do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) (Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006) (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2019-07-17
Institutions: Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs, European Commission
Subjects: chemical compound, chemical process, chemical product, health control, health risk, market approval, marketing standard, pharmaceutical industry, solvent








C_2019241EN.01000701.xml










17.7.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 241/7






Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH)

(Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (1)
)

(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 241/07)

Decisions granting an authorisation













Reference of the decision (2)



Date of decision


Substance name


Holder of the authorisation


Authorisation numbers


Authorised use


Date of expiry of review period


Reasons for the decision




C(2019) 5096


10 July 2019


Bis(2-methoxyethyl) ether (diglyme)
EC No: 203-924-4
CAS No 111-96-6


PMC ISOCHEM
32 rue Lavoisier, 91710, Vert Le Petit, France


REACH/19/21/0


Use as a process solvent in one step of manufacturing of an active pharmaceutical ingredient used in an anti-protozoal drug


22 August 2024


Risk is adequately controlled in accordance with Article 60(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006.
There are no suitable alternatives.






(1)  OJ L 396, 30.12.2006, p. 1.

(2)  The decision is available on the European Commission website at: http://ec.europa.eu/growth/sectors/chemicals/reach/about/index_en.htm
Case C-551/19 P: Appeal brought on 17 July 2019 by ABLV Bank AS against the order of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 6 May 2019 in Case T-281/18: ABLV Bank v European Central Bank (ECB)
Date: 2019-07-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU banking union, abuse of power, company in difficulties, credit institution, equal treatment, liquidation, principle of proportionality, right of establishment, right to justice, subsidiary








C_2019305EN.01002801.xml










9.9.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 305/28






Appeal brought on 17 July 2019 by ABLV Bank AS against the order of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 6 May 2019 in Case T-281/18: ABLV Bank v European Central Bank (ECB)
(Case C-551/19 P)
(2019/C 305/34)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: ABLV Bank AS (represented by: O.H. Behrends, M. Kirchner, Rechtsanwälte)

Other party to the proceedings: European Central Bank (ECB)

Forms of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:






—


set aside the order of the General Court of 6 May 2019 in case T-281/18;










—


declare that the application for annulment is admissible;










—


refer the case back to the General Court for it to determine the action for annulment; and










—


order the ECB to pay the appellant's costs and the costs of the appeal.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The appellant puts forward two pleas in law in support of its appeal:






1)


That the General Court erred in law and violated Art. 263 TFEU by failing to base its order on the decision which the ECB actually adopted.










2)


That the order under appeal is based on an incorrect interpretation of Art. 18(1) SRMR (1).






(1)  Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 July 2014 establishing uniform rules and a uniform procedure for the resolution of credit institutions and certain investment firms in the framework of a Single Resolution Mechanism and a Single Resolution Fund and amending Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 (OJ 2014, L 225, p. 1).
Case T-510/19: Action brought on 17 July 2019 — Puma v EUIPO — Gemma Group (Device of a jumping animal)
Date: 2019-07-17
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, industrial electric machinery, metalworking, plastics industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, wood industry








C_2019328EN.01006101.xml










30.9.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 328/61






Action brought on 17 July 2019 — Puma v EUIPO — Gemma Group (Device of a jumping animal)
(Case T-510/19)
(2019/C 328/70)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Puma SE (Herzogenaurach, Germany) (represented by: P. González-Bueno Catalán de Ocón, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Gemma Group Srl (Cerasolo Ausa, Italy)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


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

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union figurative mark representing device of a jumping animal — Application for registration No 11 573 474

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 30 April 2019 in Case R 2057/2018-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO and GEMMA GROUP S.r.l. to pay the costs of the proceedings.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2019-07-17
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2019241EN.01000301.xml










17.7.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 241/3






Euro exchange rates (1)

16 July 2019
(2019/C 241/03)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1223 




JPY


Japanese yen


121,13 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4678 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,90260 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,5405 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,1075 




ISK


Iceland króna


141,70 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,5933 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,575 




HUF


Hungarian forint


325,85 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2555 




RON


Romanian leu


4,7316 




TRY


Turkish lira


6,4002 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5955 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4643 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,7736 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6693 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5234 




KRW


South Korean won


1 322,95 




ZAR


South African rand


15,5709 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,7187 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,3905 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 644,86 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,6069 




PHP


Philippine peso


57,114 




RUB


Russian rouble


70,3975 




THB


Thai baht


34,662 




BRL


Brazilian real


4,2210 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,3118 




INR


Indian rupee


77,0870 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9448 — Hitachi/Chassis Brakes International) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2019-07-17
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, motor vehicle industry








C_2019241EN.01000901.xml










17.7.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 241/9






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.9448 — Hitachi/Chassis Brakes International)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 241/09)

1.   
On 10 July 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:






—


Hitachi Automotive Systems, Ltd. (‘HIAMS’, Japan), wholly owned by Hitachi Ltd. (‘Hitachi’, Japan),










—


Chassis Brakes International B.V. (‘CBI’, The Netherlands), primarily owned by certain investment funds managed by KPS (USA).




