do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-670/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Baden-Württemberg (Germany) lodged on 10 September 2019 — Gardinia Home Decor GmbH v Hauptzollamt Ulm
Date: 2019-09-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Combined Nomenclature, common customs tariff, metal product, specification of tariff heading, tube








C_2020161EN.01001403.xml










11.5.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 161/14






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Baden-Württemberg (Germany) lodged on 10 September 2019 — Gardinia Home Decor GmbH v Hauptzollamt Ulm
(Case C-670/19)
(2020/C 161/21)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Finanzgericht Baden-Württemberg

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Gardinia Home Decor GmbH

Defendant: Hauptzollamt Ulm
By order of 27 February 2020, the Court (Sixth Chamber) ruled as follows:
The Combined Nomenclature set out in Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff, (1) as amended by Commission Regulation (EU) No 861/2010 of 5 October 2010, (2) is to be interpreted as meaning that base metal curtain rods fall within tariff subheading 8302 41 90, unless those rods consist of rods, tubes or bars which have been merely cut to the required length, which is for the referring court to ascertain in order to carry out its own tariff classification of the goods at issue in the main proceedings, having regard to the information provided by the Court in response to the first question referred.


(1)  OJ 1987 L 256, p. 1.

(2)  Regulation amending Annex I of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff (OJ 2010 L 284, p. 1).
Case T-762/18 R: Order of the President of the General Court of 10 September 2019 — Athanasiadou and Soulantikas v Commission (Application for interim relief – Financial provisions (budget, financial framework, own resources, combating fraud) – Enforcement – Application for suspension – Admissibility – No urgency)
Date: 2019-09-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU financing, admissibility, budget, debt, enforcement of ruling, financial aid, injunction, own resources, suspension of sentence








C_2019363EN.01001501.xml










28.10.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 363/15






Order of the President of the General Court of 10 September 2019 — Athanasiadou and Soulantikas v Commission
(Case T-762/18 R)
(Application for interim relief - Financial provisions (budget, financial framework, own resources, combating fraud) - Enforcement - Application for suspension - Admissibility - No urgency)
(2019/C 363/22)
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicants: Sofia Athanasiadou (Athens, Greece), Konstantinos Soulantikas (Athens) (represented by: M. Lappa, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Katsimerou and A. Kyratsou, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 299 TFEU for suspension of enforcement of Commission Decision C(2017) 5883 final of 22 August 2017, of the order to pay of 30 October 2018, affixed to the copy of the enforcement order issued on the basis of Commission Decision C(2017) 5883 final of 22 August 2017, and of any other related enforcement measure.

Operative part of the order







1.



The application for interim relief is dismissed.











2.



Sofia Athanasiadou and Konstantinos Soulantikas shall bear their own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission.
Case T-612/19: Action brought on 10 September 2019 – UPL Europe and Aceto Agricultural Chemical v Commission
Date: 2019-09-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: market approval, plant health control, plant health product, precautionary principle, principle of proportionality, rights of the defence








C_2019399EN.01007201.xml










25.11.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 399/72






Action brought on 10 September 2019 – UPL Europe and Aceto Agricultural Chemical v Commission
(Case T-612/19)
(2019/C 399/90)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: UPL Europe Ltd (Warrington Cheshire, United Kingdom) and Aceto Agricultural Chemical Corp. Ltd (Port Washington, United States) (represented by: C. Mereu and P. Sellar, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:






—


annul Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/989 of 17 June 2019; (1)











—


order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicants rely on four pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging that the contested Regulation was adopted further to manifest errors of assessment.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the contested Regulation results from a procedure during which the applicants’ rights of defence have not been respected.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging that the contested Regulation was adopted in breach of the principle of proportionality.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging that the contested Regulation was adopted in breach of the precautionary principle.






(1)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/989 of 17 June 2019 concerning the non-renewal of the approval of the active substance chlorpropham, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market, and amending the Annex to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 (OJ 2019 L 160, p. 11).
Council Decision (EU) 2019/1398 of 10 September 2019 appointing three members, proposed by the Italian Republic, of the Committee of the Regions
Date: 2019-09-10
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: European Committee of the Regions, Italy, appointment of members








L_2019235EN.01000101.xml










12.9.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 235/1








            COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2019/1398
of 10 September 2019
         
appointing three members, proposed by the Italian Republic, of the Committee of the Regions


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 305 thereof,


Having regard to the proposal of the Italian Government,

Whereas:







(1)


On 26 January 2015, 5 February 2015 and 23 June 2015, the Council adopted Decisions (EU) 2015/116 (1), (EU) 2015/190 (2) and (EU) 2015/994 (3) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020. On 8 October 2018, by Council Decision (EU) 2018/1510 (4), Ms Micaela FANELLI was reappointed as a member to take account of her new mandate.












