do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-495/18: Order of the President of the Fourth Chamber of the Court of 1 October 2019 — (request for a preliminary ruling from the Najvyšší súd Slovenskej republiky — Slovakia) — Criminal proceedings against YX
Date: 2019-10-01
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: carrying out of sentence, enforcement of ruling, judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the EU, residence, social rehabilitation








C_2020068EN.01003901.xml










2.3.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 68/39






Order of the President of the Fourth Chamber of the Court of 1 October 2019 — (request for a preliminary ruling from the Najvyšší súd Slovenskej republiky — Slovakia) — Criminal proceedings against YX
(Case C-495/18) (1)

(2020/C 68/43)
Language of the case: Slovak
The President of the Fourth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 352, 1.10.2018.
Notice concerning the entry into force of the 1996 Extradition Convention2019/C 329/02
Date: 2019-10-01
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: EU Member State, Intergovernmental Convention (EU), extradition, judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the EU








C_2019329EN.01000201.xml










1.10.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 329/2






Notice concerning the entry into force of the 1996 Extradition Convention
(2019/C 329/02)
The Convention drawn up on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, relating to extradition between the Member States of the European Union (1), signed in Dublin on 27 September 1996, shall enter into force on 5 November 2019, pursuant to its Article 18(3).


(1)  OJ C 313, 23.10.1996, p. 12.
Case C-725/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Judecătoria Sectorului 2 București (Romania) lodged on 1 October 2019 — IO v Impuls Leasing România IFN SA
Date: 2019-10-01
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer protection, enforcement of ruling, hire purchase, judicial review, unfair terms of contract








C_2020054EN.01001401.xml










17.2.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 54/14






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Judecătoria Sectorului 2 București (Romania) lodged on 1 October 2019 — IO v Impuls Leasing România IFN SA
(Case C-725/19)
(2020/C 54/17)
Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Judecătoria Sectorului 2 București

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: IO

Defendant: Impuls Leasing România IFN SA

Question referred

Taking into account the principle of effectiveness, is Directive 93/13/EEC (1) to be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as the Romanian legislation in force concerning the conditions under which an objection to enforcement is admissible, namely Article 713(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, as amended by Law No 310/2018, pursuant to which, in the context of an objection to enforcement, the examination, at the request of the consumer or by the court acting of its own motion, of whether the terms of a leasing contract that constitutes the enforceable instrument are unfair is precluded because it is possible to bring a common law action in which a contract concluded between a ‘consumer’ and a ‘seller or supplier’ may be examined in order to determine whether it contains unfair terms within the meaning of that directive?


(1)  Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (OJ 1993 L 95, p. 29).
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9558 — Triton/All4Labels Group) (Text with EEA relevance) 2019/C 342/03
Date: 2019-10-01
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, packaging product, private equity








C_2019342EN.01000301.xml










10.10.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 342/3






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.9558 — Triton/All4Labels Group)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 342/03)
On 1 October 2019, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:






—


in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,










—


in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32019M9558. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9550 — PT Baskhara Utama Sedaya/CPPIB/PT Lintas Marga Sedaya) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2019/C 329/04
Date: 2019-10-01
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: concessionaire, economic concentration, investment company, merger control, toll








C_2019329EN.01000401.xml










1.10.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 329/4






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.9550 — PT Baskhara Utama Sedaya/CPPIB/PT Lintas Marga Sedaya)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 329/04)

1.   
On 19 September 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:






—


PT Baskhara Utama Sedaya (‘BUS’, Indonesia), belonging to the Jardines group (Bermuda),










—


Canada Pension Plan Investment Board (‘CPPIB’, Canada),










—


PT Lintas Marga Sedaya (‘JV’, Indonesia).




BUS and CPPIB acquire within the meaning of Articles 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation joint control of the whole of the JV.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for BUS: operation of toll roads in Indonesia,










—


for CPPIB: an investment management organisation, principally investing in public equities, private equities, real estate, infrastructure and fixed income investments,










—


for the JV: concession holder and operator of the Cikopo-Palimanan toll road in West Java Province, Indonesia.