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


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   HIAMS: the production and supply of automotive products and technologies, including brake components for passenger and light commercial vehicles. HIAMS has operations in Japan, the U.S., Mexico, Germany, France, the Czech Republic, the UK, China, Thailand, Singapore, Indonesia, India and Korea,
—   CBI: the production and supply of brake components for passenger and light commercial vehicles. CBI is headquartered in the Netherlands, and has operations in the EU, Turkey, China, Thailand, Japan, South Africa, North America, Latin America and India.


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.9448 — Hitachi/Chassis Brakes International
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 C-548/19 P: Appeal brought on 17 July 2019 by Laurence Bonnafous against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 6 June 2019 in Case T-614/17 Bonnafous v EACEA
Date: 2019-07-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: abuse of power, contract staff, dismissal, harassment at work, indemnification, probationary period, psychological harassment, rights of the defence, servant (EU)








C_2020077EN.01001302.xml










9.3.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 77/13






Appeal brought on 17 July 2019 by Laurence Bonnafous against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 6 June 2019 in Case T-614/17 Bonnafous v EACEA
(Case C-548/19 P)
(2020/C 77/19)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: Laurence Bonnafous (represented by: S. Rodrigues and A. Blot, avocats)

Other party to the proceedings: Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency
By order of 27 November 2019, the Court (Seventh Chamber) dismissed the appeal as being manifestly unfounded.
Case C-552/19 P: Appeal brought on 17 July 2019 by Ernests Bernis, Oļegs Fiļs, OF Holding SIA, Cassandra Holding Company SIA against the order of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 6 May 2019 in Case T-283/18: Bernis e.a. v European Central Bank (ECB)
Date: 2019-07-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: abuse of power, company in difficulties, credit institution, equal treatment, liquidation, ownership, principle of proportionality, right of establishment, right to justice, subsidiary








C_2019305EN.01002802.xml










9.9.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 305/28






Appeal brought on 17 July 2019 by Ernests Bernis, Oļegs Fiļs, OF Holding SIA, Cassandra Holding Company SIA against the order of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 6 May 2019 in Case T-283/18: Bernis e.a. v European Central Bank (ECB)
(Case C-552/19 P)
(2019/C 305/35)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellants: Ernests Bernis, Oļegs Fiļs, OF Holding SIA, Cassandra Holding Company SIA (represented by: O.H. Behrends, M. Kirchner, Rechtsanwälte)

Other party to the proceedings: European Central Bank (ECB)

Forms of order sought

The appellants claim that the Court should:






—


set aside the order of the General Court of 6 May 2019 in case T-283/18;










—


declare that the application for annulment is admissible;










—


refer the case back to the General Court for it to determine the action for annulment; and










—


order the ECB to pay the appellants' costs and the costs of the appeal.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The appellants put forward two pleas in law in support of their appeal:






1)


That the General Court erred in law and violated Art. 263 TFEU by failing to base its order on the decision which the ECB actually adopted.










2)


That the order under appeal is based on an incorrect interpretation of Art. 18(1) SRMR (1).






(1)  Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 July 2014 establishing uniform rules and a uniform procedure for the resolution of credit institutions and certain investment firms in the framework of a Single Resolution Mechanism and a Single Resolution Fund and amending Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 (OJ 2014, L 225, p. 1).
Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) (Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006) (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2019-07-17
Institutions: Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs, European Commission
Subjects: chemical process, chemical product, health control, health risk, market approval, marketing standard, metal coating, motor vehicle industry, oxide, railway industry








C_2019241EN.01000501.xml










17.7.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 241/5






Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH)

(Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (1)
)

(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 241/05)
Decisions granting an authorisation












Reference of the decision (2)



Date of decision


Substance name


Holder of the authorisation


Authorisation number


Authorised use


Date of expiry of review period


Reasons for the decision




C(2019) 5022


10 July 2019


Chromium trioxide
EC No. 215-607-8,
CAS No. 1333-82-0


ZF Friedrichshafen AG, Bogestrasse 50, 53783 Eitorf, Germany


REACH/19/25/0


Use for functional chrome plating of piston rods for automotive and rail applications


10 July 2031


In accordance with Article 60(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, the socio-economic benefits outweigh the risk to human health from the use of the substance and there are no suitable alternative substances or technologies.






(1)  OJ L 396, 30.12.2006, p. 1.

