do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Notice concerning a request pursuant to Article 35 of Directive 2014/25/EU Request made by a Contracting entity – suspension of the deadline2020/C 48/16
Date: 2020-02-12
Institutions: Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs, European Commission
Subjects: Finland, Southern Finland, airport, business lease, provision of services, public contract, traveller








C_2020048EN.01002501.xml










12.2.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 48/25






Notice concerning a request pursuant to Article 35 of Directive 2014/25/EU
Request made by a Contracting entity – suspension of the deadline
(2020/C 48/16)
On 1 March 2018 the Commission received a request in accordance with Article 35 of Directive 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council (1). The first working day following receipt of the request was 2 March 2018 and the initial period available to the Commission for deciding on this request was of 145 working days.
This request is made by Finavia Oyj and concerns activities relating to the provision of businesses premises for commercial actors providing commercial services (duty free, retail, food and beverages and other passenger services) for flight passengers at Helsinki airport’s terminals in Finland. The relevant notices were published on page 21 of OJ C114 on 28 March 2018, and page 9 of OJ C 359 on 5 October 2018.
Pursuant to Annex IV, point 2, of Directive 2014/25/EU, the Commission may require the Member State or the contracting entity concerned or the competent independent national authority or any other competent national authority to provide all necessary information or to supplement or clarify information given within an appropriate time limit. On 5 October 2018 the Commission asked the Applicant to provide additional information by 9 October 2018 at the latest.
In the event of late or incomplete answers, the initial deadline shall be suspended for the period between the expiry of the time limit set in the request for information, and the receipt of the complete and correct information.
The formal deadline will therefore expire after 52 working days after the receipt of complete and correct information.


(1)  Directive 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on procurement procedures by entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors and repealing Directive 2004/17/EC (OJ L 94, 28.3.2014, p. 243).
Case T-326/19 R: Order of the President of the General Court of 12 February 2020 — Gerber v Parliament and Council (Interim measures — EU customs territory — Regulation (EU) 2019/474 — Directive (EU) 2019/475 — Inclusion of the municipality of Campione d’Italia and the Italian waters of Lake Lugano — Application for interim measures — Manifest inadmissibility of the main action — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2020-02-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU customs procedure, Italy, Lombardy, Switzerland, customs territory (EU), free movement of persons, lake, municipality, tariff exemption, vehicle registration








C_2020137EN.01004902.xml










27.4.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 137/49






Order of the President of the General Court of 12 February 2020 — Gerber v Parliament and Council
(Case T-326/19 R)
(Interim measures - EU customs territory - Regulation (EU) 2019/474 - Directive (EU) 2019/475 - Inclusion of the municipality of Campione d’Italia and the Italian waters of Lake Lugano - Application for interim measures - Manifest inadmissibility of the main action - Inadmissibility)
(2020/C 137/77)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Tibor Gerber (Campione d’Italia, Italy) (represented by: N. Amadei, lawyer)

Defendants: European Parliament (represented by: L. Visaggio and C. Biz, acting as Agents), Council of the European Union (represented by: A. Lo Monaco and E. Ambrosini, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application on the basis of Article 278 TFEU seeking suspension of the operation, first, of Regulation (EU) 2019/474 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 March 2019 amending Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 laying down the Union Customs Code (OJ 2019 L 83, p. 38), and, secondly, of Council Directive (EU) 2019/475 of 18 February 2019 amending Directives 2006/112/EC and 2008/118/EC as regards the inclusion of the Italian municipality of Campione d’Italia and the Italian waters of Lake Lugano in the customs territory of the Union and in the territorial application of Directive 2008/118/EC (OJ 2019 L 83, p. 42).

Operative part of the order







1.


The application for interim measures is refused.










2.


The costs are reserved.
European Parliament legislative resolution of 12 February 2020 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the Union, of the Investment Protection Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam, of the other part (05931/2019 — C9-0020/2019 — 2018/0358(NLE))
Date: 2020-02-12
Institutions: Committee on Development, Committee on Foreign Affairs, Committee on International Trade, European Parliament
Subjects: Viet Nam, agreement (EU), investment protection, ratification of an agreement








C_2021294EN.01007701.xml










23.7.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 294/77






P9_TA(2020)0028
EU-Viet Nam Investment Protection Agreement ***
European Parliament legislative resolution of 12 February 2020 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the Union, of the Investment Protection Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam, of the other part (05931/2019 — C9-0020/2019 — 2018/0358(NLE))
(Consent)
(2021/C 294/12)

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to the draft Council decision (05931/2019),










—


having regard to draft Investment Protection Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam, of the other part (05932/2019),










—


having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 207(4), first subparagraph, and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a)(v) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C9-0020/2019),










—


having regard to its non-legislative resolution of 12 February 2020 (1) on the draft decision,










—


having regard to Rule 105(1) and (4) and Rule 114(7) of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the opinion of the Committee on Development,










—


having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on International Trade (A9-0002/2020),












1.


Gives its consent to the conclusion of the agreement;












2.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam.






