do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-121/20: Action brought on 21 February 2020 — IP v Commission
Date: 2020-02-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: administrative sanction, dismissal, servant (EU), staff regulations (EU), work contract








C_2020129EN.01002102.xml










20.4.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 129/21






Action brought on 21 February 2020 — IP v Commission
(Case T-121/20)
(2020/C 129/27)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: IP (represented by: L. Levi and S. Rodrigues, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare the action admissible and therefore well founded;




and consequently,






—


annul the contested decisions;










—


order the defendant to pay all the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action against the Commission’s decision of 21 August 2019 imposing on him the disciplinary penalty of termination without notice of his employment contract, the applicant relies on three pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging infringement of the principle of good administration and the duty to state reasons. In that respect the applicant claims, inter alia, that he was not treated fairly by the Commission which did not comply with its obligation for due diligence or its duty of care. In the applicant’s submission, the Commission should have obtained information about the outcome of the criminal proceedings which concluded with the proceedings being discontinued and passed that outcome on to the Disciplinary Board in order for the board to take it into account in its decision.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging the unlawfulness of the preparatory measures taken for the contested decision and manifest errors of assessment committed by the Commission. The applicant submits, inter alia, that the unlawfulness of both preparatory measures taken for the contested decision renders that decision unlawful.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 10 of Annex X to the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union on the ground that, first, all of the specific circumstances of the applicant’s file were not examined and, secondly, the criteria used to determine the penalty were assessed incorrectly or given disproportionate weight.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9714 – Viacom/beIN/Miramax) (Text with EEA relevance) 2020/C 123/02
Date: 2020-02-21
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: culture industry, economic concentration, film industry, mass media, merger control, programmes industry








C_2020123EN.01000201.xml










16.4.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 123/2






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.9714 – Viacom/beIN/Miramax)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2020/C 123/02)
On 21 February 2020, 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 32020M9714. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-118/20: Action brought on 21 February 2020 — Voco v EUIPO (Shape of packaging)
Date: 2020-02-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, dental medicine, packaging product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2020129EN.01002101.xml










20.4.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 129/21






Action brought on 21 February 2020 — Voco v EUIPO (Shape of packaging)
(Case T-118/20)
(2020/C 129/26)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Voco GmbH (Cuxhaven, Germany) (represented by: C. Spintig and S. Pietzcker, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Trade mark at issue: Application for a three-dimensional EU trade mark (Shape of packaging) — Application for Registration No 17 959 421

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 December 2019 in Case R 978/2019-5

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 of the applicant.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council
Case C-122/20 P: Appeal brought on 21 February 2020 by Bruno Gollnisch against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 10 December 2019 in Case T-319/19 Bruno Gollnisch v European Parliament
Date: 2020-02-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Member of the European Parliament, allowances and expenses, legal expenses, limitation of legal proceedings, pension scheme








C_2020175EN.01000601.xml










25.5.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 175/6






Appeal brought on 21 February 2020 by Bruno Gollnisch against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 10 December 2019 in Case T-319/19 Bruno Gollnisch v European Parliament
(Case C-122/20 P)
(2020/C 175/06)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: Bruno Gollnisch (represented by: B. Bonnefoy-Claudet, avocat)

Other party to the proceedings: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court of Justice should:






—


set aside the order of the General Court of the European Union of 10 December 2019 in case number T-319/19;










—


refer the case back to the General Court of the European Union for a fresh judgment;










—


also order that the sum of EUR 5 000 be paid to the appellant in respect of the costs incurred in the present appeal proceedings;










—


order the European Parliament to pay the costs.




If the Court of Justice considers that it has sufficient information, the appellant claims further that the Court of Justice should:






—


rule on the substance of the case itself;










—


annul the decision of the Bureau of the European Parliament of 10 December 2018 amending the Implementing Measures for the Statute for Members of the European Parliament;










—


rule on the form of order sought by the appellant at first instance, without prejudice to the claims made against the order under appeal;










—


order the European Parliament to pay all the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

It is alleged that the order wrongly held that the decision at issue did not individually concern the appellant, that, consequently, his complaint of 27 February 2019 did not constitute a pre-litigation procedure and that, since that complaint was not taken into account, the time limits for the judicial proceedings must be regarded as having expired.
Case C-536/18: Order of the President of the Court of 21 February 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht — Germany) — XW v Landesamt für Verbraucherschutz
Date: 2020-02-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: food inspection, pay, quasi-fiscal charge, veterinary inspection








