do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-453/19: Action brought on 3 July 2019 — Panusa v Parliament
Date: 2019-07-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Bureau of the EP, Italy, Member of the European Parliament, allowances and expenses, equal treatment, national law, pension scheme, principle of legal certainty








C_2019295EN.01007001.xml










2.9.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 295/70






Action brought on 3 July 2019 — Panusa v Parliament
(Case T-453/19)
(2019/C 295/91)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Ida Panusa (Latina, Italy) (represented by: M. Merola, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare non-existent or annul in its entirety the measure of which the applicant was informed by means of the contested communication, in which the European Parliament re-determined retirement pension rights;










—


order the European Parliament to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those relied on in Case T-389/19, Coppo Gavazzi v Parliament.
Case T-449/19: Action brought on 3 July 2019 — Dell’Alba v Parliament
Date: 2019-07-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Bureau of the EP, Italy, Member of the European Parliament, allowances and expenses, equal treatment, national law, pension scheme, principle of legal certainty








C_2019295EN.01006701.xml










2.9.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 295/67






Action brought on 3 July 2019 — Dell’Alba v Parliament
(Case T-449/19)
(2019/C 295/87)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Gianfranco Dell’Alba (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: M. Merola, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare non-existent or annul in its entirety the measure of which the applicant was informed by means of the contested communication, in which the European Parliament re-determined retirement pension rights and ordered recovery of the amount paid on the basis of the earlier pension calculation;










—


order the European Parliament to refund all the sums unduly withheld, and to pay statutory interest from the date of withholding to the date of payment and order the European Parliament to implement the judgment and undertake all the necessary initiatives, acts or measures to ensure the immediate, full re-establishment of the original pension amount;










—


order the European Parliament to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those relied on in Case T-389/19, Coppo Gavazzi v Parliament.
Case T-418/19: Action brought on 3 July 2019 — Mussa v Parliament
Date: 2019-07-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Bureau of the EP, Italy, Member of the European Parliament, allowances and expenses, equal treatment, national law, pension scheme, principle of legal certainty








C_2019295EN.01004401.xml










2.9.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 295/44






Action brought on 3 July 2019 — Mussa v Parliament
(Case T-418/19)
(2019/C 295/57)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Antonio Mussa (Turin, Italy) (represented by: M. Merola, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare non-existent or annul in its entirety the measure of which the applicant was informed by means of the contested communication, in which the European Parliament re-determined retirement pension rights and ordered recovery of the amount paid on the basis of the earlier pension calculation;










—


order the European Parliament to refund all the sums unduly withheld, and to pay statutory interest from the date of withholding to the date of payment and order the European Parliament to implement the judgment and undertake all the necessary initiatives, acts or measures to ensure the immediate, full re-establishment of the original pension amount;










—


order the European Parliament to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those relied on in Case T-389/19, Coppo Gavazzi v Parliament.
Case T-448/19: Action brought on 3 July 2019 — Costanzo v Parliament
Date: 2019-07-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Bureau of the EP, Italy, Member of the European Parliament, allowances and expenses, equal treatment, national law, pension scheme, principle of legal certainty








C_2019295EN.01006601.xml










2.9.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 295/66






Action brought on 3 July 2019 — Costanzo v Parliament
(Case T-448/19)
(2019/C 295/86)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Roberto Costanzo (Benevento, Italy) (represented by: M. Merola, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare non-existent or annul in its entirety the measure of which the applicant was informed by means of the contested communication, in which the European Parliament re-determined retirement pension rights and ordered recovery of the amount paid on the basis of the earlier pension calculation;










—


order the European Parliament to refund all the sums unduly withheld, and to pay statutory interest from the date of withholding to the date of payment and order the European Parliament to implement the judgment and undertake all the necessary initiatives, acts or measures to ensure the immediate, full re-establishment of the original pension amount;










—


order the European Parliament to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those relied on in Case T-389/19, Coppo Gavazzi v Parliament.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2019-07-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2019223EN.01000501.xml










3.7.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 223/5






Euro exchange rates (1)

2 July 2019
(2019/C 223/02)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1301 




JPY


Japanese yen


122,36 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4639 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,89443 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,5565 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,1169 




ISK


Iceland króna


141,70 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,6715 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,462 




HUF


Hungarian forint


322,91 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2429 




RON


Romanian leu


4,7331 




TRY


Turkish lira


6,3891 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,6155 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4819 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,8194 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6956 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5317 




KRW


South Korean won


1 318,30 




ZAR


South African rand


15,9594 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,7706 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,3965 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 976,79 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,6769 




PHP


Philippine peso


57,781 




RUB


Russian rouble


71,4958 




THB


Thai baht


34,643 




BRL


Brazilian real


4,3381 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,5491 




INR


Indian rupee


77,9280 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-602/17: Judgment of the General Court of 3 July 2019 — Spain v Commission (EAGF and EAFRD — Expenditure excluded from financing — Expenditure made by Spain — Key checks — Criteria for recognition of producers’ bodies — Approval of operational programmes — Transfer of investments within the same operation programme — Legitimate expectations)
Date: 2019-07-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EAFRD, EAGF, agricultural expenditure, aid to agriculture, eligibility criteria, investment, operational programme