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.9550 — PT Baskhara Utama Sedaya/CPPIB/PT Lintas Marga Sedaya
Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:
E-mail : 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-668/19: Action brought on 1 October 2019 — Ardagh Metal Beverage Holdings v EUIPO (sound mark)
Date: 2019-10-01
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, alcoholic beverage, instant product, non-alcoholic beverage, packaging product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2019399EN.01009301.xml










25.11.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 399/93






Action brought on 1 October 2019 — Ardagh Metal Beverage Holdings v EUIPO (sound mark)
(Case T-668/19)
(2019/C 399/112)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Ardagh Metal Beverage Holdings GmbH & Co. KG (Bonn, Germany) (represented by: S. Abrar, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Trade mark at issue: Application for an EU sound mark — Registration No 17 912 475

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 24 July 2019 in Case R 530/2019-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs of the proceedings including those incurred in the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.





Pleas in law







—


Distortion of facts (breach of Article 72(2) and Article 95(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council);










—


Infringement of the duty to state reasons (Article 72(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council);










—


Failure to have regard to the relevant case-law;










—


Breach of Article 72(2) and Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Breach of Article 72(2) and Article 95(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Non-observance of the right to be heard (Article 72(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/1663 of 1 October 2019 amending Decision (CFSP) 2015/1333 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Libya
Date: 2019-10-01
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Libya, economic sanctions, international sanctions, natural person




L_2019252EN.01003601.xml










2.10.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 252/36








            COUNCIL DECISION (CFSP) 2019/1663
of 1 October 2019
         
amending Decision (CFSP) 2015/1333 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Libya


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

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


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

Whereas:







(1)


On 31 July 2015, the Council adopted Decision (CFSP) 2015/1333 (1) concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Libya.












(2)


On 1 April 2019, the Council adopted Decision (CFSP) 2019/539 (2).












(3)


In view of the continuing instability and gravity of the situation in Libya, the restrictive measures concerning three persons should be extended for a further period of six months.












(4)


Decision (CFSP) 2015/1333 should therefore be amended accordingly,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
In Article 17 of Decision (CFSP) 2015/1333, paragraphs 3 and 4 are replaced by the following:


‘3.   The measures referred to in Article 8(2) shall apply with regard to entries 14, 15 and 16 in Annex II until 2 April 2020.


4.   The measures referred to in Article 9(2) shall apply with regard to entries 19, 20 and 21 in Annex IV until 2 April 2020.’




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




Done at Brussels, 1 October 2019.


For the Council


The President

T. TUPPURAINEN
            





(1)  Council Decision (CFSP) 2015/1333 of 31 July 2015 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Libya, and repealing Decision 2011/137/CFSP (OJ L 206, 1.8.2015, p. 34).

(2)  Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/539 of 1 April 2019 amending Decision (CFSP) 2015/1333 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Libya (OJ L 93, 2.4.2019, p. 15).
Case C-284/19 P: Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 1 October 2019 — Andrew Clarke v European Commission (Appeal — Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court — Action for annulment — Actions for failure to act — Refusal of the European Commission to bring infringement proceedings under Article 258 TFEU against a Member State)
Date: 2019-10-01
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: United Kingdom, infringement of EU law, jurisdiction, operation of the Institutions








C_2019423EN.01001902.xml










16.12.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 423/19






Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 1 October 2019 — Andrew Clarke v European Commission
(Case C-284/19 P) (1)

(Appeal - Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court - Action for annulment - Actions for failure to act - Refusal of the European Commission to bring infringement proceedings under Article 258 TFEU against a Member State)
(2019/C 423/24)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Andrew Clarke (represented by: E. Lock, Solicitor)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Operative part of the order







1.


The appeal is dismissed as manifestly unfounded.










2.


Mr Andrew Clarke shall pay his own costs.