(1)  Texts adopted of that date, P9_TA(2020)0029.
Case T-164/18: Judgment of the General Court of 12 February 2020 — Kampete v Council (Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo — Freezing of funds — Renewal of the listing of the applicant’s name on the list of persons concerned — Obligation to state reasons — Rights of the defence — Obligation for the Council to communicate the new elements justifying the renewal of the restrictive measures — Error of law — Manifest error of assessment — Proportionality — Article 76(d) of the Rules of Procedure — Plea of illegality)
Date: 2020-02-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Democratic Republic of the Congo, economic sanctions, human rights, international sanctions, natural person, ownership, principle of proportionality, protection of privacy, right to justice, rights of the defence








C_2020103EN.01001802.xml










30.3.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 103/18






Judgment of the General Court of 12 February 2020 — Kampete v Council
(Case T-164/18) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo - Freezing of funds - Renewal of the listing of the applicant’s name on the list of persons concerned - Obligation to state reasons - Rights of the defence - Obligation for the Council to communicate the new elements justifying the renewal of the restrictive measures - Error of law - Manifest error of assessment - Proportionality - Article 76(d) of the Rules of Procedure - Plea of illegality)
(2020/C 103/25)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Ilunga Kampete (Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf, M. Forgeois and A. Guillerme, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: J.-P. Hix, H. Marcos Fraile and S. Van Overmeire, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/2282 of 11 December 2017 amending Decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2017 L 328, p. 19), in so far as it concerns the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mr Ilunga Kampete to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 161, 7.5.2018.
Case T-177/18: Judgment of the General Court of 12 February 2020 — Kazembe Musonda v Council (Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo — Freezing of funds — Renewal of the listing of the applicant’s name on the list of persons concerned — Obligation to state reasons — Rights of the defence — Obligation for the Council to communicate the new elements justifying the renewal of the restrictive measures — Error of law — Manifest error of assessment — Proportionality — Article 76(d) of the Rules of Procedure — Plea of illegality)
Date: 2020-02-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Democratic Republic of the Congo, economic sanctions, human rights, international sanctions, natural person, ownership, principle of proportionality, protection of privacy, right to justice, rights of the defence








C_2020103EN.01002702.xml










30.3.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 103/27






Judgment of the General Court of 12 February 2020 — Kazembe Musonda v Council
(Case T-177/18) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo - Freezing of funds - Renewal of the listing of the applicant’s name on the list of persons concerned - Obligation to state reasons - Rights of the defence - Obligation for the Council to communicate the new elements justifying the renewal of the restrictive measures - Error of law - Manifest error of assessment - Proportionality - Article 76(d) of the Rules of Procedure - Plea of illegality)
(2020/C 103/38)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Jean-Claude Kazembe Musonda (Lubumbashi, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf, M. Forgeois and A. Guillerme, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: J.-P. Hix, S. Lejeune and H. Marcos Fraile, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/2282 of 11 December 2017 amending Decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2017 L 328, p. 19), in so far as it concerns the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mr Jean-Claude Kazembe Musonda to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 161, 7.5.2018.
Case C-522/19: Order of the President of the Court of 12 February 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia e Instrucción No 6 de Ceuta — Spain) — DC v Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria, SA
Date: 2020-02-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: borrowing, consumer credit, consumer protection, cost of borrowing, legal expenses, real estate credit, unfair terms of contract








C_2020320EN.01001904.xml










28.9.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 320/19






Order of the President of the Court of 12 February 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia e Instrucción No 6 de Ceuta — Spain) — DC v Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria, SA
(Case C-522/19) (1)

(2020/C 320/37)
Language of the case: Spanish
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 413, 9.12.2019.
Case T-320/18: Judgment of the General Court of 12 February 2020 — WD v EFSA (Civil service — Temporary agents — Fixed term contract — Decision not to reclassify — Lack of staff reports — Carrying forward reclassification points — Manifest error of assessment — Non-renewal decision — Duty of care — Manifest error of assessment — Misuse of power — Principle of the protection of legitimate expectations — Duty to state reasons — Right to a hearing — Liability)
Date: 2020-02-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: abuse of power, assistant, liability, pay scale, rights of the defence, servant (EU), staff assessment, temporary employment, termination of employment








C_2020095EN.01002301.xml










23.3.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 95/23






Judgment of the General Court of 12 February 2020 — WD v EFSA
(Case T-320/18) (1)

(Civil service - Temporary agents - Fixed term contract - Decision not to reclassify - Lack of staff reports - Carrying forward reclassification points - Manifest error of assessment - Non-renewal decision - Duty of care - Manifest error of assessment - Misuse of power - Principle of the protection of legitimate expectations - Duty to state reasons - Right to a hearing - Liability)
(2020/C 95/27)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: WD (represented by: L. Levi and A. Blot, lawyers)

Defendant: European Food Safety Authority (represented by: D. Detken and F. Volpi, Agents, and D. Waelbroeck, A. Duron and C. Dekemexhe, lawyers)

Re:

Application based on Article 270 TFEU seeking, first, the annulment of the EFSA’s decision of 14 July 2017 not to reclassify the applicant at Grade AST 6 in the 2017 reclassification exercise, the EFSA’s decision of 9 August 2017 not to renew her contract, and the decisions of 9 February and 12 March 2018 dismissing the complaints against those two decisions and, second, seeking compensation for the material and non-material damage the applicant claims to have suffered as a result of those decisions.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


dismisses the application;










2.


orders WD to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 259, 23. 7. 2018.
Case T-83/20: Action brought on 12 February 2020 — bonnanwalt v EUIPO — Bayerischer Rundfunk and Others (tagesschau)
Date: 2020-02-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, audiovisual programme, broadcasting, registered trade mark, television, trade-mark law








C_2020114EN.01001401.xml










6.4.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 114/14






Action brought on 12 February 2020 — bonnanwalt v EUIPO — Bayerischer Rundfunk and Others (tagesschau)
(Case T-83/20)
(2020/C 114/14)
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: bonnanwalt Vermögens- und Beteiligungsgesellschaft mbH (Bonn, Germany) (represented by: T. Wendt, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Bayerischer Rundfunk (Munich, Germany), Hessischer Rundfunk (Frankfurt am Main, Germany), Mitteldeutscher Rundfunk (Leipzig, Germany), Norddeutscher Rundfunk (Hamburg, Germany), Rundfunk Berlin-Brandenburg (Berlin, Germany), Saarländischer Rundfunk (Saarbrücken, Germany), Südwestrundfunk (Mainz, Germany), Westdeutscher Rundfunk Köln (Cologne, Germany), Radio Bremen (Bremen, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietors of the trade mark at issue: Other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘tagesschau’ — EU trade mark No 10 237 543

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 December 2019 in Case R 1487/2019-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


declare EU trade mark No 10 237 543 to be revoked with effect from 15 November 2017, also in respect of the services ‘Provision of news programmes and reports’;










—


order the EU trade-mark proprietors to pay the costs of the appeal proceedings and of the present proceedings.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of essential procedural requirements (obligation to state reasons);










—


Infringement of the first sentence of Article 18(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 58(1)(a) and 58(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case C-792/19: Order of the President of the Court of 12 February 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Köln — Germany) — TUIfly GmbH v EUflight.de GmbH
Date: 2020-02-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: air traffic control, air transport, carriage of passengers, carrier, indemnification, strike, traveller








C_2020320EN.01002104.xml










28.9.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 320/21






Order of the President of the Court of 12 February 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Köln — Germany) — TUIfly GmbH v EUflight.de GmbH
(Case C-792/19) (1)

(2020/C 320/45)
Language of the case: German
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 27, 27.1.2020.
Case T-173/18: Judgment of the General Court of 12 February 2020 — Ramazani Shadary v Council (Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo — Freezing of funds — Renewal of the listing of the applicant’s name on the list of persons concerned — Obligation to state reasons — Rights of the defence — Obligation for the Council to communicate the new elements justifying the renewal of the restrictive measures — Error of law — Manifest error of assessment — Right to property — Proportionality — Presumption of innocence — Plea of illegality)
Date: 2020-02-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Democratic Republic of the Congo, economic sanctions, human rights, international sanctions, natural person, ownership, principle of proportionality, protection of privacy, right to justice, rights of the defence








C_2020103EN.01002501.xml










30.3.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 103/25






Judgment of the General Court of 12 February 2020 — Ramazani Shadary v Council
(Case T-173/18) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo - Freezing of funds - Renewal of the listing of the applicant’s name on the list of persons concerned - Obligation to state reasons - Rights of the defence - Obligation for the Council to communicate the new elements justifying the renewal of the restrictive measures - Error of law - Manifest error of assessment - Right to property - Proportionality - Presumption of innocence - Plea of illegality)
(2020/C 103/34)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Emmanuel Ramazani Shadary (Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf, M. Forgeois and A. Guillerme, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: J.-P. Hix, S. Lejeune and H. Marcos Fraile, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/2282 of 11 December 2017 amending Decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2017 L 328, p. 19), in so far as it concerns the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mr Emmanuel Ramazani Shadary to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 161, 7.5.2018.
Case T-84/20: Action brought on 12 February 2020 — Qx World v EUIPO — Mandelay (EDUCTOR)
Date: 2020-02-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, electronic equipment, farming sector, forestry economics, hairdressing and beauty care, health service, horticulture, registered trade mark, scientific apparatus, trade-mark law








C_2020114EN.01001501.xml










6.4.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 114/15






Action brought on 12 February 2020 — Qx World v EUIPO — Mandelay (EDUCTOR)
(Case T-84/20)
(2020/C 114/15)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Qx World Kft. (Budapest, Hungary) (represented by: Á. László and A. Cserny, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Mandelay Kft. (Szigetszentmiklós, Hungary)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


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

Trade mark at issue: European Union word mark EDUCTOR — European Union trade mark No 11 043 296

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 25 November 2019 in Case R 1310/2019-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


alter the contested decision in a way to annul the first instance decision and remit the case to EUIPO’s Cancellation Division for further prosecution;










—


as an alternative, annul both the contested decision and the first instance decision and remit the case to EUIPO’s Cancellation Division for further prosecution.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of essential procedural requirements.