(2)


Two members' seats on the Committee of the Regions have become vacant following the end of the terms of office of Ms Micaela FANELLI and Ms Catiuscia MARINI.












(3)


A member's seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the mandate on the basis of which Mr Matteo Luigi BIANCHI (Sindaco del Comune di Morazzone (VA)) was proposed,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
The following are hereby appointed as members to the Committee of the Regions for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 25 January 2020:






—


Ms Virginia RAGGI, Sindaco di Roma Capitale,










—


Mr Alberto CIRIO, Presidente della Regione Piemonte,










—


Mr Matteo Luigi BIANCHI, Consigliere del Comune di Morazzone (VA) (change of mandate).






Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.




Done at Brussels, 10 September 2019.


For the Council


The President

T. TUPPURAINEN
            





(1)  Council Decision (EU) 2015/116 of 26 January 2015 appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020 (OJ L 20, 27.1.2015, p. 42).

(2)  Council Decision (EU) 2015/190 of 5 February 2015 appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020 (OJ L 31, 7.2.2015, p. 25).

(3)  Council Decision (EU) 2015/994 of 23 June 2015 appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020 (OJ L 159, 25.6.2015, p. 70).

(4)  Council Decision (EU) 2018/1510 of 8 October 2018 appointing two members, proposed by the Italian Republic, of the Committee of the Regions (OJ L 255, 11.10.2018, p. 15).
Case T-883/16: Judgment of the General Court of 10 September 2019 — Poland v Commission (Internal market in natural gas – Directive 2009/73/EC – Commission Decision approving the variation of the conditions for the exemption from EU requirements of the rules governing the operation of the OPAL pipeline with regard to third party access and tariff regulation – Article 36(1) of Directive 2009/73 – Principle of energy solidarity)
Date: 2019-09-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: derogation from EU law, energy supply, gas pipeline, gas supply, natural gas, security of supply








C_2019383EN.01005701.xml










11.11.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 383/57






Judgment of the General Court of 10 September 2019 — Poland v Commission
(Case T-883/16) (1)

(Internal market in natural gas - Directive 2009/73/EC - Commission Decision approving the variation of the conditions for the exemption from EU requirements of the rules governing the operation of the OPAL pipeline with regard to third party access and tariff regulation - Article 36(1) of Directive 2009/73 - Principle of energy solidarity)
(2019/C 383/64)
Language of the case: Polish

Parties


Applicant: Republic of Poland (represented by: B. Majczyna, K. Rudzińska and M. Kawnik, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: O. Beynet and K. Herrmann, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the applicants: Republic of Latvia (represented by: I. Kucina, G. Bambāne and V. Soņeca, Agents), and by Republic of Lithuania, (represented: initially by D. Kriaučiūnas, R. Dzikovič and R. Krasuckaitė, and subsequently by R. Dzikovič, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented: initially by T. Henze and R. Kanitz, and subsequently by R. Kanitz, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of Commission Decision C(2016) 6950 final of 28 October 2016 on the review of the conditions for exemption of the OPAL pipeline, granted under Directive 2003/55/EC, from the rules on third party access and tariff regulation.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.



Annuls Commission Decision C(2016) 6950 final of 28 October 2016 on the review of the conditions for exemption of the OPAL pipeline, granted under Directive 2003/55/EC, from the rules on third party access and tariff regulation;











2.



Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and those incurred by the Republic of Poland;











3.



Orders the Federal Republic of Germany, the Republic of Latvia and the Republic of Lithuania to bear their own costs.







(1)  OJ C 38, 6.2.2017.
Case T-744/18: Judgment of the General Court of 10 September 2019 — Oakley v EUIPO — Xuebo Ye (Representation of a discontinuous ellipse) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for an EU figurative mark representing a discontinuous ellipse — Earlier EU figurative mark representing an ellipse — Relative ground for refusal — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2019-09-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, electrical equipment, footwear industry, leather, optical industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2019357EN.01003301.xml










21.10.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 357/33






Judgment of the General Court of 10 September 2019 — Oakley v EUIPO — Xuebo Ye (Representation of a discontinuous ellipse)
(Case T-744/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for an EU figurative mark representing a discontinuous ellipse - Earlier EU figurative mark representing an ellipse - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(2019/C 357/40)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Oakley, Inc. (Foothill Ranch, California, United States) (represented by: E. Ochoa Santamaría and I. Aparicio Martínez, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Palmero Cabezas and H. O’Neill, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Xuebo Ye (Wenzhou, China)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 October 2018 (Case R 692/2018-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Oakley and Xuebo Ye.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.



Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 22 October 2018 (Case R 692/2018-1);











2.



Orders EUIPO to pay the costs, including those incurred by Oakley, Inc.







(1)  OJ C 65, 18.2.2019.
Case T-50/18: Judgment of the General Court of 10 September 2019 — BO v Court of Justice of the European Union (Public service contracts – Tender procedure – Call for tenders of the Court of Justice of the European Union – Freelance translators – Selection procedure – Rejection of a tenderer’s offer – Obligation to state reasons – Manifest error of assessment)
Date: 2019-09-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: award of contract, competition (EU), contract staff, information profession, invitation to tender, public service, services contract, tendering, translation








C_2019383EN.01005902.xml










11.11.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 383/59






Judgment of the General Court of 10 September 2019 — BO v Court of Justice of the European Union
(Case T-50/18) (1)

(Public service contracts - Tender procedure - Call for tenders of the Court of Justice of the European Union - Freelance translators - Selection procedure - Rejection of a tenderer’s offer - Obligation to state reasons - Manifest error of assessment)
(2019/C 383/67)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: BO (represented by: E. Kleani, lawyer)

Defendant: Court of Justice of the European Union (represented by: J. Inghelram, Á. Almendros Manzano and V. Hanley-Emilsson, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action based on Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of the decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 23 November 2017 rejecting the applicant’s tender for the conclusion of a framework contract for the translation of legal texts from German into Greek.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.



Dismisses the action;











2.



Orders BO to pay the costs.







(1)  OJ C 134, 16.4.2018.
Case T-217/18: Judgment of the General Court of 10 September 2019 — DK v EEAS (Civil service — Disciplinary proceedings — Criminal conviction — Penalty of withholding an amount from the pension — Manifest error of assessment — Proportionality — Obligation to state reasons — Mitigating circumstances — Liability)
Date: 2019-09-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, administrative sanction, criminal proceedings, disciplinary proceedings, penalty, pension scheme, principle of proportionality, rights of the defence








C_2019357EN.01003001.xml










21.10.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 357/30






Judgment of the General Court of 10 September 2019 — DK v EEAS
(Case T-217/18) (1)

(Civil service - Disciplinary proceedings - Criminal conviction - Penalty of withholding an amount from the pension - Manifest error of assessment - Proportionality - Obligation to state reasons - Mitigating circumstances - Liability)
(2019/C 357/36)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: DK (represented by: S. Orlandi and T. Martin, lawyers)

Defendant: European External Action Service (represented by: S. Marquardt and R. Spac, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU seeking, first, annulment of the decision of the EEAS of 23 May 2017 to impose on the applicant a disciplinary penalty and, secondly, compensation for the harm allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of the EEAS’ infringement of his rights of defence in the criminal proceedings brought against him before the Belgian courts.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.



Dismisses the action;











2.



Orders DK to pay the costs.







(1)  OJ C 211, 18.6.2018.
Case T-51/18: Judgment of the General Court of 10 September 2019 — BP v Court of Justice of the European Union (Public service contracts – Tender procedure – Call for tenders of the Court of Justice of the European Union – Freelance translators – Selection procedure – Rejection of a tenderer’s offer – Obligation to state reasons – Manifest error of assessment)
Date: 2019-09-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: award of contract, competition (EU), contract staff, information profession, invitation to tender, public service, services contract, tendering, translation








C_2019383EN.01006001.xml










11.11.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 383/60






Judgment of the General Court of 10 September 2019 — BP v Court of Justice of the European Union
(Case T-51/18) (1)

(Public service contracts - Tender procedure - Call for tenders of the Court of Justice of the European Union - Freelance translators - Selection procedure - Rejection of a tenderer’s offer - Obligation to state reasons - Manifest error of assessment)
(2019/C 383/68)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: BP (represented by: S. Tassi, lawyer)

Defendant: Court of Justice of the European Union (represented by: J. Inghelram, Á. Almendros Manzano and V. Hanley-Emilsson, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action based on Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of the decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 23 November 2017 rejecting the applicant’s tender for the conclusion of a framework contract for the translation of legal texts from German into Greek.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.