(2)  The decision is available on the European Commission website at: http://ec.europa.eu/growth/sectors/chemicals/reach/about/index_en.htm
Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) (Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006) (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2019-07-17
Institutions: Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs, European Commission
Subjects: aeronautical industry, chemical compound, chemical process, chemical product, corrosion, health control, health risk, market approval, marketing standard








C_2019241EN.01000601.xml










17.7.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 241/6






Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH)

(Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (1)
)

(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 241/06)

Decisions granting an authorisation













Reference of the decision (2)



Date of decision


Substance name


Holder of the authorisation


Authorisation numbers


Authorised uses


Date of expiry of review period


Reasons for the decision




C(2019) 5023


10 July 2019


pentazinc chromate octahydroxide (EC No 256-418-0; CAS No 49663-84-5)


Indestructible Paint Ltd, 16-25 Pentos Drive, B11 3TA, Birmingham, West Midlands, United Kingdom


REACH/19/26/0


Formulation of mixtures.


22 January 2031


In accordance with Article 60(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, the socioeconomic benefits outweigh the risk to human health arising from the use of the substance and there are no suitable alternative substances or technologies.




REACH/19/26/1


Use in stoved epoxy primer for corrosion protection of aircraft engine components in aerospace and aeroderivative applications.


22 January 2031






(1)  OJ L 396, 30.12.2006, p. 1.

(2)  The decision is available on the European Commission website at: http://ec.europa.eu/growth/sectors/chemicals/reach/about/index_en.htm
Case C-549/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Castilla-La Mancha (Spain) lodged on 17 July 2019 — DX v Subdelegación del Gobierno en Toledo
Date: 2019-07-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: foreign national, imprisonment, judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the EU, offence, removal, residence permit








C_2019372EN.01001401.xml










4.11.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 372/14






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Castilla-La Mancha (Spain) lodged on 17 July 2019 — DX v Subdelegación del Gobierno en Toledo
(Case C-549/19)
(2019/C 372/14)
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Castilla-La Mancha

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: DX

Defendant: Subdelegación del Gobierno en Toledo

Question referred

Is an interpretation such as that set out in judgments of the Spanish Supreme Court No 191/2019 of 19 February 2019, appeal in cassation 5607/2017 (ECLI:ES:TS:2019:580), and No 257/2019 of 27 February 2019, appeal in cassation 5809/2017 (ECLI:ES:TS:2019:663), according to which, through an interpretation of Directive 2001/40/EC, (1) it is possible to come to the conclusion that any third-country national holding a long-term residence permit who has committed an offence punishable by a sentence of at least one year in duration can and should be ‘automatically’ removed, that is to say, without needing to give any consideration to his personal, family, social or employment circumstances, compatible with Article 12 of Council [Directive] 2003/109/EC of 25 November 2003 concerning the status of third-country nationals who are long-term residents, (2) and with — inter alia — the judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 7 December 2017 (Case C-636/16 (3)) and of 8 December 2011 (Case C-371/08 (4))?


(1)  Council Directive 2001/40/EC of 28 May 2001 on the mutual recognition of decisions on the expulsion of third country nationals (OJ 2001 L 149, p. 34).

(2)  OJ 2004 L 16, p. 44.

(3)  Judgment of 7 December 2017, López Pastuzano (C-636/16, EU:C:2017:949).

(4)  Judgment of 8 December 2011, Ziebell (C-371/08, EU:C:2011:809).
Case T-513/19: Action brought on 17 July 2019 — Lux v Commission
Date: 2019-07-17
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European Aviation Safety Agency, European Food Safety Authority, European official, equal treatment, pension scheme, principle of legal certainty, retroactivity of a law, servant (EU), staff regulations (EU), work contract








C_2019312EN.01004201.xml










16.9.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 312/42






Action brought on 17 July 2019 — Lux v Commission
(Case T-513/19)
(2019/C 312/34)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Catherine Lux (Strasbourg, France) (represented by: N. de Montigny, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Annul the decision of the PMO.4 of 21 September 2018 to consider the transfer of the applicant’s contract from EFSA to EASA as a new employment contract and not to apply to her the transitional measures laid down in Articles 21 and 22 of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations;










—


Order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on five pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging infringement of Articles 21 and 22 of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union, in that the Commission misinterpreted the concept of entry into service.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging infringement of Articles 10 and 12 of the general implementing provisions, on the ground that those provisions were adopted in order to promote inter-agency mobility, thereby confirming the possibility of a European career within the agencies.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging infringement of the principles of legal certainty and non-retroactivity. The applicant submits in that respect that her decision to continue her role within EASA in 2017 was based on the confirmation by the EASA Human Resources Department that this continuation would also ensure the continuation of the conditions relating to her pension rights acquired within EFSA.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging infringement of the principle of continuity of career and employment of temporary staff. The applicant submits that the Commission cannot exclude the application of Articles 10 and 12 of the general implementing provisions in so far as the Commission itself established a principle of continuous joint analysis of the employment of a temporary agent within agencies.










5.


Fifth plea in law, alleging infringement of the principle of equal treatment. The applicant submits in this respect that there are no grounds to justify the difference in treatment between an official and another servant in terms of pension rights within the European Union.