C_2020320EN.01001703.xml










28.9.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 320/17






Order of the President of the Court of 21 February 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht — Germany) — XW v Landesamt für Verbraucherschutz
(Case C-536/18) (1)

(2020/C 320/28)
Language of the case: German
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 427, 26.11.2018.
Commission Communication 2020/C 58/02
Date: 2020-02-21
Institutions: Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture, European Commission
Subjects: Austria, Estonia, European cultural event, European symbol, Norway, Southern Estonia, Upper Austria, capital city








C_2020058EN.01000201.xml










21.2.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 58/2






Commission Communication
(2020/C 58/02)
The European Capitals of Culture 2024 are Tartu (Estonia), Bad Ischl (Austria) and Bodø (Norway).
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9710 — Bertelsmann / Penguin Random House) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2020/C 58/07
Date: 2020-02-21
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: audiovisual programme, economic concentration, merger control, publisher, television








C_2020058EN.01001101.xml










21.2.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 58/11






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.9710 — Bertelsmann / Penguin Random House)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2020/C 58/07)

1.   
On 13 February 2020, 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:






—


Bertelsmann SE & Co. KGaA (‘Bertelsmann’, Germany),










—


Penguin Random House (‘PRH’, USA).




Bertelsmann acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of PRH. The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares. Bertelsmann currently holds 75 % of the shares of PRH.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for Bertelsmann: television and television production, trade publishing, magazine publishing, music rights management services,










—


for PRH: media company active in trade publishing.






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.9710 — Bertelsmann / Penguin Random House
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 T-117/20: Action brought on 21 February 2020 — El Corte Inglés v EUIPO — MKR Design (Panthé)
Date: 2020-02-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2020129EN.01002001.xml










20.4.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 129/20






Action brought on 21 February 2020 — El Corte Inglés v EUIPO — MKR Design (Panthé)
(Case T-117/20)
(2020/C 129/25)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: El Corte Inglés, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: J. Rivas Zurdo, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: MKR Design Srl (Milan, 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 Panthé — Application for registration No 16 366 461

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 December 2019 in Case R 378/2019-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order the party or parties opposing this action to pay the costs.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 20 February 2020 2020/C 58/01
Date: 2020-02-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2020058EN.01000101.xml










21.2.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 58/1






Euro exchange rates (1)

20 February 2020
(2020/C 58/01)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0790 




JPY


Japanese yen


120,86 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4681 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,83840 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,5985 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0616 




ISK


Iceland króna


138,10 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,0455 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,037 




HUF


Hungarian forint


338,00 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2825 




RON


Romanian leu


4,7979 




TRY


Turkish lira


6,5806 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,6294 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4304 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,3960 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7046 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5111 




KRW


South Korean won


1 301,79 




ZAR


South African rand


16,2966 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,5787 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4495 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


14 790,39 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,5145 




PHP


Philippine peso


54,725 




RUB


Russian rouble


68,8060 




THB


Thai baht


33,924 




BRL


Brazilian real


4,7341 




MXN


Mexican peso


20,1685 




INR


Indian rupee


77,2745 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Adoption of Commission Decision on the notification by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland of a modified transitional national plan referred to in Article 32 of Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on industrial emissions 2020/C 63/02
Date: 2020-02-21
Institutions: Directorate-General for Environment, European Commission
Subjects: EU environmental policy, United Kingdom, action programme, air quality, industrial pollution, prevention of pollution, waste incineration








C_2020063EN.01000201.xml










26.2.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 63/2






Adoption of Commission Decision on the notification by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland of a modified transitional national plan referred to in Article 32 of Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on industrial emissions
(2020/C 63/02)
On 21 February 2020, the Commission adopted Commission Decision C(2020) 43 on the notification by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland of a modified transitional national plan referred to in Article 32 of Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 on industrial emissions (1).
This document is available on the following internet site: https://circabc.europa.eu/ui/group/06f33a94-9829-4eee-b187-21bb783a0fbf/library/9f54e7e7-c224-4ad1-9f92-6179ebe64f97?p=1&n=10&sort=modified_DESC


(1)  OJ L 334, 17.12.2010, p. 17.