do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Euro exchange ratesSource: reference exchange rate published by the ECB. 11 December 2019 2019/C 419/03
Date: 2019-12-12
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2019419EN.01000701.xml










12.12.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 419/7






Euro exchange rates (1)

11 December 2019
(2019/C 419/03)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1075 




JPY


Japanese yen


120,44 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4728 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,84245 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,4595 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0916 




ISK


Iceland króna


135,10 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,1495 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,522 




HUF


Hungarian forint


330,74 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2869 




RON


Romanian leu


4,7793 




TRY


Turkish lira


6,4349 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,6194 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4661 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,6538 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6924 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5060 




KRW


South Korean won


1 321,50 




ZAR


South African rand


16,3512 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,7960 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4385 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 554,28 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,6122 




PHP


Philippine peso


56,279 




RUB


Russian rouble


70,3925 




THB


Thai baht


33,518 




BRL


Brazilian real


4,5590 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,2920 




INR


Indian rupee


78,4115 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case C-627/19 PPU: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 12 December 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Amsterdam — Netherlands) — Execution of a European arrest warrant issued against ZB (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — European arrest warrant — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — Article 6(1) — Concept of ‘issuing judicial authority’ — Criteria — European arrest warrant issued by the public prosecutor’s office of a Member State for the purpose of executing a sentence)
Date: 2019-12-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European arrest warrant, judicial review, principle of proportionality, public prosecutor's department, right to justice








C_2020054EN.01001301.xml










17.2.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 54/13






Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 12 December 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Amsterdam — Netherlands) — Execution of a European arrest warrant issued against ZB
(Case C-627/19 PPU) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Urgent preliminary ruling procedure - Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters - European arrest warrant - Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA - Article 6(1) - Concept of ‘issuing judicial authority’ - Criteria - European arrest warrant issued by the public prosecutor’s office of a Member State for the purpose of executing a sentence)
(2020/C 54/16)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Rechtbank Amsterdam

Party to the main proceedings

ZB

Operative part of the judgment

Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States, as amended by Council Framework Decision 2009/299/JHA of 26 February 2009, must be interpreted as meaning that it does not preclude legislation of a Member State which, although it confers the competence to issue a European arrest warrant for the purposes of executing a sentence on an authority which, whilst participating in the administration of justice in that Member State, is not itself a court, does not provide for the existence of a separate judicial remedy against the decision of that authority to issue such a European arrest warrant.


(1)  OJ C 383, 11.11.2019.
Case T-592/16: Judgment of the General Court of 12 December 2019 — Feral v Committee of the Regions (Civil Service — Reform of the Staff Regulations and of the CEOS that entered into force on 1 January 2014 — Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1023/2013 — Solidarity levy applicable from 1 January 2014 — Suspension of application of the method for updating remuneration for 2013 and 2014)
Date: 2019-12-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, remuneration of work, servant (EU), staff regulations (EU), wage determination








C_2020036EN.01002501.xml










3.2.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 36/25






Judgment of the General Court of 12 December 2019 — Feral v Committee of the Regions
(Case T-592/16) (1)

(Civil Service - Reform of the Staff Regulations and of the CEOS that entered into force on 1 January 2014 - Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1023/2013 - Solidarity levy applicable from 1 January 2014 - Suspension of application of the method for updating remuneration for 2013 and 2014)
(2020/C 36/30)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Pierre-Alexis Feral (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: J.-N. Louis, R. Metz and D. Verbeke, lawyers)

Defendant: Committee of the Regions (represented by: J. C. Cañoto Argüelles and S. Bachotet, acting as Agents, and by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Interveners in support of the defendant: European Parliament (represented by: E. Taneva and M. Ecker, acting as Agents), Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bauer and R. Meyer, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU seeking annulment of the decision fixing the applicant’s remuneration for January 2014, as given specific expression in the salary slip for that month sent to him on 13 January 2014, which is the first salary slip to apply, with regard to the applicant, Article 65(4) and Article 66a of the Staff Regulations stemming from Article 1(44) and (46) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1023/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 (OJ 2013 L 287, p.15) providing, respectively, for the suspension of the application of the method for updating remuneration for 2013 and 2014 and the introduction of a solidarity levy from 1 January 2014.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.



Dismisses the action;











2.



Orders Mr Pierre-Alexis Feral to pay the costs;











3.



Orders the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union to bear their own costs.







