the order of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) delivered on 13 December 2018 in Case T-890/16: Scandlines Danmark and Scandlines Deutschland v Commission
Date: 2019-02-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Baltic Sea, Denmark, EU financing, Germany, State aid, control of State aid, project of common interest, rail transport, road transport, tunnel








C_2019148EN.01003401.xml










29.4.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 148/34






Appeal brought on 25 February 2019 by Scandlines Danmark ApS and Scandlines Deutschland GmbH against the order of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) delivered on 13 December 2018 in Case T-890/16: Scandlines Danmark and Scandlines Deutschland v Commission
(Case C-173/19 P)
(2019/C 148/32)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellants: Scandlines Danmark ApS and Scandlines Deutschland GmbH (represented by: L. Sandberg-Mørch, advokat)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission, Kingdom of Denmark

Form of order sought

The appellants claim that the Court should:






—


Set aside the Order of 13 December 2018 of the General Court in Case T-890/16 to the extent that it contradicts the General Court’s judgment in Case T-630/15 as to the nature of the Commission Decision as a confirmatory measure regarding the additional construction measures.










—


Order the respondent to pay its own costs and the costs of the appellants.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the application, the applicants relie on two pleas in law:






—


First Plea: the General Court erred in law by adopting the contested order on the basis of a position which is entirely the opposite of that adopted in its judgment in Case T-630/15.










—


Second Plea: the General Court erred in law by adopting the contested order with a statement of reasons that suffers from internal contradictions.
Case C-168/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte dei Conti — Sezione Giurisdizionale per la Regione Puglia (Italy) lodged on 25 February 2019 — HB v Istituto Nazionale della Previdenza Sociale
Date: 2019-02-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: nationality, residence, tax on income, tax relief, taxable income








C_2019206EN.01002001.xml










17.6.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 206/20






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte dei Conti — Sezione Giurisdizionale per la Regione Puglia (Italy) lodged on 25 February 2019 — HB v Istituto Nazionale della Previdenza Sociale
(Case C-168/19)
(2019/C 206/24)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Corte dei Conti — Sezione Giurisdizionale per la Regione Puglia

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: HB

Defendant: Istituto Nazionale della Previdenza Sociale

Question referred

Must Articles 18 TFEU and 21 TFEU be interpreted as precluding legislation of a Member State which provides for the taxation, in that Member State, of the income of a person resident in another Member State who receives all of his income from the first Member State but who does not hold the nationality of the second Member State, without the benefit of the tax advantages provided by that second Member State?
Case T-131/19: Action brought on 25 February 2019 — Oosterbosch v Parliament
Date: 2019-02-25
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: legality, pay, principle of legal certainty, wage determination








C_2019148EN.01005501.xml










29.4.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 148/55






Action brought on 25 February 2019 — Oosterbosch v Parliament
(Case T-131/19)
(2019/C 148/54)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Marc Oosterbosch (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: M. Casado García-Hirschfeld, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare that the present application is admissible and well founded;




consequently:






—


annul the ‘contested decision’ comprising the payslips for the months of March, April and June 2018;










—


declare, if necessary, that the decision of 6 November 2018 rejecting the complaint is annulled;










—


order the defendant to pay all the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on a single plea in law, based on infringement of the principles of legality and legal certainty and a plea of illegality: the contested decision was taken on the basis of unlawful internal rules and implementing provisions.
Case C-185/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Arbitral de pe lângă Asociația de arbitraj de pe lângă Baroul Cluj (Romania) lodged on 25 February 2019 — KE v LF
Date: 2019-02-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: arbitration, court of arbitration, jurisdiction, professional society, right of action, right to justice








C_2019383EN.01003602.xml










11.11.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 383/36






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Arbitral de pe lângă Asociația de arbitraj de pe lângă Baroul Cluj (Romania) lodged on 25 February 2019 — KE v LF
(Case C-185/19)
(2019/C 383/41)
Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Tribunalul Arbitral de pe lângă Asociația de arbitraj de pe lângă Baroul Cluj

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: KE

Defendant: LF
By Order of 24 September 2019, the Court (Sixth Chamber) declared the request for a preliminary ruling manifestly inadmissible and declared that it manifestly lacks jurisdiction to give a ruling thereon.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2019-02-25
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2019070EN.01001101.xml










25.2.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 70/11






Euro exchange rates (1)

22 February 2019
(2019/C 70/07)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1325 




JPY


Japanese yen


125,56 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4620 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,87263 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,5998 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,1346 




ISK


Iceland króna


135,70 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,7643 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,667 




HUF


Hungarian forint


318,03 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,3370 




RON


Romanian leu


4,7611 




TRY


Turkish lira


6,0378 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5923 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4976 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,8884 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6639 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5324 




KRW


South Korean won


1 273,20 




ZAR


South African rand


15,8607 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,6109 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4230 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 920,00 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,6174 




PHP


Philippine peso


59,052 




RUB


Russian rouble


74,1694 




THB


Thai baht


35,493 




BRL


Brazilian real


4,2392 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,7810 




INR


Indian rupee


80,5530 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case C-170/19 P: Appeal brought on 25 February 2019 by CheapFlights International Ltd against the order of the General Court (Second Chamber) delivered on 11 December 2018 in Case T-565/17: CheapFlights International v EUIPO — Momondo Group
Date: 2019-02-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, Internet, computer equipment, data processing, provision of services, registered trade mark, software, trade-mark law, user guide








C_2019295EN.01000301.xml










2.9.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 295/3






Appeal brought on 25 February 2019 by CheapFlights International Ltd against the order of the General Court (Second Chamber) delivered on 11 December 2018 in Case T-565/17: CheapFlights International v EUIPO — Momondo Group
(Case C-170/19 P)
(2019/C 295/04)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: CheapFlights International Ltd (represented by: A. von Mühlendahl and H. Hartwig, Rechtsanwälte)

Other party to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office
By order of 10 July 2019 the Court of Justice (Eighth Chamber) held that the appeal was manifestly unfounded.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9303 — LetterOne/DIA) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2019-02-25
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: distributor, economic concentration, foodstuff, investment company, merger control, retail trade, special chemicals








C_2019070EN.01001301.xml










25.2.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 70/13






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.9303 — LetterOne/DIA)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 70/09)

1.   
On 18 February 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:






—


L1R Invest1 Holdings S.à r.l. (‘L1R Invest1’) (Luxembourg), controlled by LetterOne Investment Holdings S.A. (Luxembourg),










—


Distribuidora Internacional de Alimentación, S.A. (‘DIA’) (Spain).




L1R Invest1 acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of DIA.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for LetterOne Investment Holdings S.A.: a privately-owned Luxembourg-based investment holding company targeting investments in the telecoms and technology, healthcare and retail, and energy sectors,
—   for DIA: an international food retailer and distributor of fast-moving and home and personal care goods.


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.9303 — LetterOne/DIA
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 +32 229-64301




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 C-657/17: Order of the President of the Court of 25 February 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from theVerwaltungsgerichtshof — Austria) — Hussein Mohamad Hussein, other party: Bundesamt für Fremdenwesen und Asyl
Date: 2019-02-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, EU migration policy, foreign national, right of asylum, stateless person








C_2019172EN.01002402.xml










20.5.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 172/24






Order of the President of the Court of 25 February 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof — Austria) — Hussein Mohamad Hussein, other party: Bundesamt für Fremdenwesen und Asyl
(Case C-657/17) (1)

(2019/C 172/30)
Language of the case: German
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 52, 12.2.2018.