(1)  OJ C 213, 24.6.2019.
Euro exchange ratesSource: reference exchange rate published by the ECB. 30 September 20192019/C 329/03
Date: 2019-10-01
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2019329EN.01000301.xml










1.10.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 329/3






Euro exchange rates (1)

30 September 2019
(2019/C 329/03)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0889 




JPY


Japanese yen


117,59 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4662 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,88573 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,6958 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0847 




ISK


Iceland króna


135,10 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,8953 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,816 




HUF


Hungarian forint


334,83 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,3782 




RON


Romanian leu


4,7496 




TRY


Turkish lira


6,1491 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,6126 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4426 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,5368 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7375 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5060 




KRW


South Korean won


1 304,83 




ZAR


South African rand


16,5576 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,7784 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4110 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 456,94 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,5592 




PHP


Philippine peso


56,553 




RUB


Russian rouble


70,7557 




THB


Thai baht


33,315 




BRL


Brazilian real


4,5288 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,4522 




INR


Indian rupee


77,1615 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case C-616/17: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 1 October 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal correctionnel de Foix — France) — Criminal proceedings against Mathieu Blaise and Others (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Environment — Placing of plant protection products on the market — Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 — Validity — Precautionary principle — Definition of the concept of ‘active substance’ — Combination of active substances — Reliability of the assessment procedure — Public access to the dossier — Tests of long-term toxicity — Pesticides — Glyphosate)
Date: 2019-10-01
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: access to information, chemical product, environmental protection, market approval, pesticide, precautionary principle, toxic substance








C_2019413EN.01000201.xml










9.12.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 413/2






Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 1 October 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal correctionnel de Foix — France) — Criminal proceedings against Mathieu Blaise and Others
(Case C-616/17) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Environment - Placing of plant protection products on the market - Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 - Validity - Precautionary principle - Definition of the concept of ‘active substance’ - Combination of active substances - Reliability of the assessment procedure - Public access to the dossier - Tests of long-term toxicity - Pesticides - Glyphosate)
(2019/C 413/02)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal correctionnel de Foix

Parties in the main proceedings

Mathieu Blaise, Sabrina Dauzet, Alain Feliu, Marie Foray, Sylvestre Ganter, Dominique Masset, Ambroise Monsarrat, Sandrine Muscat, Jean-Charles Sutra, Blanche Yon, Kevin Leo-Pol Fred Perrin, Germain Yves Dedieu, Olivier Godard, Kevin Pao Donovan Schachner, Laura Dominique Chantal Escande, Nicolas Benoit Rey, Eric Malek Benromdan, Olivier Eric Labrunie, Simon Joseph Jeremie Boucard, Alexis Ganter, Pierre André Garcia

intervener: Espace Émeraude

Operative part of the judgment

An examination of the questions referred for a preliminary ruling has revealed nothing capable of affecting the validity of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market and repealing Council Directives 79/117/EEC and 91/414/EEC.


(1)  OJ C 22, 22.1.2018.
Case C-724/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Spetsializiran nakazatelen sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 1 October 2019 — Criminal proceedings against HP
Date: 2019-10-01
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU police cooperation, criminal proceedings, disclosure of information, injunction, judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the EU, public prosecutor's department








C_2019413EN.01003001.xml










9.12.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 413/30






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Spetsializiran nakazatelen sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 1 October 2019 — Criminal proceedings against HP
(Case C-724/19)
(2019/C 413/36)
Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Spetsializiran nakazatelen sad

Party to the main proceedings

HP

Question referred

Is a national law (Article 5(1)(1) of the Zakon za Evropeyskata zapoved za razsledvane (Law on the European investigation order; ‘the ZEZR’)), according to which, during the pre-trial stage of the criminal proceedings, the authority competent to issue a European investigation order for the provision of traffic and location data related to telecommunications is a public prosecutor, consistent with Article 2(c)(i) of Directive 2014/41 (1) and the principle of equivalence, provided that in an identical domestic case the competent authority is a judge?
Does recognition of that European investigation order by the competent authority of the executing State (public prosecutor or an investigating judge) replace the court order required under the law of the issuing State?


(1)  Directive 2014/41/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 April 2014 regarding the European Investigation Order in criminal matters.

OJ 2014 L 130, p. 1.