(1)  OJ C 7, 12.1.2015 (case initially registered before the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union under number F-123/14 and transferred to the General Court of the European Union on 1 September 2016).
Case T-683/18: Judgment of the General Court of 12 December 2019 — Conte v EUIPO (CANNABIS STORE AMSTERDAM) (EU trade mark — Application for EU figurative mark CANNABIS STORE AMSTERDAM — Absolute ground for refusal — Trade mark contrary to public policy — Article 7(1)(f) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Article 7(2) of Regulation 2017/1001)
Date: 2019-12-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, aromatic plant, beverage, catering industry, confectionery product, dairy ice cream, flavouring, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2020036EN.01002801.xml










3.2.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 36/28






Judgment of the General Court of 12 December 2019 — Conte v EUIPO (CANNABIS STORE AMSTERDAM)
(Case T-683/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for EU figurative mark CANNABIS STORE AMSTERDAM - Absolute ground for refusal - Trade mark contrary to public policy - Article 7(1)(f) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Article 7(2) of Regulation 2017/1001)
(2020/C 36/34)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Santa Conte (Naples, Italy) (represented by: C. Demichelis, E. Ortaglio and G. Iorio Fiorelli, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: L. Rampini, acting as Agent)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 31 August 2018 (Case R 2181/2017-2), concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign CANNABIS STORE AMSTERDAM as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.



Dismisses the action;











2.



Orders Ms Santa Conte to pay the costs.







(1)  OJ C 25, 21.1.2019.
Case T-528/16: Judgment of the General Court of 12 December 2019 — OS v Commission (Civil Service — Reform of the Staff Regulations and of the CEOS that entered into force on 1 January 2014 — Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1023/2013 — Solidarity levy applicable from 1 January 2014 — Suspension of application of the method for updating remuneration for 2013 and 2014)
Date: 2019-12-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, remuneration of work, servant (EU), staff regulations (EU), wage determination








C_2020036EN.01002402.xml










3.2.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 36/24






Judgment of the General Court of 12 December 2019 — OS v Commission
(Case T-528/16) (1)

(Civil Service - Reform of the Staff Regulations and of the CEOS that entered into force on 1 January 2014 - Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1023/2013 - Solidarity levy applicable from 1 January 2014 - Suspension of application of the method for updating remuneration for 2013 and 2014)
(2020/C 36/29)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: OS (represented by: J.-N. Louis, R. Metz and D. Verbeke, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Gattinara and L. Radu Bouyon, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: European Parliament (represented by: E. Taneva and M. Ecker, acting as Agents), Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bauer and R. Meyer, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU seeking annulment of the decision fixing the applicant’s remuneration for January 2014, as given specific expression in the salary slip for that month sent to him on 13 January 2014, which is the first salary slip to apply, with regard to the applicant, Article 65(4) and Article 66a of the Staff Regulations stemming from Article 1(44) and (46) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1023/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 (OJ 2013 L 287, p.15) providing, respectively, for the suspension of the application of the method for updating remuneration for 2013 and 2014 and the introduction of a solidarity levy from 1 January 2014.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.



Dismisses the action;











2.



Orders OS to pay the costs;











3.



Orders the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union to bear their own costs.







(1)  OJ C 7, 12.1.2015 (case initially registered before the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union under number F-122/14 and transferred to the General Court of the European Union on 1 September 2016).
Case C-914/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato (Italy) lodged on 12 December 2019 — Ministero della Giustizia, in the person of the Minister currently responsible v GN
Date: 2019-12-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: access to a profession, age discrimination, notary, professional qualifications








C_2020087EN.01000901.xml










16.3.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 87/9






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato (Italy) lodged on 12 December 2019 — Ministero della Giustizia, in the person of the Minister currently responsible v GN
(Case C-914/19)
(2020/C 87/12)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Consiglio di Stato

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Ministero della Giustizia, in the person of the Minister currently responsible

Respondent: GN

Intervening parties: HM, JL, JJ

Question referred

Do Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Article 10 TFEU and Article 6 of Council Directive 2000/78/EC (1) of 27 November 2000, in so far as they prohibit discrimination on the basis of age for access to employment, preclude a Member State from imposing an age limit on access to the profession of notary?


(1)  Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation (OJ 2000 L 303, p. 16).
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9618 — La Poste/BRT) (Text with EEA relevance) 2019/C 434/06
Date: 2019-12-12
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, postal service








C_2019434EN.01000601.xml










27.12.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 434/6






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.9618 — La Poste/BRT)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 434/06)
On 12 December 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 32019M9618. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case C-450/18: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 12 December 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Social No 3 de Gerona — Spain) — WA v Instituto Nacional de la Seguridad Social (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 79/7/EEC — Equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security — Article 4(1) and (2) — Article 7(1) — Calculation of benefits — Directive 2006/54/EC — Equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation — National legislation granting a right to a pension supplement for women who have had at least two biological or adopted children, and who are in receipt of a contributory permanent incapacity pension — Same right not granted to men in an identical situation — Comparable situation — Direct discrimination on grounds of sex — No exceptions)
Date: 2019-12-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: adoption of a child, births, disability insurance, discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, equal treatment, social security legislation, supplementary pension, survivor's benefit








