do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Corrigendum to Commission Directive (EU) 2015/1480 of 28 August 2015 amending several annexes to Directives 2004/107/EC and 2008/50/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down the rules concerning reference methods, data validation and location of sampling points for the assessment of ambient air quality (OJ L 226, 29.8.2015)
Date: 2019-03-14
Institutions: European Commission, Secretariat-General
Subjects: air quality, environmental impact, environmental monitoring, evaluation method, hydrocarbon, non-ferrous metal, pollution control, prevention of pollution, quality standard, semi-metal








L_2019072EN.01014101.xml










14.3.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 72/141







Corrigendum to Commission Directive (EU) 2015/1480 of 28 August 2015 amending several annexes to Directives 2004/107/EC and 2008/50/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down the rules concerning reference methods, data validation and location of sampling points for the assessment of ambient air quality

(
Official Journal of the European Union L 226 of 29 August 2015
)


On page 10, in Annex II, in point (3)(a), in the amendments to Section A of Annex VI to Directive 2008/50/EC:
for:

‘3.   Reference method for the sampling and measurement of lead — unchanged’


read:

‘3.   Reference method for the sampling and measurement of lead
The reference method for the sampling of lead is that described in Section A(4) of this Annex. The reference method for the measurement of lead is that described in EN 14902:2005 “Standard method for measurement of Pb/Cd/As/Ni in the PM10 fraction of suspended particulate matter”.’
                  

On page 11, in Annex II, in point (3)(a), in the amendments to Section A of Annex VI to Directive 2008/50/EC:
for:

‘6.   Reference method for the sampling and measurement of benzene — unchanged’


read:

‘6.   Reference method for the sampling and measurement of benzene
The reference method for the measurement of benzene is that described in EN 14662:2005, parts 1, 2 and 3 “Ambient air quality — Standard method for measurement of benzene concentrations”.’
Communication from the EFTA Surveillance Authority under Article 21(7) of the Act referred to at point 1 of Annex VII to the EEA Agreement (Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 September 2005 on the recognition of professional qualifications)
Date: 2019-03-14
Institutions: EFTA Surveillance Authority
Subjects: European Economic Area, Norway, dentist, recognition of diplomas, recognition of vocational training qualifications, surgeon








C_2019097EN.01000301.xml










14.3.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 97/3






Communication from the EFTA Surveillance Authority under Article 21(7) of the Act referred to at point 1 of Annex VII to the EEA Agreement
(Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 September 2005 on the recognition of professional qualifications)
(2019/C 97/03)
Article 21(7) of the Act referred to at point 1 of Annex VII to the EEA Agreement (Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 September 2005 on the recognition of professional qualifications), foresees that the EFTA States shall notify the EFTA Surveillance Authority (‘the Authority’) of the legislative, regulatory and administrative provisions they adopt with regard to the issuing of evidence of formal qualifications in the fields covered by Chapter III of the Act.
The Authority has the task to publish an appropriate communication indicating the titles adopted by Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway for evidence of formal qualifications and, where appropriate, the body which issues the evidence of formal qualifications, the certificate which accompanies it and the corresponding professional title referred to in Annex V of the Act, points 5.1.1, 5.1.4, 5.2.2, 5.3.2, 5.3.3, 5.4.2, 5.5.2, 5.6.2 and 5.7.1 respectively.
Since Norway has notified changes regarding titles of training courses in specialised medicine, the Authority publishes the present communication in accordance with Article 21(7) of the Act.

Titles of training courses in specialised medicine

Norway has notified the following changes of titles of training courses in specialised medicine (Annex V, point 5.1.3, to Directive 2005/36/EC):






Country


Title
Dental, oral and maxillo-facial surgery (basic medical and dental training)




Norge


 













Country


Title
Maxillo-facial surgery (basic medical training)