Dismisses the action;











2.



Orders BP to pay the costs.







(1)  OJ C 134, 16.4.2018.
Case T-741/17: Judgment of the General Court of 10 September 2019 — Trasys International and Axianseu — Digital Solutions v EASA (Public service contracts – Tender procedure – IT application and infrastructure management services – Rejection of a tenderer’s offer and award of the contract to other tenderers – Obligation to state reasons – Assessment of the existence of abnormally low tenders – Characteristics and relative merits of the tenders accepted – Request for a statement of reasons from a tenderer who is not in an exclusion situation and whose tender is compliant with the procurement documents)
Date: 2019-09-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Germany, award of contract, consortium, information technology applications, offer price, provision of services, services contract, tendering








C_2019383EN.01005901.xml










11.11.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 383/59






Judgment of the General Court of 10 September 2019 — Trasys International and Axianseu — Digital Solutions v EASA
(Case T-741/17) (1)

(Public service contracts - Tender procedure - IT application and infrastructure management services - Rejection of a tenderer’s offer and award of the contract to other tenderers - Obligation to state reasons - Assessment of the existence of abnormally low tenders - Characteristics and relative merits of the tenders accepted - Request for a statement of reasons from a tenderer who is not in an exclusion situation and whose tender is compliant with the procurement documents)
(2019/C 383/66)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicants: Trasys International GEIE (Brussels, Belgium) and Axianseu — Digital Solutions SA (Lisbon, Portugal) (represented by L. Masson and G. Tilman, lawyers)

Defendant: European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) (represented by S. Rostren, E. Tellado Vásquez and H. Köppen, acting as Agents, and V. Ost, M. Vanderstraeten and F. Tulkens, lawyers)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of the decision of the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) of 28 August 2017 rejecting the tender submitted by the consortium of applicants in call for tenders EASA.2017.HVP.08 relating to a public service contract concerning IT application and infrastructure management services in Cologne (Germany), and the award of the successive contract to three other tenderers.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.



Annuls the decision of the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) of 28 August 2017 rejecting the tender submitted by the consortium of Trasys International GEIE and Axianseu — Digital Solutions SA in call for tenders EASA.2017.HVP.08 relating to a public service contract concerning IT application and infrastructure management services in Cologne (Germany), and the award of the successive contract to three other tenderers;











2.



Orders EASA to pay the costs.







(1)  OJ C 13, 15.1.2018.
Case C-123/18 P: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 10 September 2019 — HTTS Hanseatic Trade Trust & Shipping GmbH v Council of the European Union, European Commission (Appeal – Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures against the Islamic Republic of Iran – Compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by the appellant following its inclusion in the list of persons and entities subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources – Action for damages – Conditions which must be met in order for the European Union to incur non-contractual liability – Concept of ‘sufficiently serious breach of a rule of EU law’ – Assessment – Concept of ‘company owned or controlled’ – Obligation to state reasons)
Date: 2019-09-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Iran, economic sanctions, indemnification, infringement of EU law, international sanctions, legal person, trade restriction








C_2019383EN.01002001.xml










11.11.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 383/20






Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 10 September 2019 — HTTS Hanseatic Trade Trust & Shipping GmbH v Council of the European Union, European Commission
(Case C-123/18 P) (1)

(Appeal - Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures against the Islamic Republic of Iran - Compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by the appellant following its inclusion in the list of persons and entities subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources - Action for damages - Conditions which must be met in order for the European Union to incur non-contractual liability - Concept of ‘sufficiently serious breach of a rule of EU law’ - Assessment - Concept of ‘company owned or controlled’ - Obligation to state reasons)
(2019/C 383/20)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellant: HTTS Hanseatic Trade Trust & Shipping GmbH (represented by M. Schlingmann, Rechtsanwalt)

Other parties to the proceedings: Council of the European Union (represented by J.-P. Hix and M. Bishop, acting as Agents), European Commission (represented initially by R. Tricot, M. Kellerbauer and C. Zadra, and subsequently by R. Tricot, C. Hödlmayr and C. Zadra, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 13 December 2017, HTTS v Council (T-692/15, EU:T:2017:890);










2.


Refers the case back to the General Court of the European Union;










3.


Reserves the costs.






(1)  OJ C 161, 7.5.2018.