C_2019295EN.01002301.xml










2.9.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 295/23






Judgment of the General Court of 3 July 2019 — Spain v Commission
(Case T-602/17) (1)

(EAGF and EAFRD - Expenditure excluded from financing - Expenditure made by Spain - Key checks - Criteria for recognition of producers’ bodies - Approval of operational programmes - Transfer of investments within the same operation programme - Legitimate expectations)
(2019/C 295/29)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Kingdom of Spain (represented initially by: M. Sampol Pucurull and A. Gavela Llopis, then by: A. Gavela Llopis and finally by: S. Jiménez García, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre, W. Farrell and M. Morales Puerta, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application on the basis of Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment in part of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2017/1144 of 26 June 2017 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ 2017 L 165, p. 37), in so far as it excludes, as regards the Kingdom of Spain, the sum of EUR 7 097 397,27 from that financing.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.



Dismisses the action;











2.



Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.







(1)  OJ C 357, 23.10.2017.
Case T-305/17: Order of the General Court of 3 July 2019 — Red Bull v EUIPO (Representation of a parallelogram composed of two fields in different colours)
Date: 2019-07-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, non-alcoholic beverage, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2019328EN.01007701.xml










30.9.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 328/77






Order of the General Court of 3 July 2019 — Red Bull v EUIPO (Representation of a parallelogram composed of two fields in different colours)
(Case T-305/17) (1)

(2019/C 328/86)
Language of the case: English
The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 231, 17.7.2017.
Case C-668/17 P: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 3 July 2019 — Viridis Pharmaceutical Ltd. v European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), Hecht-Pharma GmbH (Appeal — European Union trade mark — Revocation proceedings — Word mark Boswelan — No genuine use — Use of the mark in a clinical trial prior to filing an application for authorisation to place a medicinal product on the market — Proper reason for non-use — Concept)
Date: 2019-07-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, pharmaceutical product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2019305EN.01000801.xml










9.9.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 305/8






Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 3 July 2019 — Viridis Pharmaceutical Ltd. v European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), Hecht-Pharma GmbH
(Case C-668/17 P) (1)

(Appeal - European Union trade mark - Revocation proceedings - Word mark Boswelan - No genuine use - Use of the mark in a clinical trial prior to filing an application for authorisation to place a medicinal product on the market - Proper reason for non-use - Concept)
(2019/C 305/09)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellant: Viridis Pharmaceutical Ltd. (represented by C. Spintig, S. Pietzcker and M. Prasse, Rechtsanwälte)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by S. Hanne, acting as Agent), Hecht-Pharma GmbH (represented by J. Sachs and C. Sachs, Rechtsanwälte)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Viridis Pharmaceutical Ltd to pay, in addition to its own costs, those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and Hecht-Pharma GmbH.






(1)  OJ C 83, 5.3.2018.
European Parliament decision of 3 July 2019 on the numerical strength of the standing committees (2019/2689(RSO))
Date: 2019-07-03
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: EP Committee, composition of a parliamentary committee, decision-making body (EU), standing committee








C_2021165EN.01002001.xml










4.5.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 165/20






P9_TA(2019)0001
Numerical strength of committees
European Parliament decision of 3 July 2019 on the numerical strength of the standing committees (2019/2689(RSO))
(2021/C 165/05)

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to the proposal from the Conference of Presidents,










—


having regard to its decision of 15 January 2014 on the powers and responsibilities of the standing committees (1),










—


having regard to Rule 206 of its Rules of Procedure,












1.


Decides that the numerical strength of the standing committees and subcommittees shall be as follows:






I.


Committee on Foreign Affairs: 71 members,










II.


Committee on Development: 26 members,










III.


Committee on International Trade: 41 members,










IV.


Committee on Budgets: 41 members,










V.


Committee on Budgetary Control: 30 members,










VI.


Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs: 60 members,










VII.


Committee on Employment and Social Affairs: 55 members,










VIII.


Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety: 76 members,










IX.


Committee on Industry, Research and Energy: 72 members,










X.


Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection: 45 members,










XI.


Committee on Transport and Tourism: 49 members,










XII.


Committee on Regional Development: 43 members,










XIII.


Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development: 48 members,










XIV.


Committee on Fisheries: 28 members,










XV.


Committee on Culture and Education: 31 members,










XVI.


Committee on Legal Affairs: 25 members,










XVII.


Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs: 68 members,










XVIII.


Committee on Constitutional Affairs: 28 members,










XIX.


Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality: 35 members,










XX.


Committee on Petitions: 35 members,
Subcommittee on Human Rights: 30 members,
Subcommittee on Security and Defence: 30 members.
















2.


Decides, with reference to the decision of the Conference of Presidents of 30 June 2019 relating to the composition of committee bureaux, that the committee bureaux may consist of up to four vice-chairs;












3.


Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and the Commission, for information.






(1)  OJ C 482, 23.12.2016, p. 160.
Case C-387/18: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 3 July 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Wojewódzki Sąd Administracyjny w Warszawie — Poland) — Delfarma sp. z o.o. v Prezes Urzędu Rejestracji Produktów Leczniczych, Wyrobów Medycznych i Produktów Biobójczych (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Articles 34 and 36 TFEU — Free movement of goods — Measure having equivalent effect to a quantitative restriction — Protection of health and life of humans — Parallel import of medicinal products — Reference medicinal products and generic medicinal products — Requirement that the imported medicinal product and that which has been granted a marketing authorisation in the Member State of importation are both reference medicinal products or are both generic medicinal products)
Date: 2019-07-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: generic drug, import (EU), market approval, marketing standard, measure having equivalent effect, medicine, quantitative restriction








C_2019305EN.01002301.xml










9.9.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 305/23






Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 3 July 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Wojewódzki Sąd Administracyjny w Warszawie — Poland) — Delfarma sp. z o.o. v Prezes Urzędu Rejestracji Produktów Leczniczych, Wyrobów Medycznych i Produktów Biobójczych
(Case C-387/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Articles 34 and 36 TFEU - Free movement of goods - Measure having equivalent effect to a quantitative restriction - Protection of health and life of humans - Parallel import of medicinal products - Reference medicinal products and generic medicinal products - Requirement that the imported medicinal product and that which has been granted a marketing authorisation in the Member State of importation are both reference medicinal products or are both generic medicinal products)
(2019/C 305/28)
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Wojewódzki Sąd Administracyjny w Warszawie

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Delfarma sp. z o.o.

Defendant: Prezes Urzędu Rejestracji Produktów Leczniczych, Wyrobów Medycznych i Produktów Biobójczych

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 34 and 36 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding the legislation of a Member State, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which requires, for the issue of a parallel import licence for a medicinal product, that that medicinal product and the medicinal product which has been granted a marketing authorisation in that Member State are both reference medicinal products or both generic medicinal products and which, therefore, prohibits the issue of any parallel import licence for a medicinal product where it is a generic medicinal product whereas the medicinal product previously authorised in that Member State is a reference medicinal product.


(1)  OJ C 294, 20.8.2018.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9430 — Apollo Management/Vivat) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2019-07-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, indemnity insurance, investment company, life assurance, merger control








C_2019223EN.01000601.xml










3.7.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 223/6






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.9430 — Apollo Management/Vivat)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 223/03)

1.   
On 24 June 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:






—


Apollo Management L.P. (‘Apollo’, USA),










—


VIVAT NV (‘Vivat’, the Netherlands).




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


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   Apollo: Private investments worldwide,
—   Vivat: Life and non-life insurance products and asset management services in the Netherlands.


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.9430 — Apollo Management/Vivat
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-451/19: Action brought on 3 July 2019 — Gemelli v Parliament
Date: 2019-07-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Bureau of the EP, Italy, Member of the European Parliament, allowances and expenses, equal treatment, national law, pension scheme, principle of legal certainty








C_2019295EN.01006801.xml










2.9.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 295/68






Action brought on 3 July 2019 — Gemelli v Parliament
(Case T-451/19)
(2019/C 295/89)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Vitaliano Gemelli (Rome, Italy) (represented by: M. Merola, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare non-existent or annul in its entirety the measure of which the applicant was informed by means of the contested communication, in which the European Parliament re-determined retirement pension rights and ordered recovery of the amount paid on the basis of the earlier pension calculation;










—


order the European Parliament to refund all the sums unduly withheld, and to pay statutory interest from the date of withholding to the date of payment and order the European Parliament to implement the judgment and undertake all the necessary initiatives, acts or measures to ensure the immediate, full re-establishment of the original pension amount;










—


order the European Parliament to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those relied on in Case T-389/19, Coppo Gavazzi v Parliament.
Case T-419/19: Action brought on 3 July 2019 — Colajanni v Parliament
Date: 2019-07-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Bureau of the EP, Italy, Member of the European Parliament, allowances and expenses, equal treatment, national law, pension scheme, principle of legal certainty








C_2019295EN.01004501.xml










2.9.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 295/45






Action brought on 3 July 2019 — Colajanni v Parliament
(Case T-419/19)
(2019/C 295/58)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Luigi Alberto Colajanni (Palermo, Italy) (represented by: M. Merola, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare non-existent or annul in its entirety the measure of which the applicant was informed by means of the contested communication, in which the European Parliament re-determined retirement pension rights and ordered recovery of the amount paid on the basis of the earlier pension calculation;










—


order the European Parliament to refund all the sums unduly withheld, and to pay statutory interest from the date of withholding to the date of payment and order the European Parliament to implement the judgment and undertake all the necessary initiatives, acts or measures to ensure the immediate, full re-establishment of the original pension amount;










—


order the European Parliament to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those relied on in Case T-389/19, Coppo Gavazzi v Parliament.