Norge


Maxillofacial kirurgi
Case C-695/17: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 14 March 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Helsingin käräjäoikeus — Finland) — Metirato Oy, in liquidation v Suomen valtio/Verohallinto, Eesti Vabariik/Maksu- ja Tolliamet (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Directive 2010/24/EU — Mutual assistance for the recovery of claims relating to taxes, duties and other measures — Article 13(1) — Article 14(2) — Enforced recovery, by the authorities of the requested Member State, of claims of the applicant Member State — Procedure relating to an application seeking the restitution of those claims to the insolvency estate of a company established in the requested Member State — Defendant in those proceedings — Determination)
Date: 2019-03-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, administrative cooperation, claim, financial solvency, liquidation








C_2019155EN.01001101.xml










6.5.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 155/11






Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 14 March 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Helsingin käräjäoikeus — Finland) — Metirato Oy, in liquidation v Suomen valtio/Verohallinto, Eesti Vabariik/Maksu- ja Tolliamet
(Case C-695/17) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 2010/24/EU - Mutual assistance for the recovery of claims relating to taxes, duties and other measures - Article 13(1) - Article 14(2) - Enforced recovery, by the authorities of the requested Member State, of claims of the applicant Member State - Procedure relating to an application seeking the restitution of those claims to the insolvency estate of a company established in the requested Member State - Defendant in those proceedings - Determination)
(2019/C 155/13)
Language of the case: Finnish

Referring court

Helsingin käräjäoikeus

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Metirato Oy, in liquidation

Defendants: Suomen valtio/Verohallinto, Eesti Vabariik/Maksu- ja Tolliamet

Operative part of the judgment

Article 13(1) and Article 14(2) of Council Directive 2010/24/EU of 16 March 2010 concerning mutual assistance for the recovery of claims relating to taxes, duties and other measures must be interpreted as meaning that, first, they apply to proceedings seeking restitution, to the insolvency estate of a company established in the requested Member State, of claims which were recovered at the request of the applicant Member State, if those proceedings are based on disputes concerning the enforcement measures, within the meaning of Article 14(2) and, second, the requested Member State, within the meaning of those provisions, must be regarded as the defendant in those proceedings, the fact that the amount represented by those claims has been separated from the assets of that Member State or merged with them being irrelevant in that regard.


(1)  OJ C 83, 5.3.2018.
Case C-227/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesverwaltungsgericht Steiermark (Austria) lodged on 14 March 2019 — DX
Date: 2019-03-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: administrative formalities, administrative sanction, document storage, freedom to provide services, posted worker








C_2019213EN.01000701.xml










24.6.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 213/7






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesverwaltungsgericht Steiermark (Austria) lodged on 14 March 2019 — DX
(Case C-227/19)
(2019/C 213/07)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landesverwaltungsgericht Steiermark

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: DX

Respondent authority: Bürgermeister der Stadt Graz

Interested party: Finanzpolizei

Questions referred







1.


Must Article 56 TFEU, Directive 96/71/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 1996 concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services (1) and Directive 2014/67/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 on the enforcement of Directive 96/71/EC (2) be interpreted as precluding a national provision which, for infringements of formal obligations in connection with the cross-border deployment of labour, such as a failure to make available documents relating to pay or a failure to report to the Central Coordination Office (ZKO notifications), provides for very high fines, in particular high minimum penalties, which are imposed cumulatively in respect of each worker concerned?










2.


If the answer to Question 1 is in the negative:
Must Article 56 TFEU, Directive 96/71/EC and Directive 2014/67/EU be interpreted as precluding the imposition of cumulative fines for infringements of formal obligations in connection with the cross-border deployment of labour which have no absolute upper limits?






(1)  OJ 1997 L 18, p. 1.

(2)  Directive 2014/67/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 on the enforcement of Directive 96/71/EC concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services and amending Regulation (EU) No 1024/2012 on administrative cooperation through the Internal Market Information System (OJ 2014 L 159, p. 11).
Case C-174/18: Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 14 March 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de première instance de Liège — Belgium) — Jean Jacob, Dominique Lennertz v État belge (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Freedom of movement for workers — Equal treatment — Income tax — Legislation for the avoidance of double taxation — Pension received in a Member State other than that of residence — Method of calculating the exemption in the Member State of residence — Loss of part of the benefit of certain tax advantages)
Date: 2019-03-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: double taxation, equal treatment, free movement of workers, married person, pension scheme, residence, tax exemption, tax on income, tax relief