C_2020054EN.01000701.xml










17.2.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 54/7






Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 12 December 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Social No 3 de Gerona — Spain) — WA v Instituto Nacional de la Seguridad Social
(Case C-450/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Social policy - Directive 79/7/EEC - Equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security - Article 4(1) and (2) - Article 7(1) - Calculation of benefits - Directive 2006/54/EC - Equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation - National legislation granting a right to a pension supplement for women who have had at least two biological or adopted children, and who are in receipt of a contributory permanent incapacity pension - Same right not granted to men in an identical situation - Comparable situation - Direct discrimination on grounds of sex - No exceptions)
(2020/C 54/08)
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Juzgado de lo Social No 3 de Gerona

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: WA

Defendant: Instituto Nacional de la Seguridad Social

Operative part of the judgment

Council Directive 79/7/EEC of 19 December 1978 on the progressive implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security must be interpreted as meaning that it precludes national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which makes provision for the right to a pension supplement for women who have had at least two biological or adopted children and who are in receipt of contributory permanent incapacity pensions under a scheme within the national social security system, while men in an identical situation do not have a right to such a pension supplement.


(1)  OJ C 399, 5.11.2018.
Case T-846/19: Action brought on 12 December 2019 — Golden Omega v Commission
Date: 2019-12-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Combined Nomenclature, fish oil, organic acid, processed food product, specification of tariff heading








C_2020061EN.01004802.xml










24.2.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 61/48






Action brought on 12 December 2019 — Golden Omega v Commission
(Case T-846/19)
(2020/C 61/62)
Language of the case: Dutch

Parties


Applicant: Golden Omega S.A. (Santiago, Chile) (represented by: S. Moolenaar, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:






—


annul Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1661 of 24 September 2019 concerning the classification of certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature (OJ 2019 L 251, p. 1) in its entirety.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea in law, alleging that the Commission exceeded its powers under Article 9(1) of Regulation 2658/87 by unlawfully altering the scope of CN heading 1516.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the Commission exceeded its powers under Article 9(1) of Regulation 2658/87 by unlawfully amending the customs tariff because that implementing regulation amends the customs tariff, in so far products are excluded by that implementing regulation from a CN heading in which the product at issue should be categorised on the basis of its objective characteristics and properties.
Case T-648/18: Judgment of the General Court of 12 December 2019 — Super bock group v EUIPO — Agus (Crystal) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU word mark Crystal — Earlier national word mark CRISTAL — Relative ground for refusal — No similarity between the goods — No likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2019-12-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cereal product, coffee, confectionery product, instant product, non-alcoholic beverage, registered trade mark, tea, trade-mark law








C_2020036EN.01002701.xml










3.2.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 36/27






Judgment of the General Court of 12 December 2019 — Super bock group v EUIPO — Agus (Crystal)
(Case T-648/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark Crystal - Earlier national word mark CRISTAL - Relative ground for refusal - No similarity between the goods - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(2020/C 36/32)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Super bock group, SGPS SA (Leça do Balio, Portugal) (represented by: J.P. Mioludo, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Agus sp. z o.o. (Warsaw, Poland)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 July 2018 (Case R 299/2018-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Unicer-Bebidas de Portugal, SGPS SA and Agus.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.



Dismisses the action;











2.



Orders Super bock group, SGPS SA to pay the costs.







(1)  OJ C 16, 14.1.2019.
Case C-433/18: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 12 December 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein oikeus - Finland) – ML v Aktiva Finants OÜ (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 — Jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters — Requirement for adversarial proceedings and an effective remedy — Decision of a national court declaring enforceable a judgment delivered by a court of another Member State — National procedure granting leave for further consideration of an appeal)
Date: 2019-12-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: appeal, enforcement of ruling, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU








C_2020054EN.01000501.xml










17.2.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 54/5






Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 12 December 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein oikeus - Finland) – ML v Aktiva Finants OÜ
(Case C-433/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 - Jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters - Requirement for adversarial proceedings and an effective remedy - Decision of a national court declaring enforceable a judgment delivered by a court of another Member State - National procedure granting leave for further consideration of an appeal)
(2020/C 54/06)
Language of the case: Finnish

Referring court

Korkein oikeus

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: ML

Defendant: Aktiva Finants OÜ

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 43(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted as not precluding a procedure granting leave for further consideration of an appeal in which, first, a court of appeal rules on the grant of that leave on the basis of the judgment delivered at first instance, the appeal brought before it, any observations of the respondent and, if necessary, other information in the file and, second, leave for further consideration must be granted, in particular, if there are doubts as to the correctness of the judgment in question, if it is not possible to assess the correctness of that judgment without granting leave for further consideration or if there is another significant reason to grant leave for further consideration of the appeal;










2.


Article 43(3) of Regulation No 44/2001 must be interpreted as not precluding a procedure examining an appeal against a judgment on the application for a declaration of enforceability which does not require the respondent to be heard in advance when a decision in the respondent’s favour is made.






(1)  OJ C 352, 1.10.2018.