C_2019155EN.01001401.xml










6.5.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 155/14






Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 14 March 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de première instance de Liège — Belgium) — Jean Jacob, Dominique Lennertz v État belge
(Case C-174/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Freedom of movement for workers - Equal treatment - Income tax - Legislation for the avoidance of double taxation - Pension received in a Member State other than that of residence - Method of calculating the exemption in the Member State of residence - Loss of part of the benefit of certain tax advantages)
(2019/C 155/17)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal de première instance de Liège

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Jean Jacob, Dominique Lennertz

Defendant: État belge

Operative part of the judgment

Article 45 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding the application of tax legislation of a Member State, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which has the effect of depriving a couple resident in that State, one of whom receives a pension in another Member State which is exempt from taxation in the first Member State pursuant to a bilateral convention for the avoidance of double taxation, of part of the benefit of the tax advantages granted by the Member State of residence.


(1)  OJ C 166, 14.5.2018.
Case C-399/17: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 14 March 2019 — European Commission v Czech Republic (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006 — Shipment of waste — Refusal of the Czech Republic to ensure the take-back of the mixture TPS-NOLO (Geobal) shipped from that Member State to Poland — Existence of waste — Burden of proof — Proof)
Date: 2019-03-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Poland, export of waste, infringement procedure (EU), petroleum product, proof, transport of dangerous goods, waste management








C_2019155EN.01000501.xml










6.5.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 155/5






Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 14 March 2019 — European Commission v Czech Republic
(Case C-399/17) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006 - Shipment of waste - Refusal of the Czech Republic to ensure the take-back of the mixture TPS-NOLO (Geobal) shipped from that Member State to Poland - Existence of waste - Burden of proof - Proof)
(2019/C 155/05)
Language of the case: Czech

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: P. Němečková, E. Sanfrutos Cano and L. Haasbeek, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Czech Republic (represented by: M. Smolek, J. Vláčil, T. Müller and L. Dvořáková, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders the European Commission to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 293, 4.9.2017.
Case T-159/19: Action brought on 14 March 2019 — Bog-Fran v EUIPO — Fabryki Mebli ‘Forte’ (Furniture)
Date: 2019-03-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: designs and models, furniture industry








C_2019155EN.01005401.xml










6.5.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 155/54






Action brought on 14 March 2019 — Bog-Fran v EUIPO — Fabryki Mebli ‘Forte’ (Furniture)
(Case T-159/19)
(2019/C 155/63)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Bog-Fran sp. z o.o. sp.k. (Warsaw, Poland) (represented by: M. Mikosza, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Fabryki Mebli ‘Forte’ S.A. (Ostrów Mazowiecka, Poland)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the design at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Design at issue: European Union design No 1384 002-0034

Contested decision: Decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 14 January 2019 in Case R 291/2018-3

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision and uphold the application for a declaration of invalidity;










—


order EUIPO and the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal to bear the costs of the proceedings and reimburse the applicant’s costs.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 7(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002.
European Parliament legislative resolution of 14 March 2019 on the draft Council regulation on jurisdiction, the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, and on international child abduction (recast) (15401/2018 — C8-0023/2019 — 2016/0190(CNS))
Date: 2019-03-14
Institutions: Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, Committee on Legal Affairs, Committee on Petitions, Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality, European Parliament
Subjects: child protection, custody, enforcement of ruling, illegal restraint, judicial cooperation, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, jurisdiction, matrimonial law, parental responsibility, rights of access








C_2021023EN.01057601.xml










21.1.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 23/576






P8_TA(2019)0206
Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and matters of parental responsibility, and international child abduction *
European Parliament legislative resolution of 14 March 2019 on the draft Council regulation on jurisdiction, the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, and on international child abduction (recast) (15401/2018 — C8-0023/2019 — 2016/0190(CNS))
(Special legislative procedure — renewed consultation)
(2021/C 23/79)

The European Parliament,







—


having regard to the Council draft (15401/2018),










—


having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(2016)0411),










—


having regard to its position of 18 January 2018 (1),










—


having regard to Article 81(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament again (C8-0023/2019),










—


having regard to Rules 78c and 78e of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A8-0056/2019),












1.


Approves the Council draft;












2.


Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament;












3.


Calls on the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to amend its draft substantially;












4.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.






(1)  Texts adopted, P8_TA(2018)0017.
Case C-724/17: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 14 March 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein oikeus — Finland) — Vantaan kaupunki v Skanska Industrial Solutions Oy, NCC Industry Oy, Asfaltmix Oy (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Competition — Article 101 TFEU — Compensation for the damage caused by a cartel prohibited by that article — Determination of the undertakings liable to provide compensation — Succession of legal entities — Concept of ‘undertaking’ — Economic continuity test)
Date: 2019-03-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: business activity, cartel, damages, indemnification, share, transfer of businesses








C_2019155EN.01001102.xml










6.5.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 155/11






Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 14 March 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein oikeus — Finland) — Vantaan kaupunki v Skanska Industrial Solutions Oy, NCC Industry Oy, Asfaltmix Oy
(Case C-724/17) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Competition - Article 101 TFEU - Compensation for the damage caused by a cartel prohibited by that article - Determination of the undertakings liable to provide compensation - Succession of legal entities - Concept of ‘undertaking’ - Economic continuity test)
(2019/C 155/14)
Language of the case: Finnish

Referring court

Korkein oikeus

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Vantaan kaupunki

Respondents: Skanska Industrial Solutions Oy, NCC Industry Oy, Asfaltmix Oy

Operative part of the judgment

Article 101 TFEU must be interpreted as meaning that, in a case such as that in the main proceedings, in which all the shares in the companies which participated in a cartel prohibited by that article were acquired by other companies which have dissolved the former companies and continued their commercial activities, the acquiring companies may be held liable for the damage caused by the cartel in question.


(1)  OJ C 83, 5.3.2018.
Case C-229/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Gerechtshof te Amsterdam (Netherlands) lodged on 14 March 2019 — Dexia Nederland BV v XXX
Date: 2019-03-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer protection, hire purchase, interest, termination of a contract, unfair terms of contract








C_2019187EN.01004601.xml










3.6.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 187/46






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Gerechtshof te Amsterdam (Netherlands) lodged on 14 March 2019 — Dexia Nederland BV v XXX
(Case C-229/19)
(2019/C 187/49)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Gerechtshof te Amsterdam

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Dexia Nederland BV

Defendant: XXX

Question referred

Should Directive 93/13 (1) be interpreted as meaning that a contractual term, from the point of view of the criteria laid down in that directive, should already be regarded as unfair if that contractual term, assessed in the light of all the circumstances attending the conclusion of the contract, contains the mere possibility of causing a significant imbalance depending on the circumstances that materialise during the course of the contract, in particular because that contractual term fixes in advance a potential advantage that arises for the seller at the time of the premature termination of the contract, at a certain percentage of the remaining lease sum, thereby derogating from the applicable rules of national law under which such an advantage is not fixed in advance but must be determined on the basis of the circumstances attending the termination of the contract, in particular, the level of the interest rate that should be applied for the remaining duration of the contract to an amount received prematurely?


(1)  Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (OJ 1993 L 95, p. 29).
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9253 — Mercuria/Aegean) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2019-03-14
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, logistics, marine fuel, merger control, wholesale selling








C_2019097EN.01000401.xml










14.3.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 97/4






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.9253 — Mercuria/Aegean)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 97/04)

1.   
On 7 March 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:






—


Mercuria Energy Group Limited (‘Mercuria’, Cyprus), controlled by MDJ Oil Trading Limited,










—


Aegean Marine Petroleum Network Inc. (‘Aegean’, the Republic of the Marshall Islands).




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


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


Mercuria is a global energy and commodities trading group, headquartered in Switzerland and the United Arab Emirates,










—


Aegean is an international marine fuel logistics company headquartered in Greece which markets and physically supplies bunker fuels to vessels in port, at sea, on rivers and other waterways around the globe.






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.9253 — Mercuria/Aegean
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.